Jump to content

Elizabeth Warren 2020

Hugo Stiglitz

By Hugo Stiglitz
in Cloak Room

 Share

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 6k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Popular Posts

NWBuck
NWBuck

Someday I'll forgive the ignorant mofos who voted for anyone other than her during the primaries.  But that day is not gonna be anytime soon. 

LowPressure
LowPressure
BrickHorn
BrickHorn

The Most Pampered Generation was gifted a cheap education.  Then they voted to dismantle the system that made their own success possible and compiled wealth from lower taxes due in part to reduced gov

Posted Images

bad_teammate

bad_teammate 13192

Posted
Posted (edited)

That's someone getting assaulted by a fascist, you fucking idiot.

Glenn Greenwald is receiving real death threats from people who have murdered politicians very recently and his name (along with his husband's and son's) was found on a kill list alongside political figures who had already been assassinated.

He is almost single-handedly responsible for the recent release from prison of Lula da Silva, a political prisoner set up by the fascist Bolsonaro regime.

How ignorant of the world do you have to be to see all that and think "slap party". Fucking pathetic.

Edited by bad_teammate
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
bad_teammate

bad_teammate 13192

Posted
Posted
35 minutes ago, David Dennison said:

Triggered.

Yes, absolutely.

Glenn Greenwald, his husband, and his son will probably be murdered by fascists in the near future because both Glenn and his husband are actively fighting fascism abroad.

So yes, I freely admit to Caring Online about watching the precursors to those political assassinations happen right in front of me and not laughing at it like some 4chan kid watching an ISIS beheading video and giggling at how the body flops to the ground.

And I also admit to being irritated by centrist garbage libs whose lens on the world is dominated by Tucker fucking Carlson and who are fine with any level of horror in the world as long as no one talks to the wrong people. It's normally kind of fun to jab and play with, but this guy will likely be dead soon and fucking morons like you will only think, "Oh he's a jerk because he didn't go on Maddow enough." because you don't know shit about anything.

34 minutes ago, David Dennison said:

I found humor in Glenn's punch.

What punch? Do you even know which one Greenwald is?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
David Dennison

David Dennison 18850

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, bad_teammate said:

Fair enough, Palestinians don't go on Tucker Carlson. That means they are sympathetic.

Talk to right-wingers, though? Fuck it it's gonna own when you're dismembered in your own shower.

Or poisoned in London.

That's what happens when you speak out against some of the regimes ol' Glenn has penned apologia for.

But it's cool. He's against Brazilian fascism and stuff.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
David Dennison

David Dennison 18850

Posted
Posted
38 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

Please link to Greenwald's apologia for these regimes.

https://theintercept.com/2017/09/28/yet-another-major-russia-story-falls-apart-is-skepticism-permissible-yet/

https://theintercept.com/2019/01/20/beyond-buzzfeed-the-10-worst-most-embarrassing-u-s-media-failures-on-the-trumprussia-story/

https://theintercept.com/2019/04/18/robert-mueller-did-not-merely-reject-the-trumprussia-conspiracy-theories-he-obliterated-them/

He's all in.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Hugo Stiglitz

Hugo Stiglitz 23367

Posted
  • Author
Posted
On 11/9/2019 at 2:04 PM, Hugo Stiglitz said:

It’s a gotcha question and she handled it perfectly.  Any criticism she might espouse on the process would be either be perceived as her delegitimizing the process and/or alienating Iowa/NH voters.  She was having none of it. 

Jose, of the Khive, is grasping at straws. 

This is why it was a gotcha question.  Castro has a better answer here but he can get away with saying it because he has no liability of alienating the early state voters, unlike the candidates with a legitimate chance of winning Iowa/NH.  

This question is kinda like asking an employee to publicly criticize the customers and the boss just before they’re about to be up for a promotion that is decided by both.

 It’s an important topic but how about asking Democratic leaders not running for president a 100 days from people actually voting in the early states?  Nah, gotta make something provocative out of nothing for the clicks.  It’s only everything on the line in this race. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
bad_teammate

bad_teammate 13192

Posted
Posted (edited)
10 hours ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

This question is kinda like asking an employee to publicly criticize the customers and the boss just before they’re about to be up for a promotion that is decided by both.

 It’s an important topic but how about asking Democratic leaders not running for president a 100 days from people actually voting in the early states?  Nah, gotta make something provocative out of nothing for the clicks.  It’s only everything on the line in this race. 

I get what Warren's answer being used against her irritates you, but you keep demeaning Amy Goodman as some kind of clickbait journalist and all it does is reveal how shallow your knowledge and politics are. And that's a problem, because you seem to have no idea what is happening outside of the impact it has on your preferred candidate.

Amy Goodman is a fantastic investigative journalist who asks real, unpopular questions and has done so for decades. She's exactly the kind of journalist who asks the powerful questions the powerful don't want asked and one of the few journalists who can get a mask to slip by asking reasonable, incisive, and important questions with zero drama or misrepresentation from her end.

The reality is that Warren is pretty bad at dealing with challenging questions in the moment. It's happening time and time again. It's why her "town halls" only feature 3-4 questions after an hour speech. Give her time alone to craft a response or idea and she's great, but she's not good on her feet.

As for the content, both you and the NH guy's response to Castro is indicative of the problem.

Castro is doing what leaders SHOULD do, which is say the obviously true and right thing regardless of whether or not it brings heat on them.

And for the cowardly nonsense answer from an aspirational freak who will eat a plate full of turds and say it's yummy if it'll get him what he wants...

The 0.2%-with-non-whites candidate LOVES having all-white states pick the candidate!

Edited by bad_teammate
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Hugo Stiglitz

Hugo Stiglitz 23367

Posted
  • Author
Posted

She wants all combat troops out of the Middle East as stated in a debate.

She’s an advocate for a no first use nuclear weapons policy as stated in a debate.

She’s been really vocal about Hong Kong recently 

https://foreignpolicy.com/2019/10/03/it-is-time-for-the-united-states-to-stand-up-to-china-in-hong-kong/

She laid out here foreign policy worldview about a year ago here:

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/2018-11-29/foreign-policy-all%3famp

Greenwald concern trolling on Warren foreign policy while looking the other way with Trump is rich and par for the course. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Hugo Stiglitz

Hugo Stiglitz 23367

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Not sure Glenn understands how damaged our foreign policy will be after Trump.  We have burned nearly every bridge, no one should trust us in any kind of long term agreement and our NATO/UN leadership is almost nonexistent. 

Whoever the next president is will be starting from scratch to build back alliances that took decades to achieve.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
DigglerontheHoof

DigglerontheHoof 21183

Posted
Posted
5 hours ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

Not sure Glenn understands how damaged our foreign policy will be after Trump.  We have burned nearly every bridge, no one should trust us in any kind of long term agreement and our NATO/UN leadership is almost nonexistent. 

Whoever the next president is will be starting from scratch to build back alliances that took decades to achieve.

Perhaps or, it could be, with Trump gone, we could almost do a reboot w/ our allies.  Now untangling the rest of Trump's mess will likely take decades. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Fozzz

Fozzz 152

Posted
Posted

Warren's been at her best when she shuts her mouth and lets her campaign and her surrogates in the media do all the work.  She's had some decent debate performances, but when she gets questioned one-on-one about substantive issues she has a penchant for embarrassing herself.  I think Trump would beat her ass.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Onboard 2.0

Onboard 2.0 9083

Posted
Posted
8 hours ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

Not sure Glenn understands how damaged our foreign policy will be after Trump.  We have burned nearly every bridge, no one should trust us in any kind of long term agreement and our NATO/UN leadership is almost nonexistent. 

Whoever the next president is will be starting from scratch to build back alliances that took decades to achieve.

Who's leading  NATO now, and when has the US been a leader in the UN ?  Routinely US positions are opposed by many on, and not on the security council.

I doubt it will take decades to fix whatever you think has been damaged. US president are always looked upon as temporary leaders. Every 4-8 year we have a new president, and a different tack, depending on the letter in front of their names.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
tantric superman

tantric superman 4667

Posted
Posted
11 hours ago, F250 said:

He makes a good point. Are we to assume that with Warren, U.S. foreign policy will be business as usual?

 

It is interesting how, with the impeachment inquiry, focusing on foreign affairs would be important to all the Dems.  Part of the reason the Ukraine issue is important is because of the President's  primacy in foreign affairs -- that primacy is at the heart of what will be the Republican defense.  So Dems should be jumping into it to make themselves the best at this. 

(No comment as to Warren's abilities in this area vs. the others.  This tweet just made me think about it.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
babysdaddy

babysdaddy 2721

Posted
Posted
3 hours ago, Fozzz said:

Warren's been at her best when she shuts her mouth and lets her campaign and her surrogates in the media do all the work.  She's had some decent debate performances, but when she gets questioned one-on-one about substantive issues she has a penchant for embarrassing herself.  I think Trump would beat her ass.

Bama Chick is gonna be pissed about this post.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Hugo Stiglitz

Hugo Stiglitz 23367

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Economist: Warren is right. Her Medicare for All plan won't raise taxes on the middle class

By Mark Zandi for CNN Business Perspectives 
Updated 1:38 PM EST, Wed November 13, 2019
 

It's no secret that I'm not a fan of Medicare for All. That's why I'm impressed that Senator Elizabeth Warren's campaign reached out to me to independently review her proposed financing plan for the program. Her numbers add up and her plan fully finances the program without imposing any new taxes on middle-class families. 

The most important source of revenue for Warren's Medicare for All plan is simply to have businesses pay their employees' health insurance premiums to Medicare instead of private insurance companies. Over time, businesses would be required to pay slightly less to Medicare for health insurance than they would otherwise have paid to private insurers. New small businesses with fewer than 50 employees would not be required to make these payments.

There has been some handwringing that this would be regressive. That is, lower-paid workers would suffer, since businesses would pay more for lower-paid workers' health insurance as a percent of their pay than for higher-paid workers. But companies' current premiums generally vary by the type of insurance plan and family size, and not by employee income. Warren's Medicare for All plan effectively preserves this. And by replacing trillions of dollars in individual spending on health care with new taxes on large corporations and the rich, her plan overall is clearly progressive.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
BradInATX

BradInATX 9208

Posted
Posted

I'd +rep Warren if she were here for going with "crying" to describe the billionaire titty babies on TV. Hell yeah. Kill them, Liz.

Someone should co-opt "ok boomer" and turn it into "ok billionaire" every time one of those chumps gets on TV with the poor me act.

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
 Share
Go to topic listing


Football ... Basketball ... Baseball ... Other Sports ... Futbol ... 🤫995🤫 ... Gambling ... Movies & TV ... Music ... Hobbies ... Lulz ... Food & Travel ... Daily Texan ... Business and Markets ... Cloak Room ... Help ... For Sale ... Board Discussion ... Subscribe!... Donate!... Advertise... COOKIE MONSTER!

×
×
  • Create New...