All purpose news and politics thread part v: The quickening

[Theleviathan]

I make no claim about Trump offering nuanced policies.

It's not the only thing that led to his win, but it's part of it. Vague policies make it hard to attack. You suggested candidates should have good policies and explain the details. I'm simply pointing out that the winners rarely, if ever, do that.

[Iron Maiden]

They all have different baggage and strengths. I'll give you the quick rundown from my vantage point:

Warren: Easily the best bet to actually enact progressive legislation. She has the right mind for policies and has shown an ability to get things done. She's excellent in debates, explains her policies in ways people like, and is really tenacious in a battle of ideas. The bad? I don't think she connects with blue collar, salt of the earth, swing state, independent type voters. She's a liberal, east coast, educational type that comes off as elitist. I think she'd make an excellent VP, I don't see how she ever would win the Presidency.

Biden: Easily the best chance to flip Florida, Pennsylvania, Ohio, North Carolina, and keep Hillary's states. He represents the last administration people loved. Obamacare is popular and he's basically stumping on it. Has the most reliable voting bloc. Will be echoing what won in 2018 and is the most palatable to the usual Dem voters. The bad? Well, he looks like age caught up to him quickly. He's making gaffes, his usual wit and charm seem cranky. The factions of the left that support others are going to be turned off. And the positives he has in swing states are only because the rest of the field sucks at it, he could be the best shot and still not be enough. If he loses, progressives will fracture even further.

Bernie: Easily the most passionate group of voters. Consistent, radical policies that might help break Republican strongholds on social and economic issues. Has the best odds of flipping Wisconsin, Michigan, and Arizona. Will bring in typically non-voting Democrats Genuinely has good plans and isn't afraid to speak to them. The bad? Toxic subculture has turned off many other potential voters. Has no record of being able to enact his ideas, convince others, compromise, or sway others in his political career. Has easily the least reliable voting bloc. Does not really connect well with people who don't already agree with him. Has the policies least likely to be accepted by swing voters and centrists, the hardest sell.

Bloomberg: Taking no donations whatsoever, so what you see is what you get. Has about the best track record you can imagine for an executive in perhaps the best place you can be an executive and a Dem. Connects well with the sort of Farm/Labor folks that used to backbone Dems and now vote Republican. The bad? Started too late and will be attacked as too rich/corporate/moderate etc. New wave progressives will not be passionate about him. What exactly he platforms to accomplish is nebulous at best.

It should be fair game to talk about any of these weaknesses. You want to talk Biden weaknesses? I'm all for it. But for the love of god man, stop the denials about Sanders' weaknesses. That's when things go off the rails.

This is a very on point summary of things as the stand. I completely share your thoughts on Warren. I liked her last year but it seems the more I see of her the less I like. We'll see how she does in Iowa before I decide to bail on her altogether. I still like Mayor Pete the best but I have to mention the 500 lb gorilla in the room and that is he's married to another man. I doubt he can win the south. But I think he is temperamentally the best suited for the job and I don't want old geezers in the WH

[Tami]

Speaking of which

'Kickass women win': Warren makes case to Iowans why she can beat Trump

Hours after the Senate impeachment trial of Donald Trump adjourned for the evening in Washington on Friday, Elizabeth Warren bounded into a brewery in downtown Des Moines, Iowa.

The Massachusetts senator and Democratic presidential candidate, displaying the energy of Bailey, her golden retriever and the breakout star of her campaign, hopped on top of a box and greeted the room, which was so packed the wait staff had to ask guests to pass their pint glasses to the bar to be refilled because they couldn’t bus the tables and had run out of fresh ones.

Warren had missed an earlier campaign rally across the street because of the impeachment proceedings, and thanked her supporters for turning out. And then she turned to thank her campaign co-chairs who have stepped in for Warren in her absence: congresswomen Deb Haaland of New Mexico, Katie Porter of California and Ayanna Pressley of Massachusetts, who were all part of a wave of the record of women elected in the 2018 midterm elections.

“You know what I love best about them? Warren said on Friday night, pointing to the members of Congress. “They prove that kickass women win.”

[PaulBullion]

Iowa continues to be a nailbiter, as CNN decided not to publish its final poll before the caucus, after a single Buttigieg supporter claimed he was not even given the choice to vote for his candidate when he was contacted over the poll, and CBS seeing a tie:

Monday dawns with Bernie Sanders and Joe Biden even in first-choice support at 25% each in our baseline model, Pete Buttigieg very close behind at 21%, and Elizabeth Warren at 16%, also in position to accrue some national delegates. Amy Klobuchar is at 5% in our baseline estimate, and all other candidates are under 5%.

[PaulBullion]

And the new NBC/WSJ poll once again finds Biden is the safest choice to beat Trump.

[KNIGHT OF THE LAKE]

Can you recall, or even research, a single nuanced policy position Trump ran on and spoke about at length? "I'll build a wall" obviously doesn't count.

Build the Wall was code for "hardliner on immigration at the border".

[Theleviathan]

Build the Wall was code for "hardliner on immigration at the border".

Sure, but that's not policy. That's just preying on emotion.

[WestPhillyPunisher]

Build the Wall was code for "hardliner on immigration at the border".

Trump probably couldn’t pronounce immigration while the knuckledraggers who slobber over him had no idea what it was. “Build the Wall” was easier for all those small, narrow minds. Hell, Trumpanzees no doubt still chant that along with other golden oldies like “Lock her up” at his rallies.

[The Overlord]

You're misunderstanding the situation here. Democrats have been attacking and criticizing Trump and his policies since before he was elected and it obviously has had little to no effect on his base. The GOP is the the only group that can stop Trumpism. They had that opportunity last week and chose not to.

But they never will, Trumpism is Republicanism without the mask, the GOP has been corrupt since the 1960s, they are the enemy here.

They all have different baggage and strengths. I'll give you the quick rundown from my vantage point:

Warren: Easily the best bet to actually enact progressive legislation. She has the right mind for policies and has shown an ability to get things done. She's excellent in debates, explains her policies in ways people like, and is really tenacious in a battle of ideas. The bad? I don't think she connects with blue collar, salt of the earth, swing state, independent type voters. She's a liberal, east coast, educational type that comes off as elitist. I think she'd make an excellent VP, I don't see how she ever would win the Presidency.

Biden: Easily the best chance to flip Florida, Pennsylvania, Ohio, North Carolina, and keep Hillary's states. He represents the last administration people loved. Obamacare is popular and he's basically stumping on it. Has the most reliable voting bloc. Will be echoing what won in 2018 and is the most palatable to the usual Dem voters. The bad? Well, he looks like age caught up to him quickly. He's making gaffes, his usual wit and charm seem cranky. The factions of the left that support others are going to be turned off. And the positives he has in swing states are only because the rest of the field sucks at it, he could be the best shot and still not be enough. If he loses, progressives will fracture even further.

Bernie: Easily the most passionate group of voters. Consistent, radical policies that might help break Republican strongholds on social and economic issues. Has the best odds of flipping Wisconsin, Michigan, and Arizona. Will bring in typically non-voting Democrats Genuinely has good plans and isn't afraid to speak to them. The bad? Toxic subculture has turned off many other potential voters. Has no record of being able to enact his ideas, convince others, compromise, or sway others in his political career. Has easily the least reliable voting bloc. Does not really connect well with people who don't already agree with him. Has the policies least likely to be accepted by swing voters and centrists, the hardest sell.

Bloomberg: Taking no donations whatsoever, so what you see is what you get. Has about the best track record you can imagine for an executive in perhaps the best place you can be an executive and a Dem. Connects well with the sort of Farm/Labor folks that used to backbone Dems and now vote Republican. The bad? Started too late and will be attacked as too rich/corporate/moderate etc. New wave progressives will not be passionate about him. What exactly he platforms to accomplish is nebulous at best.

It should be fair game to talk about any of these weaknesses. You want to talk Biden weaknesses? I'm all for it. But for the love of god man, stop the denials about Sanders' weaknesses. That's when things go off the rails.

Sure, look ultimately people will decide who is the best based their own values and calculations.

Is Bernie perfect? No. But I still think he is the best choice and Warren is the second best choice. Since this is the primary, everyone has the right to make the case for their choice and in the process criticize the choices they don't agree with. What bad things I have I personally said against Warren here? I mentioned the cultural appropriation thing solely to show she has flaws, I honestly do not care about it

The problem with the criticism with Bernie, is it's a lot of bunch of guilty by association and I do not think that is good faith criticism.

I also see this Bernie Bro label as about as useful as the SJW one, its designed to shut down discussion, rather than further it.

You are forgetting Biden's one big weakness, that all his talk of bipartisanship is naive and will make him a weak President, because the GOP will not play ball.

All this talk about Joe Rogan, makes it seems like too many people care about absolute moral purity rather than doing the tough work needed to win. Guess what, a lot the working class in the Rust Belt likely have boorish opinions I do not agree with, but we will need their votes to win. You cannot win, if you want to live in space only with people you always agree with. Do you want to win or will we exile anyone who is not morally pure enough?

[jetengine]

You either break the entire American political system which is inherently flawed being effectively a Beta covered in buggy patches, or you crush the Republicans and change **** over time

[Malvolio]

But they never will, Trumpism is Republicanism without the mask, the GOP has been corrupt since the 1960s, they are the enemy here.

Right, and McConnell is just dropping the pretense. He's basically saying, "Even if we had evidence and witnesses, we would still vote to acquit, so let's not waste time and just get it over with."

[The Overlord]

Right, and McConnell is just dropping the pretense. He's basically saying, "Even if we had evidence and witnesses, we would still vote to acquit, so let's not waste time and just get it over with."

Exactly, a good Republican politician is an oxymoron at this point, that party sold its soul back in the 60s, anything good in it died long ago.

[kidfresh512]

Why the land mine, a persistent killer of civilians, is coming back under Trump

Land mine use and production are banned by 164 countries. The United States is not one of them, but Obama-era restrictions only allowed anti-personnel land mines to be used in defense of the Korean Peninsula and called for destroying stockpiles that were not meant for that defense. The new Trump policy reverses those regulations.

But it’s clear that civilians worldwide will be haunted by the threat under their feet for decades to come.

In Vietnam alone, leftover land mines and other munitions dropped by the United States have killed 40,000 people since the end of the war, and it may take 300 years for all remaining munitions to be cleared.

In other words, the last Vietnamese person to be killed by an unexploded U.S. munition probably hasn’t even been born.

I mean it figures. Its an Obama era ban he has to undo it. But, my god the final quote is just sobering. We just dont learn. And continue petty arguments while things like this will linger for decades to come if he isn't stopped.

[Iron Maiden]

Trump probably couldn’t pronounce immigration while the knuckledraggers who slobber over him had no idea what it was. “Build the Wall” was easier for all those small, narrow minds. Hell, Trumpanzees no doubt still chant that along with other golden oldies like “Lock her up” at his rallies.

Speaking of which, a new section of the wall fell over into Mexicali, Mexico a couple of days ago.

[aja_christopher]

In the interview, one member of the board framed a question in an inaccurate and progressive way, suggesting he was on the frontlines of price fixing because he worked for a consulting firm that advised a company that later engaged in price fixing.

As for immigration, there are major problems with the execution, but there is no policy of abusing children.

Such as when you frame questions regarding immigration around Democrats not answering specific questions to your satisfaction and then claim they are for open borders?

There is a policy of separating children from their parents as a "deterrent" as well as forcing them into crowded, unsanitary conditions, denying them fair legal consultation, and attempting to ban people from traveling to this nation based on religion or because they come from "shithole" African countries (like Nigeria) instead of Norway.

Don't try to bring up Democrats as an excuse for Republican behavior because that's just more deflection, rather than taking responsibility for what happens under their watch -- your Republican leader actually calls it an "invasion" and many of his followers respond accordingly, with both hatred and violence.

You're not stupid Mets and neither are we -- all of his here know exactly what your party is doing with regards to non-whites, and exactly why it is doing it.

Iowa continues to be a nailbiter, as CNN decided not to publish its final poll before the caucus, after a single Buttigieg supporter claimed he was not even given the choice to vote for his candidate when he was contacted over the poll, and CBS seeing a tie:

Sanders essentially tied Hillary in Iowa last time and still lost by millions of votes in the end -- and she had even less black support than Biden.

The focus on lily-white Iowa as some kind of harbinger of American politics speaks volumes about many of the core problems within the political system itself -- it works out to the advantage of candidates like Sanders who don't address racial issues at all, and it gives the false impression that somehow said state represents the democratic "base", which is predominately black and female with regards to party loyalty, and black in general with regards to winning national elections.