Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
swordfish

The Democrat's roster for a Trump - beater in 2020

Recommended Posts

Castro drops out of 2020 U.S. presidential race: https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-election-castro/castro-drops-out-of-2020-u-s-presidential-race-idUSKBN1Z10ZE

Quote

Julian Castro, the grandson of a Mexican immigrant who became San Antonio mayor and a U.S. housing secretary, suspended his 2020 Democratic presidential run on Thursday after a candidacy overshadowed by more famous liberals.

The departure of the only Latino from the campaign, a month or so ahead of early nominating contests in Iowa and New Hampshire, leaves 14 Democratic candidates tmsnrt.rs/2Ff62ZC in a still crowded field seeking the party's nomination to take on Republican President Donald Trump in November.

The charisma and assertiveness that helped make Castro, 45, a rising star in the Democratic Party did not translate into enough support to compete against better-known candidates, including progressive U.S. Senators Bernie Sanders of Vermont and Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts.

....

And another one bites the dust.   

 

  • Disdain 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Marianne Williamson Withdraws from the Presidential Race: https://reason.com/2020/01/12/marianne-williamson-withdraws-from-the-presidential-race/

Quote

The most interesting thing about Marianne Williamson's presidential campaign may be that it did about as well as you'd ordinarily expect a Marianne Williamson campaign to do. The self-help writer and spiritual leader, who suspended her New Age quest for the Democratic nomination on Friday, made a splash in the press and the meme factories by sounding so different from the other candidates. But her poll numbers never climbed above the low single digits, and now she has withdrawn before the voting begins. Apparently, the Oprah constituency isn't enough to win a major party's presidential nod this year. Maybe Oprah herself could do it, but not a mere Oprah guest.

That should not be surprising. Major political parties do not usually hand their national tickets to celebrity candidates who don't have any elected experience. But one of them did just that last time around, and the guy they picked then got elected president. And that experience has thrust some traumatized analysts into a state of epistemic nihilism, as though they can't entirely rule out the possibility that the Democrats will nominate an AI and the Republicans will nominate Bernie Sanders.

....

Another one bites the dust.

 

  • Disdain 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, swordfish said:

Image may contain: 1 person, outdoor

I totally get the Alfred E. Neuman slant. 

But seriously has anyone ever seen Mayor Pete and Atticus Shaffer (Brick "In The Middle") in the same room. Dude even has the same haircut.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Mr. Booker is out, they are now dropping like flies:  https://www.cnn.com/2020/01/13/politics/cory-booker-ends-presidential-race/index.html

Quote

Sen. Cory Booker announced Monday that he will end his campaign after failing to qualify for the Democratic debate planned for Tuesday in Iowa.

"It was a difficult decision to make, but I got in this race to win, and I've always said I wouldn't continue if there was no longer a path to victory," Booker said in an email to supporters Monday.
 
The New Jersey Democrat's announcement came a day before six presidential candidates will participate in the CNN/Des Moines Register's debate in Des Moines, Iowa. He did not qualify for the event. It also came as the Senate gears up for the impeachment trial of President Donald Trump.
 
"Our campaign has reached the point where we need more money to scale up and continue building a campaign that can win -- money we don't have, and money that is harder to raise because I won't be on the next debate stage and because the urgent business of impeachment will rightly be keeping me in Washington," Booker wrote.

 

  • Disdain 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sanders Wins Support of Crucial Nevada Teachers Union: https://www.nationalreview.com/news/sanders-wins-support-of-crucial-nevada-teachers-union/

Quote

Democratic presidential candidate Bernie Sanders picked up a coveted endorsement from the largest teacher’s union in Nevada on Tuesday, marking much-needed working class support for him in the early voting state.

The Clark County Education Association, representing 19,000 educators and other licensed professionals in the Las Vegas area, announced their support Tuesday for the Vermont senator in comments first reported by Buzzfeed News.

“Senator Sanders has a stellar record of supporting educators. His position on public education issues is second to none. He has always been a champion for educators and working class people,” union president Vikki Courtney in a statement.

“We appreciated that Sen. Sanders came to us, very much reached out to us, and wanted to speak to us,” Courtney added. “He is concerned about access to education for kids, for students themselves but also for the adults who are the educators. The student loan debt is part of that idea, it is hard to achieve when it costs so much to go to school. And that part is important because we’re lacking educators. We’re 1000 teachers short here in Nevada.”

The school district associated with the union, the Clark County School District, is the fifth-largest in the nation.

....

So I guess we now know who @DanteEstonia is voting for..........................

 

  • Disdain 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, DanteEstonia said:

I would have voted for him without the endorsement.

Why?

 

  • Disdain 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, Muda69 said:

Sanders Wins Support of Crucial Nevada Teachers Union: https://www.nationalreview.com/news/sanders-wins-support-of-crucial-nevada-teachers-union/

So I guess we now know who @DanteEstonia is voting for..........................

 

I would have voted for him without the endorsement. Double post

3 minutes ago, Muda69 said:

Why?

 

Why not?

Edited by DanteEstonia
Double post, please delete.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, DanteEstonia said:

I would have voted for him without the endorsement. Double post

Why not?

If "why not" (aka "not Trump")  is you and other socialists primary reason for voting for Mr. Sanders then I fear for the future of our country.

 

  • Disdain 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Muda69 said:

If "why not" (aka "not Trump")  is you and other socialists primary reason for voting for Mr. Sanders then I fear for the future of our country.

 

There’s always none of these candidates, finished mid pack in the five horse race in Nevada in 2016.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Muda69 said:

If "why not" (aka "not Trump")  is you and other socialists primary reason for voting for Mr. Sanders then I fear for the future of our country.

 

I view Senator Sanders to be the best option in 2020.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Muda69 said:

If "why not" (aka "not Trump")  is you and other socialists primary reason for voting for Mr. Sanders then I fear for the future of our country.

 

Why not, they seem like a reasonable group.

https://defensemaven.io/bluelivesmatter/news/project-veritas-video-cops-will-be-beaten-if-bernie-doesn-t-get-nomination-Bc8QfUmU80qTEbz1j1-qFg?fbclid=IwAR1K-mU5R8o9_Nr34oQR5MoJ65x4daj2UIihWRv1pSwfFQGESUyRxJVSMrc

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, DanteEstonia said:

I view Senator Sanders to be the best option in 2020.

Why?  What kind of leadership qualities do you believe Mr. Sanders brings to the office of POTUS?  Or is it all about the "free stuff" he and the other socialists are promising to give to Americans?

 

  • Disdain 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, Muda69 said:

If "why not" (aka "not Trump")  is you and other socialists primary reason for voting for Mr. Sanders then I fear for the future of our country.

 

Uni -Fear

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Muda69 said:

Why?  What kind of leadership qualities do you believe Mr. Sanders brings to the office of POTUS?  Or is it all about the "free stuff" he and the other socialists are promising to give to Americans?

 

Senator Sanders is the same kind of leader as FDR and Teddy Roosevelt.

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Admittedly I saw very little of the debate last night, but one thing hit me, regardless of the topic, Joe Biden has already lead the charge on it, i.e., he authored and got passed the first peace of climate change (then global warming) legislation back in like 86 or 87. So if Biden has already done all this stuff, why is it still a problem? 

Nearly 100 years of service at the national level among the six candidates last night. Two of them have 0 experience at the national level. And all I hear from them is what's wrong with the country and they're solutions. So they get a pass on their collective nearly 100 years in creating this mess, and their answer is more of it? Tom Steyer doesn't get a pass either, from what I can gather rich folks are the biggest threat we face, aside from climate change of course, and Tom Steyer made his fortune running a hedge fund that caters to banks and in the words of his Wiki page, "high wealth individuals". So if we believe what we're being told, Steyer IS the problem. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, DanteEstonia said:

Senator Sanders is the same kind of leader as FDR and Teddy Roosevelt.

FDR I can understand, but please expound on the shared leadership qualities and policy beliefs between Mr. Sanders and Teddy Roosevelt.

 

  • Disdain 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Tulsi Gabbard Files Defamation Lawsuit Against Hillary Clinton Over 'Russian Asset' Comments: https://reason.com/2020/01/22/tulsi-gabbard-files-defamation-lawsuit-against-hillary-clinton-over-russian-asset-comments/

Quote

Dark horse presidential candidate Rep. Tulsi Gabbard (D–Hawaii) has filed an eyebrow-raising lawsuit against Hillary Clinton for defamation over comments the former Secretary of State made on a podcast suggesting that Gabbard was a Russian stooge.

The lawsuit, filed Wednesday morning in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York claims that Clinton's comments have damaged Gabbard and democracy itself.

"Clinton had no basis for making her false assertions about Tulsi—and indeed, there is no factual basis for Clinton's conspiracy theory," reads Gabbard's complaint. "Tulsi brings this lawsuit to ensure that the truth prevails and to ensure this country's political elites are held accountable for intentionally trying to distort the truth in the midst of a critical Presidential election."

In October 2019, Clinton appeared on the podcast Campaign HQ, where she, while not mentioning Gabbard by name, implied that the Hawaiian representative was being "groomed" by the Republicans to launch a disruptive third-party bid, something that would apparently delight the Russian government.

"She's the favorite of the Russians. They have a bunch of sites and bots and other ways of supporting her so far. And, that's assuming [2016 Green Party candidate] Jill Stein will give it up, which she might not because she's also a Russian asset. Yeah, she's a Russian asset," said Clinton on the podcast.

When asked the following day if these comments were about Gabbard, a Clinton spokesperson said, "If the nesting doll fits."

In November, Gabbard sent a letter to Clinton threatening her with a defamation suit unless she retracted her comments. With no retraction forthcoming, Gabbard is making good on her threat.

Her lawsuit asks that Clinton be made to pay damages, and, incredibly, that the court issue an injunction prohibiting the "publication or republication" of Clinton's Russian asset comments.

....

 

  • Like 1
  • Disdain 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A story from 2015 on Bernie Sanders that the left (meetoo flag holders) seems to forget about......

https://www.npr.org/sections/itsallpolitics/2015/05/29/410606045/the-bernie-sanders-rape-fantasy-essay-explained

The essay by the Vermont senator, who officially kicked off his presidential campaign this week, isn't long — only a page. Warning: The bit about rape comes at the very beginning, as does some not-totally-safe-for-work language:

"A man goes home and masturbates his typical fantasy. A woman on her knees, a woman tied up, a woman abused.

"A woman enjoys intercourse with her man — as she fantasizes being raped by 3 men simultaneously.

"The man and woman get dressed up on Sunday — and go to Church, or maybe to their 'revolutionary' political meeting.

"Have you ever looked at the StagManHeroTough magazines on the shelf of your local bookstore? Do you know why the newspaper with the articles like 'Girl 12 raped by 14 men' sell so well? To what in us are they appealing?"

 

"Many women seem to be walking a tightrope," he writes, as their "qualities of love, openness, and gentleness were too deeply enmeshed with qualities of dependency, subservience, and masochism."

He adds that men, likewise, are confused:

"What is it they want from a woman? Are they at fault? Are they perpetrating this man-woman situation? Are they oppressors?"

One way to read the essay is that Sanders was doing (in a supremely ham-handed way) what journalists do every day: draw the reader in with an attention-getting lede, then get to the meat of the article in the middle. Though he only sticks to his larger point for three paragraphs before getting back to his fictional couple, ending the essay with an imagined conversation:

"And she said, 'You wanted me not as a woman, or a lover, or a friend, but as a submissive woman, or submissive friend, or submissive lover...'

"And he said, 'You're full of ______.'

"And they never again made love together (which they had each liked to do more than anything) or never saw each other one more time."

 

Draw your own conclusions......but if the "grab em by the pussies" crowd starts that rant again, SF suggests "dropping this on em"......

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Presidential Candidates Promise Freebies for Everyone

Politicians win, taxpayers lose.  https://reason.com/2020/01/29/presidential-candidates-promise-freebies-for-everyone/

Quote

The Iowa Caucus, the real start of the 2020 presidential primaries, is next week. Who's favored to win? Sadly, as I write this, the smart money says it's the candidate who's promised Americans the most "free" stuff.

Six months ago, my staff and I tallied the candidates' promises. All wanted to give away trillions—or more accurately, wanted government to tax you and spend your money on the candidates' schemes.

At that point, Senator Kamala Harris led. Fortunately, her promises did not bring her sustained support, and she dropped out.

Unfortunately, now the other candidates are making even more promises.

So, it's time for a new contest.

My new video ranks the current leading candidates by how much of your money they promise to spend. We divide the promises into four categories:

Education

Joe Biden would make community college free, cut student loans in half, increase Pell Grants, and modernize schools.

Added to his previous campaign promises, he'd increase federal spending by $157 billion per year.

Elizabeth Warren would spend much more. She wants government to "provide universal child care for every baby in this country age 0 to 5, universal pre-K for every child, raise the wages of every childcare worker and preschool teacher in America, provide for universal tuition-free college, put $50 billion into historically black colleges and universities… and cancel student loan debt for 95% of the people."

She'd outspend Biden—but not Bernie Sanders.

Sanders would forgive all student loans—even for the rich. He also demands that government give everyone child care and pre-K.

Mayor Pete Buttigieg also promises free child care, more pay for teachers, more career education, free college and Pell Grants, plus the refinancing of student debt.

Good try, Pete, but Sanders "wins" in the education category, with nearly $300 billion in promises.

Climate

All the Democrats pretend they will do something useful about climate change. Biden would spend $170 billion per year, Buttigieg $150 billion to $200 billion, and Warren $300 billion. Sanders "wins" this category, too, by promising more than $1 trillion.

Health Care

Even the "moderate," Biden, now wants to "build out Obamacare" and to cover people here illegally.

So does Buttigieg—but he'd spend twice as much on it.

Warren complains the Buttigieg plan "costs so much less" than her plan. She'd spend $2 trillion a year.

Sanders is again the biggest spender. He'd spend $3 trillion of your money on his "Medicare for All" plan.

Welfare

In this category, Biden, to his credit, plans no new spending.

But Buttigieg has been cranking out lots of new promises, like $45 billion for "affordable housing" and $27 billion to expand Social Security payments beyond what people paid in.

Warren would also spend more on "affordable housing" and give kids more food stamps.

Sanders "wins" again. He promises to guarantee everyone a job, provide "housing for all," and give more people food stamps.

Miscellaneous

Then there's spending that doesn't neatly fit into major categories, like Biden's plans for new foreign aid for Central America, Sanders' high-speed internet, Buttigieg's expanding national service programs like the Peace Corps, and Warren's plan to force government to buy only American-made products.

Finally, we found a spending category that Sanders doesn't win. With $130 billion in new plans, Biden wins the "miscellaneous" round.

And what about that incumbent Republican?

Donald Trump once talked about "cutting waste," but government spending rose more than half a trillion dollars during his first three years.

Now Trump wants $267 billion in new spending for things like infrastructure and "access to high-quality, affordable childcare."

At least Trump wants to spend less than the Democrats.

Biden and Buttigieg would double Trump's increase. Warren would quadruple it. She'd increase spending by almost $3 trillion.

But Bernie Sanders blows them all out of the water, with nearly $5 trillion in proposed new spending!

"I'm not denying we're going to spend a lot of money," he admits.

He'll probably win in Iowa next week. Whoever wins… taxpayers lose.

And what is sad is the taxpayers who vote for a uni-party candidate.  They are as short-sighted as the candidates themselves, enamored with what kind of "free" stuff they can get from the federal government.    They are perfectly willing to sacrifice the future American, the country of their children and grandchildren.  Pitiful.

 

  • Like 1
  • Disdain 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...