Homebigdog wrote:BTW, I definitely did not play your clip.
lmao
The internetz are complicated, aren’t they grandma?
Here’s a hint .... it’s a series of tubes.
Pensacola Discussion Forum
This is a forum based out of Pensacola Florida.
Democrats Debate lineup
+5
bigdog
Sal
RealLindaL
zsomething
othershoe1030
9 posters
Message [Page 13 of 20]
301 Re: Democrats Debate lineup 7/18/2019, 5:36 pm
Sal
lmao
The internetz are complicated, aren’t they grandma?
Here’s a hint .... it’s a series of tubes.
302 Re: Democrats Debate lineup 7/18/2019, 8:05 pm
bigdog
It's okay. I'll forgive you for having the mentality of someone who thinks Jim Carey is so hilarious when he says "Alrighty then."
And I'll also forgive you for pretending there's something stupid in calling what you posted a clip.
Because that's exactly what it is, no matter where it exists in time and space.
It's a clip.
But I forgot you're insecure and need the last word, whether it makes any sense at all. So glad you reminded me.
And I'll also forgive you for pretending there's something stupid in calling what you posted a clip.
Because that's exactly what it is, no matter where it exists in time and space.
It's a clip.
But I forgot you're insecure and need the last word, whether it makes any sense at all. So glad you reminded me.
303 Re: Democrats Debate lineup 7/18/2019, 9:37 pm
Sal
Next debates will feature Warren v Bernie and a bunch of schlubs, and Booker v Joe v Harris and a bunch of schlubs.
Joe better be on his game this time.
Joe better be on his game this time.
304 Re: Democrats Debate lineup 7/19/2019, 11:10 am
zsomething
The new lineup's a little bleh. I don't think Warren and Bernie will really go at each other. And we've seen Harris vs. Biden already. Probably the most interesting people out of the next debates will be Booker and Mayor Pete. Kinda interesting that the whole undercard on one night is moderates vs. Bernie & Warren, and the next night are further-left vs. Biden and Harris. I'm figuring on more fireworks coming from the undercard than the main-eventers, who'll probably be defending themselves more than they'll be attacking each other. I'm hoping Warren will outshine Bernie enough to make him finally drop out. That dude needs to just go away already, he's clutter.
And Marrianne Williamson will be fun to watch being a space-orphan talking about the things the purple turtles who orbit Polaris told her through their secret windchime-language while she was out on her back porch knitting dream-scarves or whatever. I really don't know why they give her the airtime, but, whatever. At least that Tom Steyer guy's not there. I don't mind him doing his ads, but nobody needs that guy running for president.
And Marrianne Williamson will be fun to watch being a space-orphan talking about the things the purple turtles who orbit Polaris told her through their secret windchime-language while she was out on her back porch knitting dream-scarves or whatever. I really don't know why they give her the airtime, but, whatever. At least that Tom Steyer guy's not there. I don't mind him doing his ads, but nobody needs that guy running for president.
305 Re: Democrats Debate lineup 7/19/2019, 11:49 am
Sal
This week, Elizabeth Warren unveiled her plan to rein in Wall Street.
The plan is co-sponsored by Tammy Baldwin, Sherrod Brown Ranking Member of the Senate Banking Committee, Rep Mark Pocan and Rep Pramila Jayapal.
This is the first plan unveiled to rein in Wall Street since Dodd-Frank.
No other candidate has proposed anything like it, and this is on top of her economic patriotism agenda proposed last month.
She and only she is taking on the single biggest cancer tearing at the fabric of the republic - wealth inequality.
Read about it here;
https://medium.com/@teamwarren/end-wall-streets-stranglehold-on-our-economy-70cf038bac76
In a sane world, she would be winning this thing in a landslide ...
... but then she's so "high-strung", and that voice ...
The plan is co-sponsored by Tammy Baldwin, Sherrod Brown Ranking Member of the Senate Banking Committee, Rep Mark Pocan and Rep Pramila Jayapal.
This is the first plan unveiled to rein in Wall Street since Dodd-Frank.
No other candidate has proposed anything like it, and this is on top of her economic patriotism agenda proposed last month.
She and only she is taking on the single biggest cancer tearing at the fabric of the republic - wealth inequality.
Read about it here;
https://medium.com/@teamwarren/end-wall-streets-stranglehold-on-our-economy-70cf038bac76
In a sane world, she would be winning this thing in a landslide ...
... but then she's so "high-strung", and that voice ...
306 Re: Democrats Debate lineup 7/19/2019, 1:34 pm
Telstar
Sal wrote:PkrBum wrote:
I have one of those roomba robot things that cleans the floor. It does a really good job.
I call it "sandy"
If you weren't such a loathsome schlub, this post would be incredibly sad.
The only things that can stand your presence for more than five consecutive minutes are a dog and a robot vacuum.
The dog should run away.
307 Re: Democrats Debate lineup 7/19/2019, 2:05 pm
Telstar
Sal wrote:Next debates will feature Warren v Bernie and a bunch of schlubs, and Booker v Joe v Harris and a bunch of schlubs.
Joe better be on his game this time.
Booker says he felt disrespected in his verbal tussle with Biden
Sen. Cory Booker said Thursday that he felt disrespected by Joe Biden's counterattack after Booker condemned the former vice president for his remarks about working with segregationist senators.
The flap started when Biden told a group of wealthy donors that his past work with segregationist senators was an example of "civility" that's missing from politics today.
https://www.politico.com/story/2019/07/18/cory-booker-joe-biden-1421084
308 Re: Democrats Debate lineup 7/19/2019, 2:46 pm
bigdog
I don't care if Booker criticizes Biden at all, because he's qualified to be POTUS and isn't a disingenuous candidate with a lot of questionable activities in his background.
I don't agree with him at all, but as an African American who has lived his whole life in this country, including his childhood, he is at least completely connected with what it means to grow up in that community facing the prejudice that comes along with it.
Unlike the other person who is trying so hard to play her race card.
And Corey Booker is a deeply decent human being, which is what I also see in Joe Biden, so he can get by with me disagreeing with him on some issues. Plus, he's a hero. As I've said on here before, firemen and anybody that runs into burning houses to rescue other people are heroes to me.
They're on top of my list of the most amazing people on the planet.
I don't agree with him at all, but as an African American who has lived his whole life in this country, including his childhood, he is at least completely connected with what it means to grow up in that community facing the prejudice that comes along with it.
Unlike the other person who is trying so hard to play her race card.
And Corey Booker is a deeply decent human being, which is what I also see in Joe Biden, so he can get by with me disagreeing with him on some issues. Plus, he's a hero. As I've said on here before, firemen and anybody that runs into burning houses to rescue other people are heroes to me.
They're on top of my list of the most amazing people on the planet.
309 Re: Democrats Debate lineup 7/19/2019, 3:02 pm
bigdog
I promise you, if she walks out on that stage and starts talking about private equity firms, she's losing her audience for however long they let her talk. And that appears to be the main focus of her economic plan.Sal wrote:This week, Elizabeth Warren unveiled her plan to rein in Wall Street.
The plan is co-sponsored by Tammy Baldwin, Sherrod Brown Ranking Member of the Senate Banking Committee, Rep Mark Pocan and Rep Pramila Jayapal.
This is the first plan unveiled to rein in Wall Street since Dodd-Frank.
No other candidate has proposed anything like it, and this is on top of her economic patriotism agenda proposed last month.
She and only she is taking on the single biggest cancer tearing at the fabric of the republic - wealth inequality.
Read about it here;
https://medium.com/@teamwarren/end-wall-streets-stranglehold-on-our-economy-70cf038bac76
In a sane world, she would be winning this thing in a landslide ...
... but then she's so "high-strung", and that voice ...
Personally, I don't have a CLUE what a private equity firm is. I'm a college graduate, maybe I should. But I'm not an economist and neither are 99% (that's a guess) of the rest of the voting public in America.
She won't be able to explain it to them, it's far too complicated, like a lot of her thinking. Liz Warren is the Al Gore of the Democratic party today. She's too smart for the electorate and doesn't have much of a noticeable personality. She would be a disaster against Donald Trump.
310 Re: Democrats Debate lineup 7/19/2019, 4:06 pm
Sal
bigdog wrote:
I promise you, if she walks out on that stage and starts talking about private equity firms, she's losing her audience for however long they let her talk. And that appears to be the main focus of her economic plan.
Personally, I don't have a CLUE what a private equity firm is. I'm a college graduate, maybe I should. But I'm not an economist and neither are 99% (that's a guess) of the rest of the voting public in America.
She won't be able to explain it to them, it's far too complicated, like a lot of her thinking. Liz Warren is the Al Gore of the Democratic party today. She's too smart for the electorate and doesn't have much of a noticeable personality. She would be a disaster against Donald Trump.
Professor Warren is plenty smart alright.
But, she can dumb it down enough for the average American to understand.
That's why her support has been surging, and she's been able to raise so much money from small donations (meanwhile, Old Joe is begging his big money banker types to max out their donations to try to keep up).
Heck, she probably could even dumb it down enough for you to understand.
As a matter of fact, you're in luck ... she explains in layman's terms exactly what a private equity firm is and how they hurt the economy and the average worker in the link I conveniently included.
You might learn something, if you can figure out how to click the link and have someone read it to you.
It's worth a shot .. stranger things have happened.
And, you wouldn't even have to listen to her voice.
311 Re: Democrats Debate lineup 7/19/2019, 5:01 pm
Floridatexan
bigdog wrote:Sal wrote:This week, Elizabeth Warren unveiled her plan to rein in Wall Street.
The plan is co-sponsored by Tammy Baldwin, Sherrod Brown Ranking Member of the Senate Banking Committee, Rep Mark Pocan and Rep Pramila Jayapal.
This is the first plan unveiled to rein in Wall Street since Dodd-Frank.
No other candidate has proposed anything like it, and this is on top of her economic patriotism agenda proposed last month.
She and only she is taking on the single biggest cancer tearing at the fabric of the republic - wealth inequality.
Read about it here;
https://medium.com/@teamwarren/end-wall-streets-stranglehold-on-our-economy-70cf038bac76
In a sane world, she would be winning this thing in a landslide ...
... but then she's so "high-strung", and that voice ...
I promise you, if she walks out on that stage and starts talking about private equity firms, she's losing her audience for however long they let her talk. And that appears to be the main focus of her economic plan.
Personally, I don't have a CLUE what a private equity firm is. I'm a college graduate, maybe I should. But I'm not an economist and neither are 99% (that's a guess) of the rest of the voting public in America.
She won't be able to explain it to them, it's far too complicated, like a lot of her thinking. Liz Warren is the Al Gore of the Democratic party today. She's too smart for the electorate and doesn't have much of a noticeable personality. She would be a disaster against Donald Trump.
Oy, vey. Every business graduate in the country (or out) has taken multiple classes in economics, so your statistic is ridiculous. I wonder who the real hall monitor here is...your major was criminal justice, wasn't it? Did they teach you about white collar crime?
312 Re: Democrats Debate lineup 7/19/2019, 5:47 pm
bigdog
No, my major was sociology with several psychology, civil rights, and social welfare classes mixed in, along with an internship with the Division of Family Sevices now called DCF, I believe. UWF, where I attended, didn't have a separate social work degree at the time, my original degree said Sociology on it, a later replacement degree was updated to say it was in Social Work.
None of that matters. I had no idea what a private equity fund was and
I defy you to find 15 people out of 100 who know what a private equity fund is.
You said every business major in the country has taken economics-I agree, you are absolutely right.
If every business major in America votes for Elizabeth Warren, she still won't win.
And I did read the link, btw.
It's not written at a level any average voter could ever understand.
If she doesn't learn to dumb it down a little, she is going nowhere.
Al Gore was too smart to beat George W. Nobody wanted to have a beer with Al Gore, nobody. Later on, John Kerry had the same problem. He not only couldn't connect with the average man, he was also incredibly wealthy. We lost that one too. Remember Michael Dukakis? He was really smart and had a lot of good ideas. But when somebody asked him the simplest of questions-"If someone raped and killed your wife, would you want to execute them," he answered with an intellectual answer, straight from his own platform, and said No. He lost the election at that moment.
It was the correct answer from his previous writings, but the wrong answer for human nature. He could not relate to the voters, not at all .
Average voters know about taxes, they know about their paychecks, they know about needing to keep their jobs. They want somebody to tell them they will fix these things. They don't want to hear about bond trading or buying off businesses or private equity funds.
I know you think I know nothing about the voters in this country Sal, because you think they're all sitting around waiting for the progressives to make society into the perfect nirvana. It ain't so. They're scared to death of both the far left and the far right. They just want their government to settle down, get rid of Trump and to be able to make a decent living for themselves.
None of that matters. I had no idea what a private equity fund was and
I defy you to find 15 people out of 100 who know what a private equity fund is.
You said every business major in the country has taken economics-I agree, you are absolutely right.
If every business major in America votes for Elizabeth Warren, she still won't win.
And I did read the link, btw.
It's not written at a level any average voter could ever understand.
If she doesn't learn to dumb it down a little, she is going nowhere.
Al Gore was too smart to beat George W. Nobody wanted to have a beer with Al Gore, nobody. Later on, John Kerry had the same problem. He not only couldn't connect with the average man, he was also incredibly wealthy. We lost that one too. Remember Michael Dukakis? He was really smart and had a lot of good ideas. But when somebody asked him the simplest of questions-"If someone raped and killed your wife, would you want to execute them," he answered with an intellectual answer, straight from his own platform, and said No. He lost the election at that moment.
It was the correct answer from his previous writings, but the wrong answer for human nature. He could not relate to the voters, not at all .
Average voters know about taxes, they know about their paychecks, they know about needing to keep their jobs. They want somebody to tell them they will fix these things. They don't want to hear about bond trading or buying off businesses or private equity funds.
I know you think I know nothing about the voters in this country Sal, because you think they're all sitting around waiting for the progressives to make society into the perfect nirvana. It ain't so. They're scared to death of both the far left and the far right. They just want their government to settle down, get rid of Trump and to be able to make a decent living for themselves.
313 Re: Democrats Debate lineup 7/19/2019, 5:54 pm
bigdog
And hey, by the way. Joe Biden's healthcare plan IS written in plain English that anybody could understand.
And as for Elizabeth Warren being the smartest person in the run, I'd like to point out that the ONLY Rhodes Scholar running for President is Corey Booker. Also, he speaks the kind of English everybody can understand.
And as for Elizabeth Warren being the smartest person in the run, I'd like to point out that the ONLY Rhodes Scholar running for President is Corey Booker. Also, he speaks the kind of English everybody can understand.
314 Re: Democrats Debate lineup 7/19/2019, 6:17 pm
RealLindaL
bigdog wrote:
I know you think I know nothing about the voters in this country Sal, because you think they're all sitting around waiting for the progressives to make society into the perfect nirvana. It ain't so. They're scared to death of both the far left and the far right. They just want their government to settle down, get rid of Trump and to be able to make a decent living for themselves.
ABSO-POSTIVELY SPOT ON, B.D.
I was also gratified to see you cite the Al Gore personality example above, because I've been meaning to get to the computer all day to say precisely the same thing in response to Sal's sarcasm re Warren's voice and demeanor. Ignore these things, Sal, at you own severe risk, and look to the WOODEN Al Gore as a perfect example of why attitude, demeanor, personality, and just general LIKEABILITY simply cannot be ignored. Gore's message -- which could've won him a large margin of victory -- instead took a far distant second seat to his total turn-off self.
This is important stuff, and, once more, Sal, you ignore it to every thinking Trump-despiser's great detriment, because a Warren nomination will almost certainly insure a Trump re-election.
It's time to GET REAL.
315 Re: Democrats Debate lineup 7/19/2019, 6:36 pm
Floridatexan
RealLindaL wrote:bigdog wrote:
I know you think I know nothing about the voters in this country Sal, because you think they're all sitting around waiting for the progressives to make society into the perfect nirvana. It ain't so. They're scared to death of both the far left and the far right. They just want their government to settle down, get rid of Trump and to be able to make a decent living for themselves.
ABSO-POSTIVELY SPOT ON, B.D.
I was also gratified to see you cite the Al Gore personality example above, because I've been meaning to get to the computer all day to say precisely the same thing in response to Sal's sarcasm re Warren's voice and demeanor. Ignore these things, Sal, at you own severe risk, and look to the WOODEN Al Gore as a perfect example of why attitude, demeanor, personality, and just general LIKEABILITY simply cannot be ignored. Gore's message -- which could've won him a large margin of victory -- instead took a far distant second seat to his total turn-off self.
This is important stuff, and, once more, Sal, you ignore it to every thinking Trump-despiser's great detriment, because a Warren nomination will almost certainly insure a Trump re-election.
It's time to GET REAL.
It seems that both of you have forgotten that Jebbie and the Supremes stole the election for W.
316 Re: Democrats Debate lineup 7/19/2019, 7:33 pm
bigdog
OH, I know Gore won the popular vote. I figured you didn't because you cannot accept that Hillary also won the popular vote. It goes against your argument that Centrists are the old Democratic party and should bow down and accept every far left idea you have. Hillary actually winning in 2016 shoots down your entire argument. As I have said multiple times. the Democratic party needs to quit doing autopsies on itself because it's never been dead.
You can't be hypocritical and say Trump is in office because we weren't progressive enough in 2016, when the electoral college is the only reason he's there. But you do, constantly, love to pretend that Americans did not want Hillary. She just wasn't progressive enough. Americans did want Hillary. That's a fact.
When you stop making that ridiculous claim in order to advance your own progressive agenda, well, I'll be shocked. Now you want to tell me about Gore? A little hypocritical, ya' think?
Gore did win. But he'd have actually won and gone into office had he just had a little more personality. Americans weren't out there begging for another Bush in office, the Dems just nominated a candidate with no personality. And I would also contend that Gore not allowing Clinton to campaign for him was a huge mistake. Clinton was at 62 percent approval when he left office.
Maybe Ms Warren has a personality, but she hasn't shown it publicly yet.
She needs to stop explaining her plans and tell us who she is.
You can't be hypocritical and say Trump is in office because we weren't progressive enough in 2016, when the electoral college is the only reason he's there. But you do, constantly, love to pretend that Americans did not want Hillary. She just wasn't progressive enough. Americans did want Hillary. That's a fact.
When you stop making that ridiculous claim in order to advance your own progressive agenda, well, I'll be shocked. Now you want to tell me about Gore? A little hypocritical, ya' think?
Gore did win. But he'd have actually won and gone into office had he just had a little more personality. Americans weren't out there begging for another Bush in office, the Dems just nominated a candidate with no personality. And I would also contend that Gore not allowing Clinton to campaign for him was a huge mistake. Clinton was at 62 percent approval when he left office.
Maybe Ms Warren has a personality, but she hasn't shown it publicly yet.
She needs to stop explaining her plans and tell us who she is.
317 Re: Democrats Debate lineup 7/19/2019, 9:20 pm
Floridatexan
bigdog wrote:OH, I know Gore won the popular vote. I figured you didn't because you cannot accept that Hillary also won the popular vote. It goes against your argument that Centrists are the old Democratic party and should bow down and accept every far left idea you have. Hillary actually winning in 2016 shoots down your entire argument. As I have said multiple times. the Democratic party needs to quit doing autopsies on itself because it's never been dead.
You can't be hypocritical and say Trump is in office because we weren't progressive enough in 2016, when the electoral college is the only reason he's there. But you do, constantly, love to pretend that Americans did not want Hillary. She just wasn't progressive enough. Americans did want Hillary. That's a fact.
When you stop making that ridiculous claim in order to advance your own progressive agenda, well, I'll be shocked. Now you want to tell me about Gore? A little hypocritical, ya' think?
Gore did win. But he'd have actually won and gone into office had he just had a little more personality. Americans weren't out there begging for another Bush in office, the Dems just nominated a candidate with no personality. And I would also contend that Gore not allowing Clinton to campaign for him was a huge mistake. Clinton was at 62 percent approval when he left office.
Maybe Ms Warren has a personality, but she hasn't shown it publicly yet.
She needs to stop explaining her plans and tell us who she is.
I VOTED FOR HILLARY. I never said anything even remotely close to what you're accusing me of saying. You think the future of the party and the country is at the center (whatever the hell that is). I disagree. I wholeheartedly disagree, because I DO UNDERSTAND the economics; I do understand what Hillary was trying to do, and I even believe she was the most qualified for the job. I loved her when Bill was president because she took the criticism for her health care plan and because of her refusal to stand on the sidelines. At the same time, I was critical of her vote for the Iraq War. No candidate is perfect, but Hillary Clinton won the election of 2016, except for the right-wing gerrymandering, voter disenfranchisement, Russian interference, Comey's last minute statement, and the approximately 30 years of lies perpetrated by Republicans against both her and Bill. You apparently believe Hillary is a corporate Dem, which I think is an oxymoron. If I thought Hillary was just selling out to corporations, I wouldn't have voted for her. Our economic situation needs to change. I don't believe Biden can deliver the goods.
318 Re: Democrats Debate lineup 7/19/2019, 10:08 pm
bigdog
Well, if you never said the party needed to swing left because they couldn't win with the centrist Hillary being the candidate, then I apologize.
But it certainly seems like that's what you, and Telstar, and Sal are all implying with your comments that we HAVE to run to the left this election in order to win. We didn't run left with Hillary, and we did win, at least 3 million more votes than the Republicans got. And FYI, yes, the newest and loudest members of the House do seem to be progressives, but it was not all progressives that overturned the Republican majority in Congress last year. There were just as many Centrists who ran and tossed the Republican representative out of office too. The news doesn't cover that, because it isn't exciting.
The party isn't broken and does not need fixing, definitely not this year. Winning is what this year is about. Making people scared of turning Socialist isn't the way to win. Americans don't know what Socialism is. They need to be educated before they can fully accept it. And this year, there isn't enough time to take them to school. Winning comes first, because Trump winning again just is not an option.
But it certainly seems like that's what you, and Telstar, and Sal are all implying with your comments that we HAVE to run to the left this election in order to win. We didn't run left with Hillary, and we did win, at least 3 million more votes than the Republicans got. And FYI, yes, the newest and loudest members of the House do seem to be progressives, but it was not all progressives that overturned the Republican majority in Congress last year. There were just as many Centrists who ran and tossed the Republican representative out of office too. The news doesn't cover that, because it isn't exciting.
The party isn't broken and does not need fixing, definitely not this year. Winning is what this year is about. Making people scared of turning Socialist isn't the way to win. Americans don't know what Socialism is. They need to be educated before they can fully accept it. And this year, there isn't enough time to take them to school. Winning comes first, because Trump winning again just is not an option.
319 Re: Democrats Debate lineup 7/20/2019, 1:52 am
RealLindaL
Floridatexan wrote:RealLindaL wrote:bigdog wrote:
I know you think I know nothing about the voters in this country Sal, because you think they're all sitting around waiting for the progressives to make society into the perfect nirvana. It ain't so. They're scared to death of both the far left and the far right. They just want their government to settle down, get rid of Trump and to be able to make a decent living for themselves.
ABSO-POSTIVELY SPOT ON, B.D.
I was also gratified to see you cite the Al Gore personality example above, because I've been meaning to get to the computer all day to say precisely the same thing in response to Sal's sarcasm re Warren's voice and demeanor. Ignore these things, Sal, at you own severe risk, and look to the WOODEN Al Gore as a perfect example of why attitude, demeanor, personality, and just general LIKEABILITY simply cannot be ignored. Gore's message -- which could've won him a large margin of victory -- instead took a far distant second seat to his total turn-off self.
This is important stuff, and, once more, Sal, you ignore it to every thinking Trump-despiser's great detriment, because a Warren nomination will almost certainly insure a Trump re-election.
It's time to GET REAL.
It seems that both of you have forgotten that Jebbie and the Supremes stole the election for W.
Excuse me, ma'am, but I've forgotten no such thing, nor did I say anything to the contrary.
Please carefully look at my statement again, using your very best reading comprehension skills:
"Gore's message -- which could've won him a large margin of victory -- instead took a far distant second seat to his total turn-off self."
In other words -- if you still don't get it:
His message COULD have won him a LARGE margin of victory (thus assuring him an easy win), but his MESSAGE took second seat to his wooden SELF (unattractive personality).
I sure hope you get it now, FT. Personality, demeanor, presentation -- they all MATTER, BIG time -- and those factors would likely prove a major negative for our side in a Warren-Trump race, IMHO. Trump may be a complete and total a**hole, but his base loves his "entertainer" charisma, and he's proven once before that, inexplicably enough, he can charm the socks off a large portion of the electorate - the same large portion that I'm afraid Warren might turn off completely.
320 Re: Democrats Debate lineup 7/20/2019, 5:06 am
Telstar
bigdog wrote:I don't care if Booker criticizes Biden at all, because he's qualified to be POTUS and isn't a disingenuous candidate with a lot of questionable activities in his background.
I don't agree with him at all, but as an African American who has lived his whole life in this country, including his childhood, he is at least completely connected with what it means to grow up in that community facing the prejudice that comes along with it.
Unlike the other person who is trying so hard to play her race card.
And Corey Booker is a deeply decent human being, which is what I also see in Joe Biden, so he can get by with me disagreeing with him on some issues. Plus, he's a hero. As I've said on here before, firemen and anybody that runs into burning houses to rescue other people are heroes to me.
They're on top of my list of the most amazing people on the planet.
I don't care if Booker joins Harris in lighting a fire under SlowJoe, might be fun to watch.
321 Re: Democrats Debate lineup 7/20/2019, 5:55 am
Telstar
I can imagine two reactions at Biden headquarters Thursdsay night when the lineups for the CNN debates in Detroit were drawn.
The first is that this is a potential disaster. Flanked on the July 31 stage by two of his most aggressive attackers and several feisty progressives, who are desperate for a big moment to keep their bids alive, the former Vice President could find himself a frequent target.
But, as my middle school basketball coach always said, every challenge is an opportunity.
The front runner in polls, Joe Biden, who faltered in the first round of Democratic debates in June, will have a chance to soothe his anxious supporters by confidently swatting down the incoming and proving that, at age 76, he's still got game.
The second night
One consequence of the random draw is that Biden, who has struggled on questions of race, will find himself competing on the second night of back-to-back debates on a stage that includes every candidate of color in the Democratic field.
Standing to the left of Biden will be Senator Kamala Harris of California. Her riveting, made-for-TV takedown of the former VP in Miami over his opposition to mandatory school busing in the '70s was the iconic moment of the last debate.
On Biden's right will be Senator Cory Booker of New Jersey, who led the charge for a public apology after Biden boasted at a fundraiser of his working relationship in the 1970s with two of the Senate's most virulent segregationists. Booker, who eventually got the apology, has failed to get much lift and will be looking for a big moment in this debate to ignite his campaign the way Harris did last time.
So, too, will the candidates who will fill out the stage, including two flamboyant New Yorkers, Senator Kirsten Gillibrand and Mayor Bill de Blasio, who are in danger of failing to make the cut for the next Democratic debate in September if they don't dramatically lift their poll numbers from the land of one percenters where they current languish.
In September, the eligibility requirements to qualify for future debates will double, meaning candidates will be required to post at least 2 percent in four national polls between June 28 and August 28 and show 130,000 unique donors to their campaigns. To have any hope of getting there, Gillibrand and de Blasio -- who made a lot of noise in the last debate but little progress -- will need to break through in some dramatic way.
And, as Harris has proven, there is no better way to achieve that than a face-off with the front runner.
Gillibrand, who has staked her campaign on her leadership on issues such as sexual assault, could achieve that by challenging Biden over his long ago treatment of Anita Hill at the Supreme Court confirmation hearings of Clarence Thomas.
De Blasio, who got in late and is improbably hoping to muscle into a race already populated by several iconic candidates of the Left -- Senators Bernie Sanders of Vermont and Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts -- was fairly hyperventilating in the first debate, breaking in whenever he could. Look for him to create a moment with the moderate former VP on ideological grounds.
Biden's heat also will include Julian Castro, the former HUD secretary and San Antonio mayor, who drew notice in the June debates for his muscular confrontation with his fellow Texan, Beto O'Rourke, over decriminalizing the border. He will be looking for another such moment, perhaps with Harris, who now is polling in the upper echelon of candidates and has vulnerabilities with the left over her record as a prosecutor.
But Biden, who is blessed and cursed to sit atop the polls, should look forward to the honor of being a target throughout.
For unknown reasons, Biden was caught flat-footed by Harris in the first debate, giving rise to new questions about his age and stamina. (I still don't understand why Biden didn't play his strongest card when Harris challenged him, which is his partnership with the nation's first black president -- "Kamala, Barack Obama examined every aspect of my record and chose me to be his Vice President. That should tell you all you need to know about my record and commitment on civil rights.")
Biden also could fairly turn on Harris for appearing the day after the last debate to walk back her position on busing to something that sounded a lot like Biden's voluntary-not-compulsory position. And he might challenge her on her on-again, off-again support of Sanders' plan to replace the entire private health insurance system under Medicare for All.
If the front runner who appears on the stage in Detroit is strong, agile and confident in handling the incoming -- and unapologetically claims the mantle as moderate -- he could take a big step toward solidifying his status at the top of his pack. If not, the lamentations about his ability to go the distance will grow louder.
Harris vaulted to the top tier in polling after her last debate. The upcoming the debate offers a chance to go beyond her moment and deliver a clear message, something she has yet to do.
If you believe, as I do, that the ultimate argument against President Trump is that his gleeful, nasty and unremitting penchant to divide the country is a dispiriting and exhausting barrier to progress, the charismatic Harris could emerge as a force to heal the breach. But that would require her to commit to such a message.
https://www.cnn.com/2019/07/19/opinions/biden-debate-draw-potential-disaster-and-opportunity-axelrod/index.html
The first is that this is a potential disaster. Flanked on the July 31 stage by two of his most aggressive attackers and several feisty progressives, who are desperate for a big moment to keep their bids alive, the former Vice President could find himself a frequent target.
But, as my middle school basketball coach always said, every challenge is an opportunity.
The front runner in polls, Joe Biden, who faltered in the first round of Democratic debates in June, will have a chance to soothe his anxious supporters by confidently swatting down the incoming and proving that, at age 76, he's still got game.
The second night
One consequence of the random draw is that Biden, who has struggled on questions of race, will find himself competing on the second night of back-to-back debates on a stage that includes every candidate of color in the Democratic field.
Standing to the left of Biden will be Senator Kamala Harris of California. Her riveting, made-for-TV takedown of the former VP in Miami over his opposition to mandatory school busing in the '70s was the iconic moment of the last debate.
On Biden's right will be Senator Cory Booker of New Jersey, who led the charge for a public apology after Biden boasted at a fundraiser of his working relationship in the 1970s with two of the Senate's most virulent segregationists. Booker, who eventually got the apology, has failed to get much lift and will be looking for a big moment in this debate to ignite his campaign the way Harris did last time.
So, too, will the candidates who will fill out the stage, including two flamboyant New Yorkers, Senator Kirsten Gillibrand and Mayor Bill de Blasio, who are in danger of failing to make the cut for the next Democratic debate in September if they don't dramatically lift their poll numbers from the land of one percenters where they current languish.
In September, the eligibility requirements to qualify for future debates will double, meaning candidates will be required to post at least 2 percent in four national polls between June 28 and August 28 and show 130,000 unique donors to their campaigns. To have any hope of getting there, Gillibrand and de Blasio -- who made a lot of noise in the last debate but little progress -- will need to break through in some dramatic way.
And, as Harris has proven, there is no better way to achieve that than a face-off with the front runner.
Gillibrand, who has staked her campaign on her leadership on issues such as sexual assault, could achieve that by challenging Biden over his long ago treatment of Anita Hill at the Supreme Court confirmation hearings of Clarence Thomas.
De Blasio, who got in late and is improbably hoping to muscle into a race already populated by several iconic candidates of the Left -- Senators Bernie Sanders of Vermont and Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts -- was fairly hyperventilating in the first debate, breaking in whenever he could. Look for him to create a moment with the moderate former VP on ideological grounds.
Biden's heat also will include Julian Castro, the former HUD secretary and San Antonio mayor, who drew notice in the June debates for his muscular confrontation with his fellow Texan, Beto O'Rourke, over decriminalizing the border. He will be looking for another such moment, perhaps with Harris, who now is polling in the upper echelon of candidates and has vulnerabilities with the left over her record as a prosecutor.
But Biden, who is blessed and cursed to sit atop the polls, should look forward to the honor of being a target throughout.
For unknown reasons, Biden was caught flat-footed by Harris in the first debate, giving rise to new questions about his age and stamina. (I still don't understand why Biden didn't play his strongest card when Harris challenged him, which is his partnership with the nation's first black president -- "Kamala, Barack Obama examined every aspect of my record and chose me to be his Vice President. That should tell you all you need to know about my record and commitment on civil rights.")
Biden also could fairly turn on Harris for appearing the day after the last debate to walk back her position on busing to something that sounded a lot like Biden's voluntary-not-compulsory position. And he might challenge her on her on-again, off-again support of Sanders' plan to replace the entire private health insurance system under Medicare for All.
If the front runner who appears on the stage in Detroit is strong, agile and confident in handling the incoming -- and unapologetically claims the mantle as moderate -- he could take a big step toward solidifying his status at the top of his pack. If not, the lamentations about his ability to go the distance will grow louder.
Harris vaulted to the top tier in polling after her last debate. The upcoming the debate offers a chance to go beyond her moment and deliver a clear message, something she has yet to do.
If you believe, as I do, that the ultimate argument against President Trump is that his gleeful, nasty and unremitting penchant to divide the country is a dispiriting and exhausting barrier to progress, the charismatic Harris could emerge as a force to heal the breach. But that would require her to commit to such a message.
https://www.cnn.com/2019/07/19/opinions/biden-debate-draw-potential-disaster-and-opportunity-axelrod/index.html
322 Re: Democrats Debate lineup 7/20/2019, 9:45 am
Floridatexan
RealLindaL wrote:Floridatexan wrote:RealLindaL wrote:bigdog wrote:
I know you think I know nothing about the voters in this country Sal, because you think they're all sitting around waiting for the progressives to make society into the perfect nirvana. It ain't so. They're scared to death of both the far left and the far right. They just want their government to settle down, get rid of Trump and to be able to make a decent living for themselves.
ABSO-POSTIVELY SPOT ON, B.D.
I was also gratified to see you cite the Al Gore personality example above, because I've been meaning to get to the computer all day to say precisely the same thing in response to Sal's sarcasm re Warren's voice and demeanor. Ignore these things, Sal, at you own severe risk, and look to the WOODEN Al Gore as a perfect example of why attitude, demeanor, personality, and just general LIKEABILITY simply cannot be ignored. Gore's message -- which could've won him a large margin of victory -- instead took a far distant second seat to his total turn-off self.
This is important stuff, and, once more, Sal, you ignore it to every thinking Trump-despiser's great detriment, because a Warren nomination will almost certainly insure a Trump re-election.
It's time to GET REAL.
It seems that both of you have forgotten that Jebbie and the Supremes stole the election for W.
Excuse me, ma'am, but I've forgotten no such thing, nor did I say anything to the contrary.
Please carefully look at my statement again, using your very best reading comprehension skills:
"Gore's message -- which could've won him a large margin of victory -- instead took a far distant second seat to his total turn-off self."
In other words -- if you still don't get it:
His message COULD have won him a LARGE margin of victory (thus assuring him an easy win), but his MESSAGE took second seat to his wooden SELF (unattractive personality).
I sure hope you get it now, FT. Personality, demeanor, presentation -- they all MATTER, BIG time -- and those factors would likely prove a major negative for our side in a Warren-Trump race, IMHO. Trump may be a complete and total a**hole, but his base loves his "entertainer" charisma, and he's proven once before that, inexplicably enough, he can charm the socks off a large portion of the electorate - the same large portion that I'm afraid Warren might turn off completely.
Thanks for telling me that, Linda. My degree is in marketing and spent several years in advertising. I don't think I need to have you talk down to me.
It doesn't matter which candidate; the now full-on FASCIST GOP will use every tool in their slimy toolbox. They have no honesty and no integrity, so there's no use trying to work with them. As for Drumpf (*resident *rump), may he rot in prison or hell, whichever comes first.
323 Re: Democrats Debate lineup 7/20/2019, 10:04 am
Guest
Guest
Lol... who actually commissioned Russian counterintelligence?
Who had debate questions ahead of time?
Who cheated Bernie?
Who had 90% of the MSM in their pocket?
Slimy fascist toolbox indeed.
Who had debate questions ahead of time?
Who cheated Bernie?
Who had 90% of the MSM in their pocket?
Slimy fascist toolbox indeed.
324 Re: Democrats Debate lineup 7/20/2019, 1:01 pm
RealLindaL
Floridatexan wrote:
Thanks for telling me that, Linda. My degree is in marketing and spent several years in advertising. I don't think I need to have you talk down to me.
EXCUSE ME??? Who is talking down to whom here?????
"It seems that both of you have forgotten that Jebbie and the Supremes stole the election for W."
DUHHHH, REALLY, FT??? I don't think I need history lessons from YOU.
325 Re: Democrats Debate lineup 7/20/2019, 1:18 pm
bigdog
She did not "commission" Russian intelligence. It's not even possible for her to have done that. All those meetings with Russian Intelligence officers were with members of the Trump campaign. That's a fact.
She did not "cheat" Bernie. The Superdelegate system was part of the nomination process. Hillary didn't create that either. Nobody cheated Bernie, Bernie wasn't popular enough to get the nomination.
Because, once more, progressives aren't the real majority In the Democratic party.
Yes, she had the questions ahead of time during one debate. That was wrong. I'll guarantee you, if Trump could have gotten them himself, he would have.
And who had 90% of the mainstream media behind them?
Donald Trump. Period. He would have never been president if they hadn't pushed his campaign to the front of everything else, every single day. He was interesting and they didn't give a damn about the damage they were doing to this country. Every time some huge negative item came up about Trump, it lasted about 3 hours until some small negative about Hillary came up. They ignored Trump's actions and focused on her e-mails, constantly. Because they wanted a close race. That's good for them. People watch the news when it's close.
She did not "cheat" Bernie. The Superdelegate system was part of the nomination process. Hillary didn't create that either. Nobody cheated Bernie, Bernie wasn't popular enough to get the nomination.
Because, once more, progressives aren't the real majority In the Democratic party.
Yes, she had the questions ahead of time during one debate. That was wrong. I'll guarantee you, if Trump could have gotten them himself, he would have.
And who had 90% of the mainstream media behind them?
Donald Trump. Period. He would have never been president if they hadn't pushed his campaign to the front of everything else, every single day. He was interesting and they didn't give a damn about the damage they were doing to this country. Every time some huge negative item came up about Trump, it lasted about 3 hours until some small negative about Hillary came up. They ignored Trump's actions and focused on her e-mails, constantly. Because they wanted a close race. That's good for them. People watch the news when it's close.
Message [Page 13 of 20]
Similar topics
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum