Democratic 2020 Primary Thread

[CommunismWillWin]

If there is one thing fringe leftists can be counted on to actually get done, its self-sabotage and eating their own.

lol those siding with bankers are not 'left-wing'.

- - - Updated - - -

A question about what colored folk that Warren can't answer (and honestly who can answer a dumb question like that) would be working with her is Warren not caring about the working class?

Okay.

Its hard to pay attention to the names she named I see.

[Dontrike]

Its hard to pay attention to the names she named I see.

I didn't care enough to watch it, just saw the text on the tweet and my interest ended there.

[Skroe]

If Bloomberg were actually serious about beating Trump he spend 2% it his wealth over the next year to wipe out Trumps fundraising and messaging advantage and help any of the existing Democrats.

But he won’t because his latest stunt is all about a billionaires ego.

[Starter]

If Bloomberg were actually serious about beating Trump he spend 2% it his wealth over the next year to wipe out Trumps fundraising and messaging advantage and help any of the existing Democrats.

But he won’t because his latest stunt is all about a billionaires ego.

I doubt he will run too. Trump is afraid he will though lol

[PACOX]

https://twitter.com/tommyxtopher/sta...28325664792576


So much for Warren giving a fuck about the working class.

That's such a stupid question. One, naming a cabinet now is just stupid. Even if you have people in mind it's a bad look when you work with and/or run run against them.

The question is a loaded trap, as if her worth as a candidate is to pull 3 black names out a hate to say she has 3 token black people in her administration...and why 3?

That was some bullshit.

I don't want to just dismiss Angela Rye because she has said a lot of stuff I agree with but it seems like she is becoming an industry hack. She'll have her own show on CNN or something one day.

[Endus]

That's such a stupid question. One, naming a cabinet now is just stupid. Even if you have people in mind it's a bad look when you work with and/or run run against them.

Just as a for-instance, I imagine Kamala Harris is a top pick for AG, if she doesn't get the nom.

But as a candidate, you can't say that about a fellow candidate, because it's seen as dismissing their candidacy unfairly. You've gotta either wait until they step down or lose, or come to a mutual agreement that you're each other's cabinet picks, and state that publicly.

Which is why she dodged the question by saying some of them are running for President.

The question is a loaded trap, as if her worth as a candidate is to pull 3 black names out a hate to say she has 3 token black people in her administration...and why 3?

That was some bullshit.

It's right up there with "when did you stop beating your husband?"

If she names a fellow candidate, she's dismissing their candidacy and talking down to them, which will put Warren in a bad light.
If she names some handful of members of Congress, then anyone she didn't name has cause to feel snubbed.
If she tries to name every black member of Congress, that's way more than 3 names, and if she misses even one person, that's all anyone would take away from it.

There is no good answer to be had. Every single answer will anger her colleagues or will be used maliciously by the press to inflame sentiments against Warren. The journalist shouldn't have even asked.

Now, if Warren had proposed a set of cabinet picks for her Presidency, and none of them were people of color, then you'd have something to work with. This is just bad gotcha bullshit.

[ringpriest]

If Bloomberg were actually serious about beating Trump he spend 2% it his wealth over the next year to wipe out Trumps fundraising and messaging advantage and help any of the existing Democrats.

But he won’t because his latest stunt is all about a billionaires ego.

I'd agree that ego is a large part of it, but given his announced strategy (skip the first four, then go all in on Super Tuesday), I suspect his candidacy is also about making certain there's an alternative to Sanders and Warren should Biden collapse (Bloomberg's very presence also lets Biden, Buttigeig and others seem moderate by comparison); the wealth inequality and populist impulses that (very mistakenly) led to Trump are also present on the American left (where the mere invocation of "socialism!" is an insufficient deterrent to anti-plutocratic sentiment), and most hectomillionaires (or Very High Net Worth Individuals) would really rather not have American voters thinking about whether or not highly concentrated wealth truly benefits the public or nation (much less that it's within their power to actually do something about it).

[Frogguh]

Every single candidate is either incompetent or a complete nutjob. Just pick the loser you think has the best chance of beating Trump, because none of them are good candidates by any objective measure.

[Skroe]

Every single candidate is either incompetent or a complete nutjob. Just pick the loser you think has the best chance of beating Trump, because none of them are good candidates by any objective measure.

With the right message any of the big 3 can.

The question isn't if Donald Trump can beat the Democratic nominee. The question is if the Democratic nominee is going to beat themselves.

[CommunismWillWin]

Every single candidate is either incompetent or a complete nutjob. Just pick the loser you think has the best chance of beating Trump, because none of them are good candidates by any objective measure.

Unles you actualy want to improve the lives of those that are not rich, I suppose? Although even then thats only Bernie.

[Donatello Trumpi]

With the right message any of the big 3 can.

You need 3 willing democrat candidates to summon Hillary.

[Spectral]

Now, if Warren had proposed a set of cabinet picks for her Presidency, and none of them were people of color, then you'd have something to work with.

What would you have to work with?

[Endus]

What would you have to work with?

I'm pretty sure the answer is in the exact sentence you chose to quote, so I'm really not sure what you're even asking.

[jellmoo]

Every single candidate is either incompetent or a complete nutjob. Just pick the loser you think has the best chance of beating Trump, because none of them are good candidates by any objective measure.

What exactly is wrong with the current crop of candidates? They cover a pretty wide field of the political spectrum.

[Skroe]

You need 3 willing democrat candidates to summon Hillary.

I'm sorry little Trumpkin, but she isn't running this year.

Donald Trump is in fact, running against himself. God help him, because nobody else will.

[Elegiac]

What exactly is wrong with the current crop of candidates? They cover a pretty wide field of the political spectrum.

The issue is less that and more that the political energy is clearly with the progressive wing of the party, so "centrists" (read: Bezos) urged Bloomberg to run as an alternative if Biden flops.

One wonders why there is such increasing anti-rich sentiment in the US when the rich go "vote for my interests or I will support actual white supremacists". /s

[Spectral]

I'm pretty sure the answer is in the exact sentence you chose to quote, so I'm really not sure what you're even asking.

I guess I didn't realize that there was now a more or less explicit quota for how many non-whites a candidate needs for the cabinet.

[Endus]

I guess I didn't realize that there was now a more or less explicit quota for how many non-whites a candidate needs for the cabinet.

I never mentioned any "quota". I'll thank you to not build straw men and staple my face to them.

[Spectral]

I never mentioned any "quota". I'll thank you to not build straw men and staple my face to them.

OK

[Elegiac]

I guess I didn't realize that there was now a more or less explicit quota for how many non-whites a candidate needs for the cabinet.

Lol, what a ridiculous strawman.