Election 2020

[PHATJ]

Elizabeth Warren is the original Rachel Dolezal.

[Green Habit]

I realize that people want to use Presidents as avatars for entire party agendas, but it's silly to for presidential candidates to spend so much rhetoric on legislative agendas when they're at the mercy of what Congress will send them. If the opposing party controls one chamber of Congress, their legislative agenda is DOA, and even if their party has full control, Congress is still going to dictate what laws they'll pass that could vary much from what the President wants.

It would be more useful to hear what the candidates would do with, y'know, their actual delegated power in the executive branch.

[Monkey_Driven]

Not Sanders.

[4/5]

Her vision equates to a check on the capitalist/globalist system that has prospered on the back of everyone else since forever...

You know that I'm contractually obligated to point out that the liberalization of trade and markets has been associated with the largest and fastest movement out of poverty and extreme poverty in human history.

I'm not arguing that the rich haven't benefited or that they shouldn't be taxed at higher rates than everybody else or anything else (they have and they should). I just don't like the implication that this is a zero-sum game that the rich are winning and everybody else is losing, especially globally.

[Mickey]

Elizabeth Warren is the original Rachel Dolezal.

I bet this gets big laughs on the traveling salesman and brain melted boomer circuit.

[Mickey]

Sanders and Warren have very similar politics.

There are some huge differences in how their ideas would play out though.

Warren's highly detailed policies -- which mostly amount to "tax the super-rich, and impose modest taxes on those making between $100K-$250K." She has clear delineations of taxes/support for those beneath the poverty line, in the middle class, in the $100K-$250K bracket, $250K+, and then the "super rich" (not sure exactly where this starts). Her vision equates to a check on the capitalist/globalist system that has prospered on the back of everyone else since forever...

Bernie's policies, on the other hand, have typically been long on concept and short on details; and with the notable exception of his educational plan, are very much an off-shoot of socialism. Without much info, I see his ideas, in the long run, devolving into the Gov't-subsidized affluenza that Bi_3 mentioned the other day.

It'll be fun to watch the two of them debate.

I don't agree with your details here but yes of course Bernie and Warren have different stances. Where I'm confused is Sanders appearing in third, after Harris. If you like Warren for how she doesn't go as far as Bernie, then it might make sense for Harris to be a second choice--but then any one of the more or less identical candidates would be third or fourth or fifth (Mayor Pete is really similar to her). In other words, if you think Bernie goes too far then I'd expect to see him significantly further down the list.

[Superblood Wolfmoon]

I realize that people want to use Presidents as avatars for entire party agendas, but it's silly to for presidential candidates to spend so much rhetoric on legislative agendas when they're at the mercy of what Congress will send them. If the opposing party controls one chamber of Congress, their legislative agenda is DOA, and even if their party has full control, Congress is still going to dictate what laws they'll pass that could vary much from what the President wants.

It would be more useful to hear what the candidates would do with, y'know, their actual delegated power in the executive branch.

[Norah]

Elizabeth Warren is the original Rachel Dolezal.

I bet this gets big laughs on the traveling salesman and brain melted boomer circuit.

What I find great about this criticism is that it's literally the worst thing you can say about her.

What baffles me about it is that people will vote for the pussy grabber but be offended by the woman who naively believed her grandmother when it came to family lore.

[BurtReynolds]

I realize that people want to use Presidents as avatars for entire party agendas, but it's silly to for presidential candidates to spend so much rhetoric on legislative agendas when they're at the mercy of what Congress will send them. If the opposing party controls one chamber of Congress, their legislative agenda is DOA, and even if their party has full control, Congress is still going to dictate what laws they'll pass that could vary much from what the President wants.

It would be more useful to hear what the candidates would do with, y'know, their actual delegated power in the executive branch.

In the age of naked power grabs, executive orders and wars without congressional approval, I'm not so sure this logic still applies.

[PHATJ]

Elizabeth Warren is the original Rachel Dolezal.

I bet this gets big laughs on the traveling salesman and brain melted boomer circuit.

What I find great about this criticism is that it's literally the worst thing you can say about her.

What baffles me about it is that people will vote for the pussy grabber but be offended by the woman who naively believed her grandmother when it came to family lore.

Lol, “worst thing”.

[tragabigzanda]

FUCK ICE

[tragabigzanda]

FUCK ICE

[Norah]

Elizabeth Warren is the original Rachel Dolezal.

I bet this gets big laughs on the traveling salesman and brain melted boomer circuit.

What I find great about this criticism is that it's literally the worst thing you can say about her.

What baffles me about it is that people will vote for the pussy grabber but be offended by the woman who naively believed her grandmother when it came to family lore.

Lol, “worst thing”.

I'm not talking politics or ideology, I'm talking character. If you disagree with her policy proposals, or overall ideological stance on how to run the country, that's fine. I can respect that even if I disagree with it. But when people say the indian thing means she's not a good enough person to be President, while voting for the guy with two dozen accusations of sex assault, I don't know how to process that.

[bart]

plus C. Thomas Howell is the original Rachel Dolezal

[Peeps]

warren, harris and a very distant third is sanders

Explain this logic to me. Sanders and Warren have very similar politics. Why does Harris come between them?

sanders is just too old. i realize hes not even 10 years older than warren(he'll be almost 80 at the time of election) but we do need someone a bit younger. the others im not impressed with at all even though they are younger so i am wagering age vs what i like about what i am hearing

[LoathedVermin72]

I like Sanders. I don’t know all that much about Warren but she seems good too. Yang is kinda sorta interesting. Fuck the rest of them.

[Bi_3]

As things are evolving, I am less scared of Warren than I once was. I feel like she has the Obama vibe to her where she says dumb prog shit on the campaign trail but is smart enough not to try and enact any of it.

[Green Habit]

Her vision equates to a check on the capitalist/globalist system that has prospered on the back of everyone else since forever...

You know that I'm contractually obligated to point out that the liberalization of trade and markets has been associated with the largest and fastest movement out of poverty and extreme poverty in human history.

I'm not arguing that the rich haven't benefited or that they shouldn't be taxed at higher rates than everybody else or anything else (they have and they should). I just don't like the implication that this is a zero-sum game that the rich are winning and everybody else is losing, especially globally.

Mostly co-sign. Only quibble is that instead of "higher rates" I'd go with "equating rates on capital gains to rates on wages". That's the real crock going on now.

[Green Habit]

I realize that people want to use Presidents as avatars for entire party agendas, but it's silly to for presidential candidates to spend so much rhetoric on legislative agendas when they're at the mercy of what Congress will send them. If the opposing party controls one chamber of Congress, their legislative agenda is DOA, and even if their party has full control, Congress is still going to dictate what laws they'll pass that could vary much from what the President wants.

It would be more useful to hear what the candidates would do with, y'know, their actual delegated power in the executive branch.

In the age of naked power grabs, executive orders and wars without congressional approval, I'm not so sure this logic still applies.

I wonder how nakedly open candidates are going to be about that on the campaign trail, especially on the Democratic side.

[Green Habit]

sanders is just too old. i realize hes not even 10 years older than warren(he'll be almost 80 at the time of election) but we do need someone a bit younger. the others im not impressed with at all even though they are younger so i am wagering age vs what i like about what i am hearing

Only condition I see as appropriate for age would be to make sure to appoint a younger VP that's stronger than the typical VP in case the President dies or goes senile.