1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

The Democratic 2020 Primaries

Discussion in 'Speaker's Corner' started by BowdonUK, Jun 29, 2019.

  1. Evangelion

    Capodecina

    Joined: Dec 29, 2007

    Posts: 23,181

    Location: Adelaide, South Australia

    They don't, none of this is true. AOC is calling for a 70% marginal tax rate, but she's not running for president.

    Also, the top three Democratic candidates are all polling higher than Trump.
     
  2. BowdonUK

    Mobster

    Joined: Jan 17, 2016

    Posts: 2,889

    You're thinking of Elizabeth Warren who faked her heritage. She's in the top 2 possible candidates at the moment.

    Such weak opposition these days, on both sides of the atlantic.
     
  3. Evangelion

    Capodecina

    Joined: Dec 29, 2007

    Posts: 23,181

    Location: Adelaide, South Australia

    She didn't fake it, she made an unsubstantiated claim that was subsequently disproved.

    If she'd produced a fraudulent family tree or birth certificate, that would be faking it
     
  4. BowdonUK

    Mobster

    Joined: Jan 17, 2016

    Posts: 2,889

    There is physical evidence that she filled out a form claiming to be native American.

    New evidence has emerged Elizabeth Warren claimed American Indian heritage in 1986
    https://www.vox.com/2018/10/16/17983250/elizabeth-warren-bar-application-american-indian-dna



    I've typed to a couple of people years ago that were white, both claiming to be native American. I found it abit unusual back then. I guess its one of the racial quirks in America.
     
  5. StriderX

    Capodecina

    Joined: Mar 18, 2008

    Posts: 22,148

    It's no worse than claiming to be Irish without knowing (or any other ancestry for that matter, thinking it literally makes them such), she's just being American. Certainly far below Trump claiming to be the ******* chosen one sent from god (or is god?) for evangelicals, so frankly it's entirely whatever that Warren believed that she was part native.
     
  6. BowdonUK

    Mobster

    Joined: Jan 17, 2016

    Posts: 2,889

    You're not consistant at all. If someone you didn't like did this you'd be all over it. It's not worth engaging you in your whataboutism.

    I found a snopes link for the people genuinely interested.

    Did Sen. Elizabeth Warren Describe Her Race as ‘American Indian’ on Her 1986 Texas Bar Card?
    https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/elizabeth-warren-indian-card/
     
  7. StriderX

    Capodecina

    Joined: Mar 18, 2008

    Posts: 22,148

    Why should i be consistent when the opponents aren't? That's a losers game.

    I don't give a single **** about her claiming to be American Indian (A stupid Americanism she's been attacked for while millions claim X,Y and Z on a daily basis), she believes she is part Native which a DNA test showed to be true, the Native community don't believe these things give any legitimacy, and she apologised for claiming to be a citizen. https://www.npr.org/2018/10/15/6574...hallenges-trump-over-native-american-ancestry

    Then something was drudged up about 1986 and she's apologised again and no longer claims to be a citizen of a Native nation, she still has native ancestry however (i'll trust the legitimacy of the university that did it), so it's at least partly true and she believed it was important to her identity from a young age (apparently). This is literally like claiming to be Irish and turning into a plastic paddy, though the Natives take a far more dim view of it. https://www.npr.org/2019/02/06/6921...r-latest-revelation-of-native-american-claims

    Does Trump ever apologise for his claims? At least she has the ability to do so, so to me that's far more worthy of being president than someone who is clearly mentally ill.
     
    Last edited: Oct 26, 2019
  8. Evangelion

    Capodecina

    Joined: Dec 29, 2007

    Posts: 23,181

    Location: Adelaide, South Australia

    Yes, I know. But that's a false claim, it's not a case of faking something.

    There's nothing a white American hates more than the idea that everyone knows they're just plain white. That's why they desperately reach back into their family trees as far as possible so they can come out with stupid stuff like 'I'm quarter Italian and six tenths German.'
     
  9. BowdonUK

    Mobster

    Joined: Jan 17, 2016

    Posts: 2,889

    You really need to drop this Trump obsession. This thread is about the future Democrat candidate to stand for election in 2020, yet you're here drowning them out by going on about Trump.

    It's very easy to be negative and a reactionary. But that's not going to win any elections. As an example of Hillary Clinton, I knew very little about her vision for America when she stood for election. All I knew is she was a woman (an obvious fact), and that she talked about making changes to Obama care while also defending the current system. That is all I know about her campaign. No vision came across. Her whole campaign was reacting to Trump.

    As I said in another thread, morals aren't based on the actions of others. They are based on our own standards of whats right, wrong, and good and bad. Someone else doing something bad doesn't give you a pass to also be bad. Two wrongs don't make a right etc.

    The person who goes up against Trump needs to be able to justify every action they have done. If they can't then they will get slaughtered, simple as that.

    Drowning out threads that are giving public oxygen to potential Democrat candidates only helps Trump.
     
  10. StriderX

    Capodecina

    Joined: Mar 18, 2008

    Posts: 22,148

    Well you are bringing it up on the basis of "would criticise others differently", i took that to be Trump as he's their only opponent of relevance. The fact of the matter is that he is relevant as a comparison as he is the ultimate goal, so the candidates have to actually poll enough to beat him.
     
  11. BowdonUK

    Mobster

    Joined: Jan 17, 2016

    Posts: 2,889

    Yes, but every candidate that excessively targets him will lose.

    To be fair to most of the Democratic candidates at this point are presenting more of their views, and defending them against the other candidates.
     
  12. terley

    Mobster

    Joined: Feb 3, 2010

    Posts: 2,660

    Why are you quoting a 5 month old post?
     
  13. Evangelion

    Capodecina

    Joined: Dec 29, 2007

    Posts: 23,181

    Location: Adelaide, South Australia

    Beto has dropped out.

    Warren has released her Medicare for All plan.

    (Source).

    The predicted cost is an additional $20.5 trillion over the next 10 years.

    Her system is an improvement on Obamacare, but still not good enough. She's stuck in the 'insurance' mindset, so her plan still ties healthcare to employment, which is a huge fail IMHO.

    Honestly, I am disappointed. I expected far better from the most finance-savvy Democratic candidate.
     
  14. StriderX

    Capodecina

    Joined: Mar 18, 2008

    Posts: 22,148

    That's the weirdest thing about US healthcare, it costs more for the US government than the NHS does for ours... Why and what the ****?

    Must be a case of picking up the pieces, a universal system would likely mean paying off the original companies to downsize immensely, so that's also why it's a hard sell to shift. But ironically all the things people blame the NHS for the US private sector actually does ON PURPOSE, massive administration costs for seemingly no reason, overpaid doctors, over-prescription of everything, overzealous testing for little reason...

    What a dumb situation.
     
    Last edited: Nov 2, 2019
  15. Evangelion

    Capodecina

    Joined: Dec 29, 2007

    Posts: 23,181

    Location: Adelaide, South Australia

    * poor regulation
    * no universal healthcare
    * a system that encourages local monopolies (health insurance companies are not allowed to sell across state lines)
    * powerful medical lobby
    * health insurance tied to employment
    * price gouging

    I have never seen a single US politician propose a healthcare system modelled on one of the many, far more successful systems used elsewhere in the western world. It's exactly what they should be doing, and yet they never even try.
     
  16. Evangelion

    Capodecina

    Joined: Dec 29, 2007

    Posts: 23,181

    Location: Adelaide, South Australia

  17. StriderX

    Capodecina

    Joined: Mar 18, 2008

    Posts: 22,148

    It's almost as if he's the President of the US and a noisy one at that.

    There's also the fact that Trump's following is probably filled with people looking for comedy, though i'm sure it's more limited (I don't really care or use Twitter, beyond getting news).

    People will be sharing his name in as many bad ways as good, so while he dominates it for obvious reasons, it's likely extremely partisan. Obviously the Streisand effect is at play, but you can't just ignore him, as he's probably the only reason people will come to vote against... so it's a double edged sword, but one that likely can't be avoided.
     
    Last edited: Nov 2, 2019
  18. Evangelion

    Capodecina

    Joined: Dec 29, 2007

    Posts: 23,181

    Location: Adelaide, South Australia

    The latest Washington Post/ABC News poll is in.

    * Joe Biden: 27%
    * Elizabeth Warren: 21%
    * Bernie Sanders: 19%
     
  19. Evangelion

    Capodecina

    Joined: Dec 29, 2007

    Posts: 23,181

    Location: Adelaide, South Australia

    Warren is copping an enormous amount of well deserved blowback for her Medicare For All policy:

    (Source).

    It's a real shame, because she's such a good candidate. But this plan is just mindbogglingly stupid. I will never understand why she didn't just copy the Australian model, or one of the European systems.
     
  20. doodah

    Capodecina

    Joined: Oct 18, 2002

    Posts: 20,781

    Location: London

    I will look this up later but (in short) how does it differ from Bernie's plan? Tax increases is such a taboo term, CNN got caught saying Bernie's plan would result in tax increases (headline) but failed to mention you would still be paying significantly less overall as you wouldn't be paying a monthly premium, co-pays and all of that middleman nonsense.

    But yes on the face of it - that looks riddled with problems.

    Edit - not familiar with the Aussie system. So you get covered with the basics with public hospitals from taxes? And then if you want more or private - you would typically pay >$100 a month?
     
    Last edited: Nov 7, 2019