Which democratic candidates do you like?

[TBayXXXVII 2,106]

14 hours ago, kilroy69 said:

Apparently that he does not want biden to be president. 

I mean its not required but kinda understood that you back your VP if they run. To me obama not endorsing biden...again shows me a lack of faith in him. 

I don't think that's the case anymore.  The parties are more active in the VP selection these days and not so much the candidate.  When Obama ran, the Dems still knew they were the party of the racists, so they needed an old white racist to be on their "woke ticket" with their token black candidate.  The GOP put Palin on the ticket to try and get a 1-up on the oppression ballet.  They then picked the far right Pence to run with the moderate Trump.  If a socialist like Bernie or Warren wins the Democrat primary, they'll pick a moderate such as Williamson or Delaney as VP and vice versa if moderate wins the primary.

[TBayXXXVII 2,106]

13 hours ago, KSB2424 said:

If I had to vote Democrat, like gun to head, Yang is the most sane.  He hates identity politics, is pro capitalism (well moreso than the others) is not a politician by trade and has a successful business background.

The thousand dollar per month for all U.S. Citizens living wage is interesting.  He’d get rid of welfare, food stamps, unemployment etc.   All things that people take advantage of to help offset the cost.  Any person can eat, clothes themselves and find shelter with that.  Theoretically if you are homeless on the street the only excuse is mental illness or addiction.  

It has merit.  Especially when you consider the rising population contrasted with robots and artificial intelligence.  

 

The $1k per month stipend without welfare won't and can't work.  Right now, (single) people on welfare get around $9500 a year in just cash value before you even talk about food stamps, medical, etc.  A single parent with 2 children makes almost $40k when factor in money, housing subsides, medical, and food stamps.  If you're only going to get $12k without housing, medical, or food stamps... you're focked.  Yeah, these people will want to work instead, which is great, but it'll be better for Yang's opponents in 4 years.  It would essentially destroy the lower end black community.

On top of that, all that $1k will do is guarantee that costs of goods and services increase substantially because that money's going to come for corporate tax dollars that the company's will just get back when they raise prices.

[kilroy69 993]

12 minutes ago, TBayXXXVII said:

I don't think that's the case anymore.  The parties are more active in the VP selection these days and not so much the candidate.  When Obama ran, the Dems still knew they were the party of the racists, so they needed an old white racist to be on their "woke ticket" with their token black candidate.  The GOP put Palin on the ticket to try and get a 1-up on the oppression ballet.  They then picked the far right Pence to run with the moderate Trump.  If a socialist like Bernie or Warren wins the Democrat primary, they'll pick a moderate such as Williamson or Delaney as VP and vice versa if moderate wins the primary.

That is all well and good in how the process works. Thats not what I am talking about at all though. 

I am talking about an outspoken former president that has chosen NOT to publicly endorse the man he shared the white house with for 8 years. Doesn't matter who the dems pick. His endorsement would go a long way in the primary process and his lack of said endorsement to me speaks to one or both of the mens character. 

[TimmySmith 2,782]

Just now, kilroy69 said:

That is all well and good in how the process works. Thats not what I am talking about at all though. 

I am talking about an outspoken former president that has chosen NOT to publicly endorse the man he shared the white house with for 8 years. Doesn't matter who the dems pick. His endorsement would go a long way in the primary process and his lack of said endorsement to me speaks to one or both of the mens character. 

Obama's main (only) concern is for his legacy.  He won't risk backing a white loser until the general. 

[IGotWorms 3,300]

30 minutes ago, bostonlager said:

Yes or no, will you raise taxes on the middle class to implement medicare for all? - Not once did one of those jews (Bernie &Warren) answer the question. 

I didn't think it was possible for me to hate another human being more than I hate Hillary Clinton, but I hate Warren 10 times more.  

They both said yes, but middle class will pay much less overall considering no premiums, copays, deductibles, etc.

Guess you must’ve missed that.

[Hardcore troubadour 12,588]

12 minutes ago, IGotWorms said:

They both said yes, but middle class will pay much less overall considering no premiums, copays, deductibles, etc.

Guess you must’ve missed that.

I don't pay much right now (union). So what happens then? We took benefits instead of more money forever. . Do employers  then raise our compensation because they won't be laying out for health insurance anymore? Millions of likely voters would be interested to see how that is rectified. Retired veterans and current military as well. 

[bostonlager 2,457]

6 minutes ago, IGotWorms said:

They both said yes, but middle class will pay much less overall considering no premiums, copays, deductibles, etc.

Guess you must’ve missed that.

No, they did not come out and say yes. They said overall costs will go down which I find very hard to believe. 

Here is the exact exchange reported on by a homo-leaning organization, NPR. 

https://www.npr.org/2019/07/30/746805856/the-democratic-debate-over-medicare-for-all-and-middle-class-taxes-explained

[TBayXXXVII 2,106]

25 minutes ago, kilroy69 said:

That is all well and good in how the process works. Thats not what I am talking about at all though. 

I am talking about an outspoken former president that has chosen NOT to publicly endorse the man he shared the white house with for 8 years. Doesn't matter who the dems pick. His endorsement would go a long way in the primary process and his lack of said endorsement to me speaks to one or both of the mens character. 

The Dems want to go more left.  Biden isn't more left.  The party doesn't want Obama to endorse anyone.  If he endorses Biden, it doesn't fit their "old white guy is evil" narrative.  If he endorses a more leftist candidate, the Dems will lose the election because the independents will vote for Trump.  Obama won't endorse anyone until the party tell him who to endorse when the field gets down to about 2 or 3.  Meaning = my point = it's more party than individual now.

[MDC 5,877]

I will be really interested to see who the Dems nominate. Incumbency is a huge advantage but Trump is in a really bad spot as President. 

[KSB2424 3,082]

Bernie is toast.....the momentum he had 4 years ago is gone.  He was up there just yelling.

Warren is crazy, like bat shiot crazy

Spartacus and Beto have no support

Mayor Pete is a great public speaker, but its to soon.....maybe a VP candidate.

It's gonna come down to Biden vs Harris. 

[TBayXXXVII 2,106]

8 minutes ago, MDC said:

I will be really interested to see who the Dems nominate. Incumbency is a huge advantage but Trump is in a really bad spot as President. 

I don't think the majority of the country agree with you on that.

[MDC 5,877]

9 minutes ago, TBayXXXVII said:

I don't think the majority of the country agree with you on that.

The majority of the country disapproves of the job he’s doing. 

[TBayXXXVII 2,106]

Just now, MDC said:

The majority of the country disapproves of the job he’s doing. 

The majority of the country disapproves of his demeanor and attitude.  Not the same thing as "the job" he's doing.  Any data you see about "the job", is only referring to Democrats and/or anti-Trumper's like yourself.  He'll still get re-elected because the facts are that he is doing a good job.

[MDC 5,877]

Just now, TBayXXXVII said:

The majority of the country disapproves of his demeanor and attitude.  Not the same thing as "the job" he's doing.  Any data you see about "the job", is only referring to Democrats and/or anti-Trumper's like yourself.  He'll still get re-elected because the facts are that he is doing a good job.

I’m just going by his 42% approval rating (52% disapprove). That is dismal.

[TBayXXXVII 2,106]

10 minutes ago, MDC said:

I’m just going by his 42% approval rating (52% disapprove). That is dismal.

LOL, that's not what that means!  HAHAHAHA

Edit:  Sorry.  Democrats aren't voting based on "the job" he's doing, they're voting on the way he acts.  This "Approval rating" is proof that most of the country does approve of the job he's doing because 80% of this data is provided from Democrats.

[Voltaire 4,554]

1 hour ago, bostonlager said:

Yes or no, will you raise taxes on the middle class to implement medicare for all? - Not once did one of those jews (Bernie &Warren) answer the question. 

I didn't think it was possible for me to hate another human being more than I hate Hillary Clinton, but I hate Warren 10 times more.  

Is Warren Jewish or some kind of honorary Jew?

[Baker Boy 1,477]

1 hour ago, IGotWorms said:

They both said yes, but middle class will pay much less overall considering no premiums, copays, deductibles, etc.

Guess you must’ve missed that.

WHEN Obama said the average family would save $2700 a year under the ACA, did you believe him too. Of course you did! 

Did you know seniors pay premiums for Medicare? 

[Lil' Webtoed Porkbutt 155]

4 minutes ago, Voltaire said:

Is Warren Jewish or some kind of honorary Jew?

She's claiming to be a Jew because she doesn't have a foreskin. 

[bostonlager 2,457]

4 minutes ago, Voltaire said:

Is Warren Jewish or some kind of honorary Jew?

She would claim jew decent if it helped her cause. 

[Voltaire 4,554]

26 minutes ago, MDC said:

I’m just going by his 42% approval rating (52% disapprove). That is dismal.

Lasat I checked it was like 45%.

[Voltaire 4,554]

4 minutes ago, Lil' Webtoed Porkbutt said:

She's claiming to be a Jew because she doesn't have a foreskin. 

Maybe she's 1/1264 Jewish as well as Native American.

[Lil' Webtoed Porkbutt 155]

3 minutes ago, Voltaire said:

Maybe she's 1/1264 Jewish as well as Native American.

And she won't pay retail. 

[Strike 3,948]

1 hour ago, IGotWorms said:

They both said yes, but middle class will pay much less overall considering no premiums, copays, deductibles, etc.

Guess you must’ve missed that.

Obama said everyone would pay $2500/year less in premiums.   He also said you can keep your doctor.  They say anything to get elected and you're such an idiot you believe them.

https://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/promises/obameter/promise/521/cut-cost-typical-familys-health-insurance-premium-/

[Voltaire 4,554]

Warren is multiple choice.

[Hardcore troubadour 12,588]

3 minutes ago, Strike said:

Obama said everyone would pay $2500/year less in premiums.   He also said you can keep your doctor.  They say anything to get elected and you're such an idiot you believe them.

https://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/promises/obameter/promise/521/cut-cost-typical-familys-health-insurance-premium-/

Here comes the " I didn't vote for him". 

[Baker Boy 1,477]

This is becoming a contest, who can give everything away to everyone the fastest.

 

Student loan forgiveness

Both Sanders and Warren have unveiled proposals to partially, or completely, wipe out Americans’ student debt liabilities.

As of last month, outstanding student loan totals stood at nearly $1.6 trillion.

There are about 43 million borrowers with outstanding debt.

Eliminating all student debt could cost around $1.6 trillion – though the exact price tag is unknown at this point.

Free public college, too

Sanders’ plan to eliminate $1.6 trillion worth of student debt also calls for making U.S. public colleges tuition-free, which could cost $2.2 trillion.

He has said those costs could be covered by a tax levied on trades of stocks, bonds and derivatives. According to his office, that proposal would raise $2.4 trillion.

Warren’s student debt cancelation plan would also include free public college education – she estimates her overall education plan would cost $1.25 trillion. She said costs could be covered by her “ultra-millionaire tax.”

Medicare-for-all

While Democrats are divided on the best way to reform the U.S. health care system – a fact that was glaringly obvious on the debate stage on Tuesday – Warren and Sanders have called for a transition to a single-payer system that would eliminate the role of private insurance companies.

An estimate from the Mercatus Center at George Mason University has pegged the cost of Sanders’ bill, which Warren supports, at around $32 trillion.

Green New Deal

The climate change plan known as the Green New Deal – which calls for massive investments in climate-friendly infrastructure to reduce greenhouse gas emissions to zero by 2050 – could carry costs as high as $93 trillion over the course of 10 years.

A new study found that the average American household could be on the hook for anywhere between $70,000 and $100,000 during the first year of the plan’s implementation – with only slight reductions in the years that followed.

 

$15 minimum wage

According to data from the Congressional Budget Office (CBO), raising the country’s federal minimum wage to $15 per hour would eliminate as many as 3.7 million jobs, while boosting wages for about 17 million people.

[Hardcore troubadour 12,588]

3 minutes ago, Baker Boy said:

This is becoming a contest, who can give everything away to everyone the fastest.

Not everyone. 

[Cdub100 3,366]

How can anyone vote for these clowns? Seriously if they don't come from completely broken districts they are our right socialist. 

[Baker Boy 1,477]

The first installment of CNN’s two-night Democratic primary debate was slammed by critics before it even began. Then it concluded without a single mention of CNN’s longstanding narrative that blew up during former Special Counsel Robert Mueller's testimony.

 

“It is fascinating that Mueller, who Democrats have spent two years making the centerpiece of their efforts to undermine the President, was conspicuously missing from last night’s debate,” Barron said.

[IGotWorms 3,300]

4 hours ago, Hardcore troubadour said:

I don't pay much right now (union). So what happens then? We took benefits instead of more money forever. . Do employers  then raise our compensation because they won't be laying out for health insurance anymore? Millions of likely voters would be interested to see how that is rectified. Retired veterans and current military as well. 

Seems to me those unions would then be free to bargain for greater wages, increased safety, and whatever else they deem important, once their healthcare is no longer held hostage by their employer.

Same goes for all the rest of us, too.

Stuck at a sh1tty job because of the healthcare benefits? Boom, you’re now free to find your true calling.

Want to start a business but need employer-provided insurance for your family? Guess what — no longer a problem.

It really could be a wonderful thing. I don’t know which option from “Medicare for All” or the public option or whatever else is the best way to get there, but I for damn sure know the goal is laudatory.

[RaiderHaters Revenge 3,566]

why does nobody ever talk about the people who make 15-25$ an hour who would basically not see their income increase, and would have to turn to food stamps to survive

 

[RaiderHaters Revenge 3,566]

Yang 2020

[Hardcore troubadour 12,588]

4 minutes ago, IGotWorms said:

Seems to me those unions would then be free to bargain for greater wages, increased safety, and whatever else they deem important, once their healthcare is no longer held hostage by their employer.

Same goes for all the rest of us, too.

Stuck at a sh1tty job because of the healthcare benefits? Boom, you’re now free to find your true calling.

Want to start a business but need employer-provided insurance for your family? Guess what — no longer a problem.

It really could be a wonderful thing. I don’t know which option from “Medicare for All” or the public option or whatever else is the best way to get there, but I for damn sure know the goal is laudatory.

They could bargain? That should work out great.  Why should I have to bargain for something I've already earned? And how about the military and veterans? They don't get to bargain. So when their taxes go up, they get to pay for something they already earned with their labor? How is that a good deal for them? Millions want to know.

[MDC 5,877]

25 minutes ago, IGotWorms said:

Seems to me those unions would then be free to bargain for greater wages, increased safety, and whatever else they deem important, once their healthcare is no longer held hostage by their employer.

Same goes for all the rest of us, too.

Stuck at a sh1tty job because of the healthcare benefits? Boom, you’re now free to find your true calling.

Want to start a business but need employer-provided insurance for your family? Guess what — no longer a problem.

It really could be a wonderful thing. I don’t know which option from “Medicare for All” or the public option or whatever else is the best way to get there, but I for damn sure know the goal is laudatory.

Good point and good post.

[bostonlager 2,457]

Healthcare for everyone that is free means I have to wait longer to see a doctor and get my procedures done. 

[DonS 3,063]

13 minutes ago, bostonlager said:

Healthcare for everyone that is free means I have to wait longer to see a doctor and get my procedures done. 

I do wonder what my cancer treatment would've looked like if it was through one of these "Medicare-for-all / private insurance illegal" pipe dreams.  

[bostonlager 2,457]

1 minute ago, DonS said:

I do wonder what my cancer treatment would've looked like if it was through one of these "Medicare-for-all / private insurance illegal" pipe dreams.  

You probably wouldn't be with us, but thankfully you are. USA!!

[Strike 3,948]

8 minutes ago, DonS said:

I do wonder what my cancer treatment would've looked like if it was through one of these "Medicare-for-all / private insurance illegal" pipe dreams.  

What's to wonder about?  You'd be dead.

[EternalShinyAndChrome 2,493]

4 hours ago, bostonlager said:

Healthcare for everyone that is free means I have to wait longer to see a doctor and get my procedures done. 

Average wait time to see a doctor for any reason in Canada - one of the countries the left says "does it right" - is 5 months.  5 months.  You may end up dying before you see the doctor.  But then again, if you do then the socialists see that as a "health savings".  That's the whole point.

The only time you get to see a doctor right away is if it is basically a life or death emergency.

In the good old USA, I went in for a physical last week and since I'm now 50 I have to do a colonoscopy.  Scheduling called me THE SAME DAY and scheduled it in two weeks.

[Cdub100 3,366]

4 hours ago, DonS said:

I do wonder what my cancer treatment would've looked like if it was through one of these "Medicare-for-all / private insurance illegal" pipe dreams.  

You'd be dead.