|
Who do you want to be the 2020 Democratic Nominee? This poll is closed. |
|||
|---|---|---|---|
| Joe "the liberal who fights busing" Biden |
|
27 | 1.40% |
| Bernie "please don't die" Sanders |
|
1017 | 52.69% |
| Cory "charter schools" Booker |
|
12 | 0.62% |
| Kirsten "wall street" Gillibrand |
|
24 | 1.24% |
| Kamala "truancy queen" Harris |
|
59 | 3.06% |
| Julian "who?" Castro |
|
7 | 0.36% |
| Tulsi "gay panic" Gabbard |
|
25 | 1.30% |
| Michael "crimes crimes crimes" Avenatti |
|
22 | 1.14% |
| Sherrod "discount bernie" Brown |
|
21 | 1.09% |
| Amy "horrible boss" Klobuchar |
|
12 | 0.62% |
| Tammy "stands for america" Duckworth |
|
48 | 2.49% |
| Beto "whataburger" O'Rourke |
|
32 | 1.66% |
| Elizabeth "instagram beer" Warren |
|
284 | 14.72% |
| Tom "impeach please" Steyer |
|
4 | 0.21% |
| Michael "soda is the devil" Bloomberg |
|
9 | 0.47% |
| Joseph Stalin |
|
287 | 14.87% |
| Howard "coffee republican" Schultz |
|
10 | 0.52% |
Jay "nobody cares about climate change  " Inslee |
|
13 | 0.67% |
| Pete "gently caress the homeless" Butt Man |
|
17 | 0.88% |
| Total: | 1930 votes | ||
|
bird cooch posted:Hey...I don't know how to tell you this..um, it's super awkward. Ok. Here goes. West Texas is....oil land. That's what they do out there. So, by nature, that's what his constituency does for a living by and large. And these are personal donations You don't know much about West Texas, do you? Turns out, its a big place. And El Paso isn't in the parts that is rich in oil and gas. In fact, its not a major sector of the El Paso economy at all nor a major employer. But don't trust me, here's a pretty chart: 
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2019 06:55
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 13, 2024 07:02 |
|
|
Yeah dog, um. I'm there right now. In Texas and everything. The 16th district is pretty sprawlling and there not much between El Paso and, ya know.... Dallas. Several hundred miles away. Turns out Texas is a big, empty place. But oil. There's a lot of oil. Also, homie just ran for senate in Texas. That's where he built his database. But cool. I like your pluck buckaroo (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST) (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2019 07:02
|
|
|
bird cooch posted:Yeah dog, um. I'm there right now. In Texas and everything. Hey flyboy...uh bro pal...cool champino...my drat fortnite...thanks for that
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2019 07:12
|
|
|
Lot of refinery capacity in El Paso. Also eastern New Mexico is oil country as well. The entire economy down there is tied up in it even if you’re five hours drive from Midland, which is sometimes the daily commute for land manager types.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2019 07:15
|
|
|
In our dumbfuck electoral system where everyone gotta whore for money in order to run a campaign, I seriously do not give a single gently caress about what "industry" is totally buying candidates via individual campaign donations. It's a stupid argument, and disingenuous as all gently caress. Now if they're getting huge PAC/SUPER PAC funding from actual companies and rich gently caress executives, well that's a different matter.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2019 07:15
|
|
|
bird cooch posted:But cool. I like your pluck buckaroo bird cooch posted:Anywho. Back to storming the castle or whatever you are doing. Wow, you're so cool and above it all.  I think it's a fair criticism that Beto gets a larger than normal proportion of oil money, considering climate change and all that.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2019 07:15
|
|
|
Also I'm not sure it's a good thing if Beto is receiving almost all his donations from a single state that is unlikely to go blue in the first place. Like, the two options here are "Beto has a lot of support from people involved in a bad industry" and "Beto coincidentally has a lot of support from people involved in a bad industry because most of his support is only from his Senate campaign."
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2019 07:29
|
|
|
Also holding up a chart that shows education, retail and healthcare as a major sectors of the El Paso economy and then going “see, oil and energy is a bit player” is a strange hand wave because the demand which drives those sectors has a lot to do with energy sector employees and allied services. For instance a lot of the students at UTEP undoubtedly have family either working in oil or are cashing a small lease or run check, etc. Even the sectors of the economy which aren’t overtly oil and gas related, a lot of the money and resources flowing into those sectors are still pouring out of oil and gas.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2019 07:30
|
|
|
KingNastidon posted:Idiotic. How many people 65 retirees are enrolled in private insurance given the non-competitive premiums / OOPs vs. services for Medicare? Not part of Medicare as it was originally designed. Created in 1997 by a Republican Congress and a neoliberal Democratic administration, expanded by the Bush Administration in 2005 which also deliberately made Medicare Part D worse than it needed to be by banning it from negotiating drug prices in order to make private insurance more competitive. But you already know all that. Serious question: when you find you have to lie and dissemble and mislead so much to defend your ideology, wouldn't it be better for you mentally and morally to just adopt a good ideology that doesn't require trying to trick people in the first place? Seems like it would be less stressful.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2019 09:26
|
|
VitalSigns posted:Not part of Medicare as it was originally designed. Created in 1997 by a Republican Congress and a neoliberal Democratic administration, expanded by the Bush Administration in 2005 which also deliberately made Medicare Part D worse than it needed to be by banning it from negotiating drug prices in order to make private insurance more competitive. Part D isn't the only aspect of medicare with premiums and deductibles? Look back at what you were responding to. How does lack of negotiation on part D make private insurance any more or less competitive? Medicare is only available to those 65+. Private insurance largely covers the rest. They are two separate markets based on age. Medicare could have VA/DOD levels of negotiation and it wouldn't make private insurance more or less competitive because their users can't switch to either Medicare or VA. Part D premiums and OOPs are likely inflated due to lack of negotiation, yes. But assuming aggregate pharma revenues must be X to be viable (not arguing over what X should be, but let's say parity with R&D in your ideal world), then lack of negotiation on reimbursement on Part D allows private insurance reimbursement and therefore premiums/OOP to be lower to still achieve X. The reverse is true for Part A/B regarding reimbursement rates for hospitals/physicians, where generally medicare reimbursement rates are much lower than private insurance.
|
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2019 11:39
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/zei_nabq/status/1109782537897951232
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2019 12:45
|
|
|
bird cooch posted:Here's the whole quote Saying you aren't going to do the right thing because Republicans are so far gone that going after a guy making GBS threads all over not only the Presidency but your own base is extra cowardly. The Republicans didn't give a poo poo about "splitting the country" when they impeached Bill Clinton for like 1/10 of the poo poo Trump does every month and then they won the Presidency because they don't give a poo poo about what half the country thinks because they know they don't matter to them. You can't split this country more since everyone hates each other and the only people that don't get that are political centrists that constantly want the Democrats to cede more and more ground to the Republicans as they spiral into full theocratic authoritarianism. There will NEVER be conviction in the Senate because the Republicans will never vote to do anything to their leader no matter what happens. Saying that you won't proceed until the Senate is ready means 2/3 need to be non-Manchin Democrats and that is not going to happen in any of our lifetimes. It's straight up saying that there is nothing Trump will do that the Democrats will impeach him over so Republican Presidents should just go hog wild because that check on executive power is dead. Everything is getting worse every day so I'm not sure what Pelosi's political genius is actually accomplishing. Eggplant Squire fucked around with this message at 13:20 on Mar 24, 2019 |
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2019 13:12
|
|
|
lol what a terrible candidate . he just gets worse everyday
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2019 13:21
|
|
|
bird cooch you got some galaxy brain posts but "why shouldn't we do the morally/politically correct thing because it won't remove him from office" might take the cake. it's a dereliction of duty to go well yeah he's guilty of at least a dozen impeachable offenses but we're gonna let it slide. trump probably could murder someone and the senate wouldn't convict. everything going forward is going to be "partisan". the republicans have completely ceded the job or actually managing the government. even when they had unitary control the only thing major thing they could pass was the tax bill and that was one of the most unpopular pieces of legislation in history. whenever they control a committee it's an absolute farce - and it's still a farce whenever they get to ask questions when not controlling the committees. not only the base but tthe politicians are now mostly brain bug infested mouthbreathers completely divorced from objective reality. Groovelord Neato fucked around with this message at 13:27 on Mar 24, 2019 |
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2019 13:24
|
|
|
Do you people realise that a failed impeachment would arguably hand Trump a political victory?
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2019 13:28
|
|
|
it would not. it would get senate republicans on record as siding with a criminal. like i just said above nothing democrats do or don't do will gain trump any voters - the deal is to get more of your people out (because there are a lot more democrat and democrat-leaning voters). he saw it happen in the midterms (dems captured something like 2/3 of senate votes - too bad the senate is poo poo!). people keep acting like this is the clinton impeachment all over again because they are either too young or ignorant of what happened then. Groovelord Neato fucked around with this message at 13:36 on Mar 24, 2019 |
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2019 13:30
|
|
|
That "arguably" is doing a lot of the work here.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2019 13:32
|
|
|
Groovelord Neato posted:it would not. it would get senate republicans on record as siding with a criminal. like i just said above nothing democrats do or don't do will gain trump any voters - the deal is to get more of your people out (because there are a lot more democrat and democrat-leaning voters). Right, well that's a very different strategy than what most Democrats seem to be calling for - which is an impeachment to actually get rid of him. It won't happen. If you're doing it for turnout, then go nuts I guess. Not sure it would have the effect you think it will if it fails. Especially because if it does fail, most people won't see Trump as a criminal - they'll see him as innocent. See? The Senate said so! Etc.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2019 13:37
|
|
|
impeachment isn't getting rid of the president. impeachment could be successful. conviction obviously would not be. certainly doesn't help turn out to not hold the powerful responsible for their actions.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2019 13:38
|
|
|
Groovelord Neato posted:impeachment isn't getting rid of the president. Jesus Christ you know what I meant.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2019 13:40
|
|
|
David Simon is having a very normal one about quid pro quo. I require these bird brained imbeciles to be drained of their wealth at a very noticeable rate please, thank you future Democrat President.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2019 15:22
|
|
|
CelestialScribe posted:Do you people realise that a failed impeachment would arguably hand Trump a political victory? It's fine as long as you set appropriate expectations with the public.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2019 15:23
|
|
|
readingatwork posted:It's fine as long as you set appropriate expectations with the public. It's kind of funny when you consider the insane expectations people had that Mueller was going to do something like perp walk Donald Trump Jr out of his house in hand cuffs.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2019 15:24
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/_waleedshahid/status/1106543029371002880 Beto is the most articulate Republican.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2019 15:45
|
|
|
Radish posted:It's kind of funny when you consider the insane expectations people had that Mueller was going to do something like perp walk Donald Trump Jr out of his house in hand cuffs.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2019 15:46
|
|
|
Nonsense posted:https://twitter.com/_waleedshahid/status/1106543029371002880 Friendship ended with BETO now BUTTMAN is my best friend
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2019 15:47
|
|
|
In the public consciousness, "impeachment" means "attempting to remove from office", and impeachment without removal means "failed impeachment". This isn't some theoretical thing, it happened just over 20 years ago. And in that case, it led to a massive popularity boost to the President. What would be the goal of impeaching? To show people you "take misconduct seriously", or something? In the end it would just be a very dispiriting exercise for marginal voters, like the absolutely disgusting 2016 campaign was, and that wouldn't help Democratic turnout in 2020 at all.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2019 15:52
|
|
|
Mellow Seas posted:In the public consciousness, "impeachment" means "attempting to remove from office", and impeachment without removal means "failed impeachment". This isn't some theoretical thing, it happened just over 20 years ago. And in that case, it led to a massive popularity boost to the President. i don't know how many times this has to be repeated but clinton's approval numbers were already in the 60s when they started impeaching him and it was for a blatantly partisan reason.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2019 15:53
|
|
|
Groovelord Neato posted:i don't know how many times this has to be repeated but clinton's approval numbers were already in the 60s when they started impeaching him and it was for a blatantly partisan reason. OK, fine. Take that sentence out. Is impeachment worthwhile now? No.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2019 15:54
|
|
|
I don't know how many times this has to be repeated: approval ratings are absolute bunk. Total bullshit in any meaningful sense.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2019 15:56
|
|
|
The Democrats failing to impeach Trump would be on par with Hillary losing to him, so no Pelosi doesn't want to give them that (again).
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2019 15:56
|
|
|
KOTEX GOD OF BLOOD posted:I don't know how many times this has to be repeated: approval ratings are absolute bunk. Total bullshit in any meaningful sense. the popularity of a president in a nominal democracy is somewhat important.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2019 15:57
|
|
|
Groovelord Neato posted:the popularity of a president in a nominal democracy is somewhat important.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2019 16:06
|
|
|
Radish posted:It's kind of funny when you consider the insane expectations people had that Mueller was going to do something like perp walk Donald Trump Jr out of his house in hand cuffs. Eh... that's not an insane expectation. What's funny is everyone coming into the thread now and posting how totally normal ideas were "insane" because "the media" has been building our expectations up.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2019 16:06
|
|
|
Regardless of whether or not it’s the intention, an impeachment without a conviction is perceived by the public as a trial with a “not guilty” verdict. I cannot wrap my head around why you’d want to gift Trump with that.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2019 16:08
|
|
|
Chilichimp posted:Eh... that's not an insane expectation. yeah people thought that about jr because he flat out admitted to doing shady poo poo while thinking it exonerated him.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2019 16:15
|
|
|
In the abstract, the Democrats have a unique historical opportunity to indict and try the entire Republican Party in a nasty and public spectacle. In practice, any such spectacle would of course indict the Democrats too, so it’s in their narrow interests to continue yelling at high school students.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2019 16:21
|
|
|
People need to admit then that impeachment is no longer a power of congress.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2019 16:23
|
|
|
I'm not sure what the political strategy of impeachment has to do with the primaries.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2019 16:25
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 13, 2024 07:02 |
|
|
https://twitter.com/cd_hooks/status/1109305680937263104?s=19 https://twitter.com/cd_hooks/status/1109308351404523522?s=19
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2019 16:25
|
|
