Page 254 of 667 FirstFirst ... 154204244250251252253254255256257258264304354 ... LastLast
Results 3,796 to 3,810 of 10005
  1. #3796
    Invincible Member numberthirty's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    24,944

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by WestPhillyPunisher View Post
    Hickenlooper, Yang, the author, these people need to go as they’re just wasting everyone’s time since they have zero shot at even being competitive.
    If they are barely even getting a question in the debates, how are they wasting my time?

  2. #3797
    Silver Sentinel BeastieRunner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Location
    West Coast, USA
    Posts
    15,420

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by numberthirty View Post
    If they are barely even getting a question in the debates, how are they wasting my time?
    "Always listen to the crazy scientist with a weird van or armful of blueprints and diagrams." -- Vibranium

  3. #3798
    Astonishing Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2014
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    2,653

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by numberthirty View Post
    If they are barely even getting a question in the debates, how are they wasting my time?
    They barely get questions because they are irrelevant and don't speak up. They could have interrupted and embarrassed themselves more like Swallwell did, and I am not here for my mic wasn't on conspiracy theories. There is no way in hell either will get the Democratic nomination period. All of them have a better chance running for local/state races or Senators. Where they will do FAR more good. They could slip into those positions.

  4. #3799
    Invincible Member numberthirty's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    24,944

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BeastieRunner View Post
    Taking a guess at what I believe you might be on about...

    Please explain how Andrew Yang and Marianne Williamson play into it.

  5. #3800
    Invincible Member numberthirty's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    24,944

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kidfresh512 View Post
    They barely get questions because they are irrelevant and don't speak up. They could have interrupted and embarrassed themselves more like Swallwell did, and I am not here for my mic wasn't on conspiracy theories. There is no way in hell either will get the Democratic nomination period. All of them have a better chance running for local/state races or Senators. Where they will do FAR more good. They could slip into those positions.
    First, I'm going to have to disagree with "Irrelevant".

    Second, I don't personally buy into that "Can you win the nomination?" being the metric. The party set the guideline, and the folks on the stage fit them.

    Third, Don't even disagree about Senate a bit. That said, do you actually see that happening? While I guess that it's possible, I'm not going to get my hopes up.

  6. #3801
    Silver Sentinel BeastieRunner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Location
    West Coast, USA
    Posts
    15,420

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by numberthirty View Post
    Taking a guess at what I believe you might be on about...

    Please explain how Andrew Yang and Marianne Williamson play into it.
    It's directed at you, not them.

    Calling you out on your white knight move as a way to minimize the other bigger, impressive, impactful voices during debate.

    On the subject of those two, Yang and Williamson need to bow out. They add nothing and when given the chance, blew it. Or did Yang's stumbling answer really speak to you? Same for Williamson. They gave no solid policy when given a chance. Maybe when they develop a cult of personality like Trump and Sanders, they can spew out their greatest hits. But they don't have a foundation to debate on.

    I have to say, sadly, that Trump was minimized in the early debates but found a way out. Yang and Williamson did not. And Williamson has been sliding out the door since she announced. Yang actually seems to be finding a foothold he could use for a smaller run somewhere else.

    These 2 add nothing at this point other than to crowd the clown car.
    "Always listen to the crazy scientist with a weird van or armful of blueprints and diagrams." -- Vibranium

  7. #3802
    Invincible Member numberthirty's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    24,944

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BeastieRunner View Post
    It's directed at you, not them.

    Calling you out on your white knight move as a way to minimize the other bigger, impressive, impactful voices during debate.

    On the subject of those two, Yang and Williamson need to bow out. They add nothing and when given the chance, blew it. Or did Yang's stumbling answer really speak to you? Same for Williamson. They gave no solid policy when given a chance. Maybe when they develop a cult of personality like Trump and Sanders, they can spew out their greatest hits. But they don't have a foundation to debate on.

    I have to say, sadly, that Trump was minimized in the early debates but found a way out. Yang and Williamson did not. And Williamson has been sliding out the door since she announced. Yang actually seems to be finding a foothold he could use for a smaller run somewhere else.

    These 2 add nothing at this point other than to crowd the clown car.
    Seriously, what world are they being "Minimized..." in?

    They are getting all of the media coverage. What more is there that they should have that they are not getting because Yang/Williamson/Hickenlooper are on the debate stage.

    While I don't entirely disagree with that the field is pretty crowded, what is the point of attempting to force folks that the party say qualify to be on the debate stage out of the race?

    However accurate your view into my mind may or may not be, the party set the way folks would(or would not) qualify to be on the debate stage?

    It seems like the reality of things will wind up working those things out just fine.
    Last edited by numberthirty; 07-02-2019 at 04:23 PM.

  8. #3803
    Astonishing Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2014
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    2,653

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by numberthirty View Post
    Seriously, what world are they being "Minimized..." in?

    They are getting all of the media coverage. What more is there that they should have that they are not getting because Yang/Williamson/Hickenlooper are on the debate stage.

    While I don't entirely disagree with that the field is pretty crowded, what is the point of attempting to force folks that the party say qualify to be on the debate stage out of the race?

    However accurate your view into my mind may or may not be, the party set the way folks would(or would not) qualify to be on the debate stage.

    It seems like the reality of things will wind up working those things out just fine.
    I am not going to their house telling them to get out of the race. I am commenting that they have no chance and Democrats need Senators, and Local/state government control to fight voters being gerrymandered out of the electorate, thanks SCOTUS.

    No one is "forcing" them to drop out. They can stay in till after the convention but its stupid.

  9. #3804
    Invincible Member numberthirty's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    24,944

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kidfresh512 View Post
    I am not going to their house telling them to get out of the race. I am commenting that they have no chance and Democrats need Senators, and Local/state government control to fight voters being gerrymandered out of the electorate, thanks SCOTUS.

    No one is "forcing" them to drop out. They can stay in till after the convention but its stupid.
    I'm just not sure I see "Stupid".

    At this point, I just think that any attempt to try to take Yang or Williamson out of the race has a very particular potential negative for the DNC's process with no real upside. The primary process will most likely see them out of the race all on it's own.

    As for Hickenlooper, yeah. I've already agreed. The guy is just from the "Politics As Career..." wing of the Democratic Party. I don't see those folks screwing up their careers to do the needed work that you mentioned when it comes to Senators.

  10. #3805
    Silver Sentinel BeastieRunner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Location
    West Coast, USA
    Posts
    15,420

    Default

    To get all devil's advocate here, there is something to be said for raising your national profile to get elected to a smaller office.

    But the current trend for building a war chest has been to convert it to bank and make money out of a cult of personality.

    The last 2 Presidents are riding out book deals. The current one is leveraging for a news network.

    I'd much rather see a former POTUS build up their party than shuffle off to make money.
    "Always listen to the crazy scientist with a weird van or armful of blueprints and diagrams." -- Vibranium

  11. #3806
    Invincible Member numberthirty's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    24,944

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BeastieRunner View Post
    To get all devil's advocate here, there is something to be said for raising your national profile to get elected to a smaller office.

    But the current trend for building a war chest has been to convert it to bank and make money out of a cult of personality.

    The last 2 Presidents are riding out book deals. The current one is leveraging for a news network.

    I'd much rather see a former POTUS build up their party than shuffle off to make money.
    Oh, man.

    Don't hold your breath on that one.

    While there's obviously a reason to do it, you just laid out why they don't do it.

  12. #3807
    Astonishing Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2014
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    2,653

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BeastieRunner View Post
    To get all devil's advocate here, there is something to be said for raising your national profile to get elected to a smaller office.

    But the current trend for building a war chest has been to convert it to bank and make money out of a cult of personality.

    The last 2 Presidents are riding out book deals. The current one is leveraging for a news network.

    I'd much rather see a former POTUS build up their party than shuffle off to make money.
    I think Im the opposite. I think if you serve your term as President you deserve to go off and make money and relax or build your library etc. I think trump will be different though he will never get out of the public eye. When hes out he will be tweeting and commenting on every little thing until the day he dies.

    Obama has been attacked and maligned and denigrated. If anyone has a right to be speaking out and shutting down every lie spewed its him. So I don't begrudge him going off and doing charity with his foundation or making millions on books and Netflix specials.

    After trump I suspect we will long for the days when the ex presidents went off and rarely commented on every little thing.

  13. #3808
    Mighty Member TriggerWarning's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2019
    Posts
    1,048

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BeastieRunner View Post
    To get all devil's advocate here, there is something to be said for raising your national profile to get elected to a smaller office.
    This has been my theory about Pete Buttegeig all along. I don't think he ever thought he really had a chance but getting his name in the ring gives him name recognition for when he runs for governor or senator of Indiana.

  14. #3809
    Ultimate Member Malvolio's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Location
    Freeville, NY
    Posts
    12,183

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kidfresh512 View Post
    They barely get questions because they are irrelevant and don't speak up. They could have interrupted and embarrassed themselves more like Swallwell did, and I am not here for my mic wasn't on conspiracy theories. There is no way in hell either will get the Democratic nomination period. All of them have a better chance running for local/state races or Senators. Where they will do FAR more good. They could slip into those positions.
    It's not about them wasting our time. It's about them wasting their own time that could be better spent running for the Senate.

  15. #3810
    Invincible Member numberthirty's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    24,944

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Malvolio View Post
    It's not about them wasting our time. It's about them wasting their own time that could be better spent running for the Senate.
    This one's mixing things up too much.

    On the one hand, you are talking about "Our" time.

    On the other, the reason for not wasting "Their" time seems to be a solidly "Will be in 'Our' best interest..." reason.

    If they don't actively want to undertake a Senate run, how is this a waste of their own time?

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •