Delthalaz posted:

Now that it’s been revealed Biden is a paper tiger, I am extremely worried that Harris is going to lie and attack her way to the nomination. What’s a good angle of attack against her?

VitalSigns posted:

I feel like Williamson confuses people the same way Gabbard does.

Legitimately better than 95% of Democratic politicians, yet still utterly horrible. But a ton of people hear someone say the first, and immediately jump to the conclusion that this is the same as saying she's good, because the alternative would be to face the fact that the party is mostly a pack of greedy evil opportunists lusting for foreign blood.

Epicurius posted:

So, I'm wondering how much this busing thing will hurt Biden. Does anybody know if thereel are any recent polls about the attitude towards busing among the general population and the Democratic party?

mcmagic posted:

I mean the first part of what she's saying is right about squandering American influence though I would argue that the American electorate pretty much did that when they elected Trump president.

Craptacular! posted:

Keep in mind most people have not read long articles on strategic defense and the options in North Korea. If they did, they’ll see every retaliation has enormous cost to either us or the South Koreans and maybe Japan, and the most likely outcome is that we’re going to have to accept that the Kim dynasty can point nuclear warheads at the lower 48 and learn to live under that threat. Long detailed infopieces about the various options usually end with, “well maybe we should being back 1950s style nuclear drills to classrooms again.”

The candidates can’t actually say that, though. Most everyday Americans who don’t obsess over politics believe it’s unacceptable to surrender an untouchable mainland. Like a lot of privileges, it’s not one people let go of easily. So I’m not sure exactly what kind of statement you want from Warren, because “wake up and face to the shadow of annihilation” doesn’t really make people Pokémon Go to the polls.

mcmagic posted:

Bernie is in some trouble.

Groovelord Neato posted:

jesus christ is the whole "i wanna keep my private plan under m4a" because people just wanted to keep their doctor?

The Muppets On PCP posted:

maybe it's because i live out in the sticks where almost everyone's primary physician is the nurse practitioner at the cvs two towns over because the regional hospital chain that bought up every medical facility in a 150 mile radius shut down all the outlying clinics years ago, but how the gently caress do people think this works where all of a sudden their current doctor disappears or something

is it like how most people think evolution works like pokemon or some poo poo

Wicked Them Beats posted:

Polls don't really matter, so saying that the debates changed the poll results is not a defense of debates mattering.

Also that Iowa poll is weird, since it's showing that Biden's support held more or less steady (the most recent Iowa polls had him at 30 and 24 points) but Harris surged via taking Bernie Sanders and Buttigieg voters? That's an odd coalition if accurate. Guess we'll need to wait and see if it's an outlier or not.

Helsing posted:

It's really not. The vast majority of voters do not think about politics through a coherent ideological lense.

Also let's be realistic, these polls are bad for Bernie and these polls matter because they shape expectations and reporting. At this point it's getting very difficult to imagine a plausible path to the nomination.

Majorian posted:

This is such a weird thing for her to say. Is it just kind of a lawyer mental tic that she's exhibiting when she does this? "Oops, that thing that I said last week that everybody loved? Yeah, the opposite of that."

Majorian posted:

Well, but here's the thing: she didn't have to comment on busing at all after the debate. Vocally pulling a 180 on it is a very, very weird thing to do when it's not something you're running on. Sort of an...error that's...unforced, if you will.

Majorian posted:

If it were something like M4A (which Harris also backtracked on immediately after the debate, of course), I'd find that a lot more understandable. She's trying to attract voters who don't necessarily want M4A, as well as voters who do, after all, and that's a typical centrist thing to do. But who, exactly, is she trying to attract in signaling that she's not really committed to a federal busing mandate? I realize not all of the country wants that to happen, but how many of them are Democratic primary voters? Are there enough of them to cover for the voters she may lose because she pulled a 180 on this? The logic doesn't add up, as far as I can see, which is what makes it so weird.

Then again, of course, her team is made up of former Clinton advisors, so...I guess it does make sense after all.

yronic heroism posted:

There’s pretty much no reason not to have federally mandated busing now if you believe it was needed in the past. We still have hella de facto segregation, so if it’s a real policy debate what is every candidate’s position?

quote:

The American Housing Economic and Mobility Act provides an average of $50 billion per annum to alleviate the shortage of affordable housing units. This is done through funds to incent localities to ease regulations and other building restrictions, provide down-payment assistance, and reduce the burden on households with negative equity in their homes.

quote:

Most significantly, the funds are to be used to boost the Housing Trust Fund and Capital Magnet Funds. The HTF and CMF were established by the 2008 Housing Economic and Recovery Act, but funding began only a few years ago.
...
The American Housing and Economic Mobility Act does not change current law with regard to how the HTF and CMF operate. Under current law, at least 70% of CMF funds must be used to support affordable housing projects, and no more than 10% of an affordable housing project’s costs can come from the CMF.

quote:

This will still leave a shortfall in affordable housing. But market forces should work to slowly and steadily increase supply. This is particularly true if the American Housing and Economic Mobility Act eases regulatory restrictions on affordable homebuilding as anticipated. By the end of the 10-year horizon, affordable housing supply should be approximately equal to demand. Since the legislation significantly increases housing supply, it will have the added benefit of improving housing affordability, particularly for affordable rental homes. Without the legislation, rents are expected to increase by more than 4% per annum. With the legislation, rent growth will be closer to 3% per annum.

twodot posted:

Does what will a candidate do after the 2020 Primary election to deal with the Senate fall into this rule or not? Like I think all of Sanders' plausible strategies involve the 2022 election, which feels in scope in terms of "What can Sanders, a candidate for President, even do?", but possibly out of scope for how people should be making choices in 2020.

MSDOS KAPITAL posted:

Okay so for actually stating "I am or am not voting for this or that person," fine. I have to agree it's kind of bitchy to do that and doesn't really foster discussion, despite definitely being guilty of this myself.

But especially in the second post it seems you're banning all discussion of the general, which is going to end up being a problem IMO:

The protest voting thread really isn't an appropriate place to talk about what some primary candidate will do in the general, any more than this one is - rather less, in fact. And talking about it in USPOL will probably earn a (deserved) "take it to the primary thread" from fool_of_sound as well, so that's out. It would be one thing if the topic itself was fundamentally idiotic but speculating about what a particular candidate might or might not do in the general election is important to primary chat since it will influence perceptions of electability, among other reasons. Like for example it seems you've banned discussing whether a candidate will pivot to the right after the primary, right? But that seems totally germane for this thread because it is relevant to the primary, even if it's not happening between now and next July.

I mean, talking about what primary candidates will do in the general election is... sort of obvious? By which I mean it's a thing that will just happen naturally. It would be like if we had a thread about cooking and then made a thread rule that mentioning which foods you enjoy is punishable by a three-day probation. And not everybody is going to see your post or re-read the OP either, so it really seems like you've set up some people up for three-day probations for doing something that really on the face of it shouldn't be a big deal.

I understand the reasons for it and I could see this as something we do for a bit, maybe until the second or third debate, but the closer we get to next July the more this rule is going to drag the discussion and serve as a honeypot for probations.

Midgetskydiver posted:

There is a stark difference between knowingly saying something is false, and placing a little too much faith in one's own family members being correct about lineage. Her siblings and other family members have stated that they had a relative who was socially ostracized because everyone thought she had native blood. Turns out that was probably not the case but the belief did cause a rift in her family that was real. Warren herself mentions that the relative essentially had to elope in order to get married.

All this to say, as an Oklahoman myself, this sort of thing is very common. Family genealogies in places like Oklahoma from 1880-1960 were extremely janky because there weren't really any strong social institutions to keep detailed family records. This is true all across America in the 19th century (most American genealogies are extremely well kept once you get back to Europe, record keeping in the US was poo poo due to the Catholic Church, the main authority on family records, being a minority religious institution). Plenty of people in OK believe they have native ancestry when they don't, and not all of them are racist liars- some people just genuinely don't know and have gone through situations like Warren where the assumption of native blood wasn't a ploy to get ahead, it was an understandable mistake.

VitalSigns posted:

lol 10% MOE

Iamgoofball posted:

hey can i ask why y'all are playing right into the GOP's hands by sticking to the issue they very specifically exploited to cause division within the ranks here on the left? like, come on, it's obvious

whether warren considers herself native american and whether it's true or not doesn't loving matter right now, or ever really

worry about that poo poo if she makes it to the debate against trump because nobody on the left is going to bother pulling that card unless they're trying to throw things in favor of the repubs

by the way, parroting the GOP's obvious as gently caress hitpiece about warren is really dumb so stop doing it thanks

Nissin Cup Nudist posted:

Are there any ways to integrate schools other than busing

Typo posted:

https://twitter.com/Politics_Polls/status/1148450803641925634

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).

https://fortune.com/2019/07/09/bernie-sanders-cancel-student-debt/


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?

Faustian Bargain posted:

https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2019/07/09/never-trumpers-2020-democrats-227255

Sorry if this has been talked about, but how can someone live so far up their own rear end to argue "if you want to win, just put up a conservative-light and I'll totally pinky-promise to not vote for Trump"?

Sounds like they are shook.

Luckyellow posted:

So I have to ask again, with ACA potentially being struck down by the court, does that mean almost all of the candidates who was promising Obamacare V.2 is now out of luck? Is the individual mandate the key part to make their plan constitutional?

Shear Modulus posted:

credit scores are computed however the company computing the scores feels like computing it

she basically wants the credit score companies to include rent payments if they arent, with the idea that since poor people dont have credit cards or mortgages the credit score companies dont bother keeping a file on them so nobody wants to loan them money

its a silly idea because the reason that poor people have bad or no credit scores is because they are poor, which is reflected by them not being able to get a mortgage, or having to carry credit card debt to live. having no money is going to also be reflected in someone's rent or utility bills

Charlz Guybon posted:

I guess he noticed he's drawing about zero African American support

https://twitter.com/PeteButtigieg/status/1149265718816497664

Ogmius815 posted:

The situation is different because campaigns aren’t for-profit businesses. People are there because they want to be, not because they’re desperate to go on living. Thus, exploitation is of less concern.

generic one posted:

Lemme ask you this: Do you understand that there is a difference between a criminal and a civil offense?

twodot posted:

The whole contention is whether people will be treated like criminals, if you insist on lasering on minutiae that has nothing to do with how people will be treated, you're the one being obtuse regarding what the actual conversation is.

Ogmius815 posted:

I hasten to clarify that by “Bernie people” I meant Bernie supporters on this forum, not Bernie himself.

a.lo posted:

I still don’t know what Warren has done to mark a “good candidate” I guess she has been in Bill Maher more than other candidates (Cory Booker???)?

BENGHAZI 2 posted:

What about having a degree in English makes me more qualified to do a basic data entry job

Or an entry level assistant manager position

Z. Autobahn posted:

I feel like this is much harder to do in the context of a job interview than a college admissions process

quote:

PHILADELPHIA (CBS) – Democratic presidential candidate Bernie Sanders joined in a big rally Monday to protest the closure of Hahnemann University Hospital. The Vermont senator was with hundreds of supporters outside of the hospital on Monday afternoon.

“It’s not a question of economics, it’s a question of basic human morality,” Sanders said.

Last month, the hospital announced plans to shut down in September, citing financial issues.

Sanders says health care should be a guaranteed right for all Americans and he used the hospital’s closure to drive home that point.

“The issue that brings us here today is not complicated. At a time when our country faces a major health care crisis, when 80 million Americans are either uninsured or underinsured, including tens of thousands of people here in the Philadelphia area, we should be moving, we must be moving forward to guarantee health care to all the people as a right,” the presidential candidate said.

Sanders took aim at Joel Freedman, the hospital CEO and owner.

“We’re sending a very loud and clear message to Mr. Joel Freedman, the investment banker from Los Angeles, and that message is as simple as one can imagine and that is do not shut down this hospital,” Sander said to a roaring crowd. “Work with local officials, work with the unions and the people of this city and keep this hospital open.”

Sanders added his voice to a growing chorus of those condemning Hahnemann University Hospital’s closure.

“It’s insane,” Sanders said in an exclusive interview with CBS3 prior to the rally. “If you look at this thing objectively and you say that in the midst of a health care crisis, a hospital is being converted into a real estate opportunity in order to make some wealthy guy even more money, ignoring the health care needs of thousands of people, that is pretty crazy.”

Hahnemann already shut down its maternity ward over the weekend and plans to close the entire facility by early September. However, Gov. Tom Wolf and Philadelphia city leaders announced Monday it secured $15 million in tax dollars for any new medical provider that plans to open at Hahnemann. The money would be used to fill in any gaps.

“Let’s make it clear — today the eyes of the nation are on Hahnemann Hospital right now,” Philadelphia City Councilwoman Helen Gym said.

Hahnemann’s nurses union believes that tax money is a good start but insists it is not enough. The union also wants lawmakers to push the hospital’s owners to sell the facility to a medical nonprofit.

“We do not want this to shut down,” nurses union president Maureen May said.

Sanders says the hospital is among 100 other medical facilities that have closed since 2010. He told supporters at the rally he wants to create a $20 billion emergency fund to help states and communities take over hospitals that are in financial distress.

More than 2,000 jobs are predicted to be lost when the hospital shuts down in early September.

Discendo Vox posted:

RuanGacho posted:

Does anyone know why Democrats are having to pay democrats for voter data or is rent seeking just the norm--- I know what the answer is gently caress these idiots

quote:

In addition to the $175,000 price tag on the voter file, according to a copy of the agreement obtained by BuzzFeed News, candidates who purchase the voter file must also agree to appear at one or more DNC fundraising events every three months during the duration of their bid for the nomination. At each fundraising-event appearance — dubbed "signature event(s)" in the term sheet — candidates will also be asked to record a short video in support of the DNC.

Campaigns must also sign at least one DNC fundraising email every three months, with donations split evenly between the campaign and the DNC. Separate from the emails to the DNC’s list, campaigns will also participate in a partywide fundraising day, slated for Aug. 7, 2019, sending an email to their own list. Those donations, too, will be split equally.

According to the term sheet, candidates who use the voter file will continue raising money for the party even after they drop out of the race, sending three additional emails to the DNC list before Election Day in 2020.

Ruminahui posted:

Why.

Why are numbers fuckstein so utterly broken.