PAC MAN Posted August 1, 2019 Share Posted August 1, 2019 3 minutes ago, Orange said: It was a glancing blow at best. She was "eviscerated" by a millennial who has zero executive experience with anything, and keeps on hoping her national guard stint will make her look like a Navy SEAL. And yet the current POTUS has no military experience right? And we voted a community planner as POTUS back in 2008. I think people want change. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
glduck Posted August 1, 2019 Share Posted August 1, 2019 3 minutes ago, Orange said: It was a glancing blow at best. She was "eviscerated" by a millennial who has zero executive experience with anything, and keeps on hoping her national guard stint will make her look like a Navy SEAL. Agreed. Biden... oy. At this point I think Harris eventually overtakes him as the moderate-of-choice, and we wind up with an ideological fight between Harris and whichever progressive is left standing (Warren/Sanders). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
glduck Posted August 1, 2019 Share Posted August 1, 2019 2 minutes ago, Jalapeno said: And yet the current POTUS has no military experience right? And we voted a community planner as POTUS back in 2008. I think people want change. The point is that the blows didn't land because Tulsi isn't a credible source. She's not a viable candidate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PAC MAN Posted August 1, 2019 Share Posted August 1, 2019 2 minutes ago, glduck said: The point is that the blows didn't land because Tulsi isn't a credible source. She's not a viable candidate. Again, the last two POTUSes.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
glduck Posted August 1, 2019 Share Posted August 1, 2019 Yes, they are the two most recent Presidents. Good work, slugger. Take the rest of the day off and put your feet up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PAC MAN Posted August 1, 2019 Share Posted August 1, 2019 Just now, glduck said: Yes, they are the two most recent Presidents. Good work, slugger. So you say Tulsi isn't a viable candidate? Aren't surfing gals hot? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrBug708 Posted August 2, 2019 Share Posted August 2, 2019 Gabbard isn't a viable candidate, but she hammered home a point that nobody actually bothered to look into. Biden's people should have. Harris had no answer for it and was smart to not engage on that. She got her ass whooped and the best move was to turn the page. Too bad she doesn't have enough cache to get a VP gig, but she's likely destined for a cabinet position in a Biden presidency. Not sure she gains any traction with the rest of the candidates because she doesnt align that well to most of them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrBug708 Posted August 2, 2019 Share Posted August 2, 2019 It appears that the September debates have a far more stringent entry criteria. They need 2% and 130,000 unique donors. That'll cull the herd a lot: As of the end of July, only seven candidates have announced that they meet all the requirements: Former Vice President Joe Biden New Jersey Sen. Cory Booker South Bend, Indiana, Mayor Pete Buttigieg California Sen. Kamala Harris Former Texas Rep. Beto O’Rourke Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders Massachusetts Sen. Elizabeth Warren Two candidates have met just the donor requirement: Former Secretary of Housing and Urban Development Julián Castro Entrepreneur Andrew Yang One candidate has met just the polling requirement: Minnesota Sen. Amy Klobuchar And the rest don't reach either. It's possible that it's just 8 up there if Klobuchar can meet the donor requirement. I'm not sure Castro or Yang can get to 2% in the polls. That, thankfully, should mean 1 debate. I'd much rather see 8 than 10 on the stage (even though it's just 2 less people, I think it can flow much better with 8 than 10). The Yang campaign is angry because the DNC threw out a poll. Apparently NBC ordered polls by different companies and Yang hit the 2% in both polls which allowed him to qualify for the debate (since he would've hit 4 total). But the DNC decided since the polls had the same sponsor that only one poll would count. If the DNC wants to get past accusations of favoritism it's best not to make arbitrary rules during the middle of the campaign. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
All Hail Posted August 2, 2019 Share Posted August 2, 2019 18 hours ago, glduck said: The point is that the blows didn't land because Tulsi isn't a credible source. She's not a viable candidate. What happens when a credible candidate expands on these attacks? Harris’ record as a prosecutor is a major Achilles heel for her, particular in a party that has swung so far to the left over the past few years. I hope she is the candidate that emerges from this fray but she’s certainly got her work cut out for her. the good news is that if she survives the Democrats, the Republicans can’t really attack her record as a prosecutor. “You arrested too many criminals and didn’t do enough to decriminalize marijuana offenses” isn’t exactly a Republican talking point. Harris is built to take down Trump. Biden, not so much. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
glduck Posted August 2, 2019 Share Posted August 2, 2019 It's absolutely a vulnerable spot, but that's a different argument. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PAC MAN Posted August 2, 2019 Share Posted August 2, 2019 https://www.foxnews.com/media/wapo-nyt-op-eds-blast-defense-al-sharpton Might as well cross Harris, Warren, and Biden off the list for the Dem nomination since the NYT and WaPo are slamming them for backing Al Sharpton against Trump. That leaves us Bernie, Buttigieg, Beto, and Booker. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Quack 12 Posted August 2, 2019 Share Posted August 2, 2019 Those were both op-ed pieces. Your characterization of "slamming" is completely wrong. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Orange Posted August 2, 2019 Share Posted August 2, 2019 13 hours ago, MrBug708 said: Gabbard isn't a viable candidate, but she hammered home a point that nobody actually bothered to look into. Biden's people should have. Harris had no answer for it and was smart to not engage on that. She got her ass whooped and the best move was to turn the page. Too bad she doesn't have enough cache to get a VP gig, but she's likely destined for a cabinet position in a Biden presidency. Not sure she gains any traction with the rest of the candidates because she doesnt align that well to most of them. Anyone with a record is going to have weak spots. That's the nature of the beast. Her record will be the least offensive in the general, as you pointed out. Prosecutors do prosecutor shit. Period. They vie for convictions, they represent the state on appeal, etc., all things that appear to the other side to be heartless and unjust. That argument can be made in practically every case. It doesn't surprise me in the least that she's had some shady prosecutions, but if she owns it and touts her executive experience above all, it'll be harmless in November 2020. Probably the reason Biden didn't go on the attack is because of his lengthy, questionable record. That's the yoke of experience in a battle for popularity. Of all the viable candidates, only Buttigieg, Biden and Harris actually have ANY executive branch experience, and Buttegieg's is pretty insignificant. Biden's is as VP, and that job is tantamount to keeping your desk chair from flying into the atmosphere. So really, Harris is probably the most experienced executive we've got. I'm still partial to Bernie and Warren's policies, but I'd back Harris in a heartbeat against Trump. I guarantee you she scares him to death. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
glduck Posted August 2, 2019 Share Posted August 2, 2019 3 hours ago, Jalapeno said: https://www.foxnews.com/media/wapo-nyt-op-eds-blast-defense-al-sharpton Might as well cross Harris, Warren, and Biden off the list for the Dem nomination since the NYT and WaPo are slamming them for backing Al Sharpton against Trump. That leaves us Bernie, Buttigieg, Beto, and Booker. You think Dem nominees will be hurt by backing someone criticizing Trump? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PAC MAN Posted August 3, 2019 Share Posted August 3, 2019 6 hours ago, glduck said: You think Dem nominees will be hurt by backing someone criticizing Trump? The NYT and WaPo are two of the largest publications in the country and very pro-Dem. That's gonna leave a mark on those people named in the report even if it is an open-ed. My slightest hope for Trump getting voted out of office (from like six months ago) is pretty much gone. Breitbart article that I am going to post mentions 1998 when the GOP tried to impeach Clinton and it backfired at the polls. That is why Nancy Pelosi has been reluctant to do so and I'd have done the same thing if I was in her shoes. https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2019/08/01/pinkerton-pro-impeachment-democrats-about-to-make-same-mistake-as-republicans-20-years-ago/ Reading that article will not transform you into a racist jerk like the POTUS is portrayed as. Neither will it turn you into an alt-right scumbag. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PAC MAN Posted August 3, 2019 Share Posted August 3, 2019 Looks like Hickenloper is on his way out of the race: https://www.coloradopols.com/diary/125384/hick4senate-new-domains-signal-big-moves-in-senate-race I think Hick would win that US Senate seat from Colorado. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PAC MAN Posted August 3, 2019 Share Posted August 3, 2019 Dems are now angry at Obama and turned on him. I think that is a mistake and the Dems need to make sure that they don't nominate another Hillary. Should have gone with Bernie last time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mano Posted August 3, 2019 Share Posted August 3, 2019 5 hours ago, Jalapeno said: Reading that article will not transform you into a racist jerk like the POTUS is portrayed as. Neither will it turn you into an alt-right scumbag. Regularly reading all this alt-right propaganda is doing precisely that to you. I hope you are happy with that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PAC MAN Posted August 5, 2019 Share Posted August 5, 2019 You might want to cross Cory Booker off your list of Dem nominates. Donald Trump finally speaks out against white supremacy, finally called out for red flag laws on gun purchases, and updated mental health laws to better identify people at risk and yet Booker speaks out like that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Orange Posted August 5, 2019 Share Posted August 5, 2019 On 8/2/2019 at 6:28 PM, Jalapeno said: The NYT and WaPo are two of the largest publications in the country and very pro-Dem. That's gonna leave a mark on those people named in the report even if it is an open-ed. My slightest hope for Trump getting voted out of office (from like six months ago) is pretty much gone. Breitbart article that I am going to post mentions 1998 when the GOP tried to impeach Clinton and it backfired at the polls. That is why Nancy Pelosi has been reluctant to do so and I'd have done the same thing if I was in her shoes. https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2019/08/01/pinkerton-pro-impeachment-democrats-about-to-make-same-mistake-as-republicans-20-years-ago/ Reading that article will not transform you into a racist jerk like the POTUS is portrayed as. Neither will it turn you into an alt-right scumbag. Do you not understand the difference between an Op-ed and an editorial that is drafted and approved by the NYT/WaPo editors? As for your breitbart article, you DO realize there are plenty of non-alt-right publications that have made the same point about the dangers of impeachment, don't you? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.