|
Who do you wish to win the Democratic primaries? This poll is closed. |
|||
|---|---|---|---|
| Joe Biden, the Inappropriate Toucher |
|
18 | 1.46% |
| Bernie Sanders, the Hand Flailer |
|
665 | 54.11% |
| Elizabeth Warren, the Plan Maker |
|
319 | 25.96% |
| Kamala Harris, the Cop Lord |
|
26 | 2.12% |
| Cory Booker, the Super Hero Wannabe |
|
5 | 0.41% |
| Julian Castro, the Twin |
|
5 | 0.41% |
| Kirsten Gillibrand, the Franken Killer |
|
5 | 0.41% |
| Pete Buttigieg, the Troop Sociopath |
|
17 | 1.38% |
| Robert Francis O'Rourke, the Fake Latino |
|
3 | 0.24% |
| Jay Inslee, the Climate Alarmist |
|
8 | 0.65% |
| Marianne Williamson, the Crystal Queen |
|
86 | 7.00% |
| Tulsi Gabbard, the Muslim Hater |
|
23 | 1.87% |
| Andrew Yang, the $1000 Fool |
|
32 | 2.60% |
| Eric Swalwell, the Insurance Wife Guy |
|
2 | 0.16% |
| Amy Klobuchar, the Comb Enthusiast |
|
1 | 0.08% |
| Bill de Blasio, the NYPD Most Hated |
|
4 | 0.33% |
| Tim Ryan, the Dope Face |
|
3 | 0.24% |
| John Hickenlooper, the Also Ran |
|
7 | 0.57% |
| Total: | 1229 votes | ||
|
I think overall, we should evaluate Warren to be 70 good 30 bad
|
#
?
Jul 9, 2019 23:33
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 24, 2024 05:52 |
|
|
Yeah, I think I'd be fine with that.
|
|
#
?
Jul 9, 2019 23:34
|
|
|
Shear Modulus posted:warren was building political capital by not running in 2016 there is definitely an argument either way, and clearly warren decided not running was the more secure option, but i do think she'd be starting on a much better footing this year had she ran
|
|
#
?
Jul 9, 2019 23:35
|
|
|
Berke Negri posted:there is definitely an argument either way, and clearly warren decided not running was the more secure option, but i do think she'd be starting on a much better footing this year had she ran Warren chose not to run because Clinton aggressively and actively pushed out every competition, and Warren wasn't as interested in running as a protest candidate as Bernie started out being
|
|
#
?
Jul 9, 2019 23:36
|
|
|
yeah
|
|
#
?
Jul 9, 2019 23:36
|
|
|
Typo posted:I think overall, we should evaluate Warren to be 70 good 30 bad Well I deffo evaluate her to be 70
|
|
#
?
Jul 9, 2019 23:41
|
|
|
The science suggests that she is 0.015 good to 99.985 bad
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2019 00:14
|
|
|
Berke Negri posted:there is definitely an argument either way, and clearly warren decided not running was the more secure option, but i do think she'd be starting on a much better footing this year had she ran warren would be on much better footing this year if she had ran in 2016 because she would be the incumbent president
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2019 00:19
|
|
|
Calibanibal posted:The science suggests that she is 0.015 good to 99.985 bad
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2019 00:31
|
|
|
Cerebral Bore posted:TBF it's pretty ballsy to Kramer into a thread and start pulling some kinda amateur psychoanalysis out of your rear end combined with passive-aggressive complaining about other posters instead of even trying to make a proper argument and then start accusing others of intellectual dishonesty, but it's still really, really stupid. Cerebral Bore posted:It's pretty telling that you can't even begin to actually defend your claims. Cerebral Bore posted:It's extremely telling that you don't feel comfortable even disputing what I said and instead fall back on "well actually" and even more passive-aggressive accusations.
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2019 00:31
|
|
|
MSDOS KAPITAL posted:1 / 1024 is 0.00097 She's got a plan for that.
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2019 00:33
|
|
|
Terror Sweat posted:Means tested plans never last, and are incredibly easy to make cuts to by future governments Yeah because Medicare and Medicaid totally didn't last.. oh wait. Means tested are inferior to universal plans of that I don't think that there is much debate, but your claim regarding means tested never lasting is demonstrably false, yes they are more vulnerable to fuckery but they aren't guaranteed to fail regardless of what "internet experts" claim. Means testing is a bit of a gimmick that's used to satisfy the public that those who don't need the help aren't getting it. It sucks that it's a gimmick that works, but it does work. As far as how easy it is to make cuts, kind of depends on the program and other circumstances, see how Republican's fair every time they try to gently caress with Social Security or Medicare/Medicaid.
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2019 00:49
|
|
|
Majorian posted:Wow, it's almost as if the media being entirely uncritical of any of Warren's plans makes them look better than they actually are, in the eyes of voters. Bernie is being foiled by CNN, but he will somehow outmaneuver and destroy the healthcare industry? Seems like the MSM should be child's play given the challenges he is talking about facing down.
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2019 01:17
|
|
|
MSDOS KAPITAL posted:1 / 1024 is 0.00097 This is a Trump smear. The full range (provided by real scientists) is 1/64 to 1/1024
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2019 01:18
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/Politics_Polls/status/1148752028681814016 She'll be 35 by next summer
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2019 01:43
|
|
|
Raskolnikov38 posted:white people are incapable of tasting food unless its bland and/or coated in butter you eat plain baked potatoes without butter? 
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2019 01:50
|
|
|
Skex posted:Yeah because Medicare and Medicaid totally didn't last.. oh wait. Medicaid doesn't exist in my state unless you're very poor and also have a family. If the gimmick worked then we would have more of a social safety net in this country than "SNAP if you're extremely poor and I guess a couple months of unemployment till they find a reason to kick you off". also Dems tried to deeply cut Medicare in 2010/2011 lmao
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2019 01:56
|
|
|
So, question about the Sanders student loan debt plan? I get that Sanders wants the government to pay off all outstanding student loan debt. But then what happens going forward? He's said (and this is from an article by him in Fortune Magazine). https://fortune.com/2019/07/09/bernie-sanders-cancel-student-debt/ quote:Moving forward, our legislation will also make every public college and university, historically black college and university, trade school, and apprenticeship program in America tuition-free and debt-free, because we understand that education must be an economic right for all, not a privilege for the few. While that's nice for the people attending, all those places are pretty full up already, so most students are still going to have to pay for their education, and large portions of that will also likely be debt financed. So what happens down the line with that debt? Has he said anything about that?
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2019 02:02
|
|
|
Epicurius posted:So, question about the Sanders student loan debt plan? I get that Sanders wants the government to pay off all outstanding student loan debt. But then what happens going forward? He's said (and this is from an article by him in Fortune Magazine). You mean the existing students? What happens with them? Their current debt is wiped by the legislation and the next quarter/semester they attend after the legislation passes is free. I don't see the problem. Edit: And for anyone in something like a grad program or something else that isn't completely covered, interest rates will be capped at 1.88%. For comparison, the rate on my federal student loans is 7%. Wicked Them Beats fucked around with this message at 02:14 on Jul 10, 2019 |
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2019 02:09
|
|
|
Typo posted:Income: <50K: 'sanders does better among the poor than among the rich' is not saying 'he does better than warren among the poor,' it is saying 'his results with poor people are higher than his results with rich people.' likewise, saying warren does worst among poor people does not mean she is weaker than sanders among the poor, it is that her lowest result comes from the poor ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ Endorph fucked around with this message at 02:18 on Jul 10, 2019 |
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2019 02:15
|
|
|
Student loans are non-dischargable so them having an interest rate over 2% is literally just usury, I support any movement to knock them out.
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2019 02:22
|
|
|
first, it's not quite the government "paying off" student loan debt since iirc like 95% of student loan debt is owed to the federal government, and just like any other creditor the government can forgive the debt if it feels like it second, i am not sure what you mean when you quote a quote that says "we will make public colleges tuition free" and then say "but how will people pay for tuition?" if you are predicting that the public colleges will get full and some students will be forced to go to private colleges that are not tuition free, the solution is to hire more teachers and open more schools.
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2019 02:26
|
|
|
Grapplejack posted:Student loans are non-dischargable so them having an interest rate over 2% is literally just usury, I support any movement to knock them out. Charging over 0% interest is usury
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2019 02:49
|
|
|
 us I guesshttps://twitter.com/michaelschwab13/status/1148770279155523584 this city is ruined forever now
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2019 02:50
|
|
|
FlamingLiberal posted:Good news guys, the best candidate of them all has wandered in! gently caress, the roll is getting bigger since the debate? E: Heh, that tweet is ratio'd.
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2019 03:01
|
|
|
Wicked Them Beats posted:You mean the existing students? What happens with them? Their current debt is wiped by the legislation and the next quarter/semester they attend after the legislation passes is free. I don't see the problem. I mean the new students who don't go to a public school or HBE? Because according to that Fortune article, it's only going to be education at state schools, trade schools, and HBUs that's going to be free for students. So, say Sanders gets elected in 2020 and Congress passes the bill on inauguration day 2021. So then, lets say I'm high school class of 2021, and go to college in fall of 2021. I don't go to a state school or an HBU, so I've got to pay tuition, which I can't afford, so I have to take out loans. Are you saying that those loans will capped at 1.88% interest?
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2019 03:05
|
|
|
Shear Modulus posted:second, i am not sure what you mean when you quote a quote that says "we will make public colleges tuition free" and then say "but how will people pay for tuition?" if you are predicting that the public colleges will get full and some students will be forced to go to private colleges that are not tuition free, the solution is to hire more teachers and open more schools. The public colleges are full now, and budgets there are being cut.
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2019 03:07
|
|
|
I do think it's legitimate to criticize Bernie's plan for not banning private schools
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2019 03:09
|
|
|
Epicurius posted:I mean the new students who don't go to a public school or HBE? Because according to that Fortune article, it's only going to be education at state schools, trade schools, and HBUs that's going to be free for students. So, say Sanders gets elected in 2020 and Congress passes the bill on inauguration day 2021. So then, lets say I'm high school class of 2021, and go to college in fall of 2021. I don't go to a state school or an HBU, so I've got to pay tuition, which I can't afford, so I have to take out loans. Are you saying that those loans will capped at 1.88% interest? the sanders-omar-jayapal bill caps interest on student loans at the rate the government pays for its debt, which they quote as currently 1.88%. not sure if this is only public or private loans, but again nearly all student debt, even for people who go to private schools, is owed to the government. the privately-held school debt is mainly owed by students who were preyed on by predatory for-profit schools Epicurius posted:The public colleges are full now, and budgets there are being cut. the tax on wall street included in the bill would raise an absurd amount of money. the money goes to the states to spend on, among other things, building more schools and hiring more faculty
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2019 03:18
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/gindaanis/status/1148400437332045824?s=19 https://twitter.com/gindaanis/status/1148400440196784128?s=19 As far as I can tell it's still Bernie > Warren > giant meteor > that self help lady > the cop > Booker > Castro Am I missing anything?
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2019 03:21
|
|
|
marianne is good
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2019 03:24
|
|
|
Shear Modulus posted:the tax on wall street included in the bill would raise an absurd amount of money. the money goes to the states to spend on, among other things, building more schools and hiring more faculty The bill seems to anticipate a 25% increase in enrollment, I believe? quote:PROJECTED ENROLLMENT.—If the projected full-time equivalent eligible students figure of the State or eligible Indian entity under subparagraph (A) is more than 25 percent larger than the full-time equivalent eligible students figure for the preceding year, the Secretary may challenge such enrollment projection and offer an alternative enrollment projection which shall be used in the formula under subparagraph (A) for determining the allotment.
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2019 03:31
|
|
|
Heck Yes! Loam! posted:https://twitter.com/gindaanis/status/1148400437332045824?s=19 You forgot the Gravel teens. Also, drat, I thought I heard Castro come out of the debate looking good, how is he behind Booker of all people?
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2019 03:50
|
|
|
Shear Modulus posted:warren was building political capital by not running in 2016 More like there wasn't a 2020 candidate that was intimidating enough to deter other candidates from entering. Like if Bernie's organization had displayed sufficient organizing strength it could have cleared the field early on and deterred a Warren run.
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2019 03:59
|
|
|
yeah I’d swap Harris and Castro
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2019 04:00
|
|
|
Epicurius posted:So, question about the Sanders student loan debt plan? I get that Sanders wants the government to pay off all outstanding student loan debt. But then what happens going forward? He's said (and this is from an article by him in Fortune Magazine). It took me a whopping minute and a half to find the plan. Some of the measures proposed include:
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2019 04:00
|
|
|
still fully believing that the main reason for this 2020 clown-car-con-clusterfuck is because 2016 was the clintons cashing in 40 years of favors strongarming people into putting off running in '16 until 2020 so thanks yet again, hilldawg
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2019 04:10
|
|
|
Heck Yes! Loam! posted:Bernie > Warren > giant meteor > that self help lady > the cop > Booker > Castro Giant Meteor 2020, not only will it keep its promises but it'll plow right through congressional gridlock and being its agenda home to everyday Americans. Craig K posted:still fully believing that the main reason for this 2020 clown-car-con-clusterfuck is because 2016 was the clintons cashing in 40 years of favors strongarming people into putting off running in '16 until 2020 That didn't help, but the main reason for the massive field is that everyone assumes running against Trump in 2020 is a free win. It's not, but that's the sentiment of the political and donor class. Skippy McPants fucked around with this message at 04:22 on Jul 10, 2019 |
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2019 04:20
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/gelliottmorris/status/1148549603387744256?s=19 (Following tweet mentions a 5-10% MOE)
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2019 04:22
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 24, 2024 05:52 |
|
|
LinYutang posted:https://twitter.com/gelliottmorris/status/1148549603387744256?s=19 Yeah, we talked about this before. That MoE is huge, this poll is basically useless; interesting curiosity, though.
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2019 04:24
|
|