Page 8 of 12 FirstFirst ... 678910 ... LastLast
Results 71 to 80 of 111

Thread: Democratic debates

  1. Top | #71
    Contributor
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    NOT laying back and thinking of England
    Posts
    9,487
    Archived
    3,655
    Total Posts
    13,142
    Rep Power
    46
    Quote Originally Posted by Jarhyn View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Toni View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Derec View Post
    I really hated what she did because what we definitely do not need is more political correctness and witch hunts in US politics.


    That is true. He entered the race late and has not been through the baptism of fire that the previous eight debates had been for the rest of the field since the Summer.


    As far as I understand the issue, there have been no allegations that MRB abused anybody. All she had against him personally is that he back in the day used some mildly off-color language


    I think this has hurt his primary electability far more than his general election electability. The sanctimonious feminist vote that Warren channeled in that barrage is far more concentrated in the former. On the other hand, I am sure there are many men who saw his side too, and there are many men voting in the Dem primaries.


    So Warren will attack the men, but will defend the woman. She has been more and more gender-based since the clash between her and Bernie two debates ago and is in real danger of becoming a "vote for me because I am a woman" candidate.
    I do not think it was an unfair attack. Klob has been attacking Pete for the longest about his lack of experience, and he merely pointed out that with her experience on the commerce committee (and trade subcommittee) she should be more familiar with one of our biggest trading partners.

    Klobuchar and Warren did quite well in the debate.
    I do not think Klob did well at all. She seemed very frazzled in her exchange with Pete. Warren drew blood, but that will help Biden more than anybody else. Warren's own campaign is still on life support I think.

    Buttigieg was OK, but he didn't really have anything of much substance to contribute and still didn't know quite how to handle Klobuchar's pointed references to his lack of experience.
    I think his point about experience being about more than just a butt in a committee chair for x years was a good one. I liked his zinger about Mondale, but I fear that will hurt him in Minnesota. Btw, had no idea he was still alive. Maybe he could be Veep again - Sanders/Fritz 2020!

    Bloomberg did his best impression of the Hindenburg going down in flames.
    Except Hindenburg was an accident. This was more like USS Arizona.

    I hope MRB approaches this with a "now more than ever" attitude and resolves to come back swinging in Charleston next week. But he will need good debate prep.
    Bloomberg has a long history of making and tolerating sexist remarks and sexist behavior in employees at all levels.

    I thought he looked older than I expected him to. In my opinion, Sanders, Bloomberg and Biden were all badly showing their age. Given the rigors and stresses --and importance of the job, that's a really important negative.
    You keep ignoring that there is such a thing as a "vice president".

    Then, Bernie Sanders has been getting the propaganda treatment for some time now and seems to be doing just fine. I'm not worried, but if that's what makes you balk, you can be confident in electing a progressive in this race between Warren or Sanders: they will appoint a VP who is going to be about the same level of progressive.
    Oh, bullshit. If the person you really want to be POTUS is being run as a VP candidate then you have zero standing to decry corruption. Run the candidate you think can do the best job. If you think your heart throb will croak in the first term then the heart throb is clearly not the best person to do the best job.

    You have not lived through the circumstance of having a POTUS replaced by a VP. I have. It’s not like switching out a piece of LEGO. Someone who was NOT elected as VP must be sought out, vetted, and confirmed. People do not necessarily embrace someone that did not win the election as POTUS. Example? See Gerald Ford

  2. Top | #72
    Veteran Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Burnsville, MN
    Posts
    3,420
    Archived
    2,911
    Total Posts
    6,331
    Rep Power
    41
    Quote Originally Posted by Toni View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Jarhyn View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Toni View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Derec View Post
    I really hated what she did because what we definitely do not need is more political correctness and witch hunts in US politics.


    That is true. He entered the race late and has not been through the baptism of fire that the previous eight debates had been for the rest of the field since the Summer.


    As far as I understand the issue, there have been no allegations that MRB abused anybody. All she had against him personally is that he back in the day used some mildly off-color language


    I think this has hurt his primary electability far more than his general election electability. The sanctimonious feminist vote that Warren channeled in that barrage is far more concentrated in the former. On the other hand, I am sure there are many men who saw his side too, and there are many men voting in the Dem primaries.


    So Warren will attack the men, but will defend the woman. She has been more and more gender-based since the clash between her and Bernie two debates ago and is in real danger of becoming a "vote for me because I am a woman" candidate.
    I do not think it was an unfair attack. Klob has been attacking Pete for the longest about his lack of experience, and he merely pointed out that with her experience on the commerce committee (and trade subcommittee) she should be more familiar with one of our biggest trading partners.


    I do not think Klob did well at all. She seemed very frazzled in her exchange with Pete. Warren drew blood, but that will help Biden more than anybody else. Warren's own campaign is still on life support I think.

    Buttigieg was OK, but he didn't really have anything of much substance to contribute and still didn't know quite how to handle Klobuchar's pointed references to his lack of experience.
    I think his point about experience being about more than just a butt in a committee chair for x years was a good one. I liked his zinger about Mondale, but I fear that will hurt him in Minnesota. Btw, had no idea he was still alive. Maybe he could be Veep again - Sanders/Fritz 2020!

    Bloomberg did his best impression of the Hindenburg going down in flames.
    Except Hindenburg was an accident. This was more like USS Arizona.

    I hope MRB approaches this with a "now more than ever" attitude and resolves to come back swinging in Charleston next week. But he will need good debate prep.
    Bloomberg has a long history of making and tolerating sexist remarks and sexist behavior in employees at all levels.

    I thought he looked older than I expected him to. In my opinion, Sanders, Bloomberg and Biden were all badly showing their age. Given the rigors and stresses --and importance of the job, that's a really important negative.
    You keep ignoring that there is such a thing as a "vice president".

    Then, Bernie Sanders has been getting the propaganda treatment for some time now and seems to be doing just fine. I'm not worried, but if that's what makes you balk, you can be confident in electing a progressive in this race between Warren or Sanders: they will appoint a VP who is going to be about the same level of progressive.
    Oh, bullshit. If the person you really want to be POTUS is being run as a VP candidate then you have zero standing to decry corruption. Run the candidate you think can do the best job. If you think your heart throb will croak in the first term then the heart throb is clearly not the best person to do the best job.

    You have not lived through the circumstance of having a POTUS replaced by a VP. I have. It’s not like switching out a piece of LEGO. Someone who was NOT elected as VP must be sought out, vetted, and confirmed. People do not necessarily embrace someone that did not win the election as POTUS. Example? See Gerald Ford
    Straw-man positioning at its finest

    The VP is appointed by the candidate before the election, so they are still very much voted on.

    Further, I AM voting for 'the candidate who can do the best job'. It just happens that part of that best job is making sure to appoint a runningmate, a VP, who can continue to do that best job, especially in the presence of survival concerns from people like yourselves

  3. Top | #73
    Contributor
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    NOT laying back and thinking of England
    Posts
    9,487
    Archived
    3,655
    Total Posts
    13,142
    Rep Power
    46
    Quote Originally Posted by Jarhyn View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Toni View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Jarhyn View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Toni View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Derec View Post
    I really hated what she did because what we definitely do not need is more political correctness and witch hunts in US politics.


    That is true. He entered the race late and has not been through the baptism of fire that the previous eight debates had been for the rest of the field since the Summer.


    As far as I understand the issue, there have been no allegations that MRB abused anybody. All she had against him personally is that he back in the day used some mildly off-color language


    I think this has hurt his primary electability far more than his general election electability. The sanctimonious feminist vote that Warren channeled in that barrage is far more concentrated in the former. On the other hand, I am sure there are many men who saw his side too, and there are many men voting in the Dem primaries.


    So Warren will attack the men, but will defend the woman. She has been more and more gender-based since the clash between her and Bernie two debates ago and is in real danger of becoming a "vote for me because I am a woman" candidate.
    I do not think it was an unfair attack. Klob has been attacking Pete for the longest about his lack of experience, and he merely pointed out that with her experience on the commerce committee (and trade subcommittee) she should be more familiar with one of our biggest trading partners.


    I do not think Klob did well at all. She seemed very frazzled in her exchange with Pete. Warren drew blood, but that will help Biden more than anybody else. Warren's own campaign is still on life support I think.

    Buttigieg was OK, but he didn't really have anything of much substance to contribute and still didn't know quite how to handle Klobuchar's pointed references to his lack of experience.
    I think his point about experience being about more than just a butt in a committee chair for x years was a good one. I liked his zinger about Mondale, but I fear that will hurt him in Minnesota. Btw, had no idea he was still alive. Maybe he could be Veep again - Sanders/Fritz 2020!

    Bloomberg did his best impression of the Hindenburg going down in flames.
    Except Hindenburg was an accident. This was more like USS Arizona.

    I hope MRB approaches this with a "now more than ever" attitude and resolves to come back swinging in Charleston next week. But he will need good debate prep.
    Bloomberg has a long history of making and tolerating sexist remarks and sexist behavior in employees at all levels.

    I thought he looked older than I expected him to. In my opinion, Sanders, Bloomberg and Biden were all badly showing their age. Given the rigors and stresses --and importance of the job, that's a really important negative.
    You keep ignoring that there is such a thing as a "vice president".

    Then, Bernie Sanders has been getting the propaganda treatment for some time now and seems to be doing just fine. I'm not worried, but if that's what makes you balk, you can be confident in electing a progressive in this race between Warren or Sanders: they will appoint a VP who is going to be about the same level of progressive.
    Oh, bullshit. If the person you really want to be POTUS is being run as a VP candidate then you have zero standing to decry corruption. Run the candidate you think can do the best job. If you think your heart throb will croak in the first term then the heart throb is clearly not the best person to do the best job.

    You have not lived through the circumstance of having a POTUS replaced by a VP. I have. It’s not like switching out a piece of LEGO. Someone who was NOT elected as VP must be sought out, vetted, and confirmed. People do not necessarily embrace someone that did not win the election as POTUS. Example? See Gerald Ford
    Straw-man positioning at its finest

    The VP is appointed by the candidate before the election, so they are still very much voted on.

    Further, I AM voting for 'the candidate who can do the best job'. It just happens that part of that best job is making sure to appoint a runningmate, a VP, who can continue to do that best job, especially in the presence of survival concerns from people like yourselves
    Candidates for POTUS do not 'appoint a running mate.'

    You are right: rational people such as myself have justifiable concerns about a POTUS who would be entering his 80s in his first term, particularly when he has had a recent heart attack. POTUS is an extremely demanding, stressful job. Trump is not the first POTUS I've observed to unravel under the strain. I honestly don't like the chances of survival of a full term of Sanders, Bloomberg or Biden if any of them are elected. Warren is really over the upper age limits that I think wise. Note: I agree with almost all of Sanders' positions, am violently opposed to his cozy relationship with NRA and really like Warren, her declarations (and Bernie's) of what they'd do on day one nothwithstanding. (Note: it is not that I disagree with actions they say they'd take but I DO disagree with what I see as an abuse of executive privilege under Trump.)

    Age is disqualifying to me. If someone does not expect to be able to fulfill the duties of the job of POTUS for a full term, they have zero business running. ZERO.

  4. Top | #74
    Elder Contributor
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Location
    Atlanta, GA
    Posts
    16,684
    Archived
    15,686
    Total Posts
    32,370
    Rep Power
    82
    Quote Originally Posted by Toni View Post
    Candidates for POTUS do not 'appoint a running mate.'
    That's a nitpick. The presumptive nominee selects their running mate who is then officially nominated at the convention, but that is a normally a formality. Although, in the relatively unlikely case we go to a brokered convention and there is no presumptive nominee, Veep slot could become part of horse trading.

    You are right: rational people such as myself have justifiable concerns about a POTUS who would be entering his 80s in his first term, particularly when he has had a recent heart attack. POTUS is an extremely demanding, stressful job. Trump is not the first POTUS I've observed to unravel under the strain. I honestly don't like the chances of survival of a full term of Sanders, Bloomberg or Biden if any of them are elected. Warren is really over the upper age limits that I think wise.
    Well, that leaves Mayor Pete.

    And Klob I guess, but she has been doing much worse than him in the two contests we have had so far. And her prospects for NV and SC do not look great either.

    Note: I agree with almost all of Sanders' positions, am violently opposed to his cozy relationship with NRA
    I don't really see coziness, just because he disagrees with the received opinion on gun control. I actually admire his willingness not to go along with all progressive sacred cows.

    and really like Warren,
    She may not be as far left as Bernie, but she is much further on the left than him in terms of wokeness. Pass.

    her declarations (and Bernie's) of what they'd do on day one nothwithstanding. (Note: it is not that I disagree with actions they say they'd take but I DO disagree with what I see as an abuse of executive privilege under Trump.)
    I agree with you there. Although there has been EO overreach under Obama too, particularly with regard to so-called "dreamers".

    Age is disqualifying to me. If someone does not expect to be able to fulfill the duties of the job of POTUS for a full term, they have zero business running. ZERO.
    To paraphrase Rumsfeld, you go to elections with the field you have, not with the field you might want or wish to have at a later time.
    Last edited by Derec; 02-22-2020 at 10:15 AM.

  5. Top | #75
    Elder Contributor
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Location
    Atlanta, GA
    Posts
    16,684
    Archived
    15,686
    Total Posts
    32,370
    Rep Power
    82
    Quote Originally Posted by Toni View Post
    You have not lived through the circumstance of having a POTUS replaced by a VP. I have. It’s not like switching out a piece of LEGO. Someone who was NOT elected as VP must be sought out, vetted, and confirmed. People do not necessarily embrace someone that did not win the election as POTUS. Example? See Gerald Ford
    Ascension of Gerald Ford to the presidency was an unusual situation in that both the elected vice president, Spiro Agnew, and elected president, Richard Nixon, resigned. So a new vice president was appointed and confirmed and then he became president almost a year later. Should President Bernie (or Biden or Bloomberg or Warren or, for that matter Buttigieg - death is far less likely for younger people but not impossible) die in office, the person elected as vice president would become president unless the vice president is replaced after the election. So it would likely not be much like the case of Gerald Ford. More like Theodore Roosevelt or Harry Truman or Lyndon Johnson.

  6. Top | #76
    Elder Contributor
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Location
    Atlanta, GA
    Posts
    16,684
    Archived
    15,686
    Total Posts
    32,370
    Rep Power
    82
    Quote Originally Posted by laughing dog View Post
    LOL - I do not calibrate every irony meter.
    No, only the ones that exploded.

  7. Top | #77
    Contributor
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    NOT laying back and thinking of England
    Posts
    9,487
    Archived
    3,655
    Total Posts
    13,142
    Rep Power
    46
    Quote Originally Posted by Derec View Post
    That's a nitpick. The presumptive nominee selects their running mate who is then officially nominated at the convention, but that is a normally a formality. Although, in the relatively unlikely case we go to a brokered convention and there is no presumptive nominee, Veep slot could become part of horse trading.
    Nominees *may* make the final selection. A lot depends on the candidate and who they want as a partner. But if you think that Trump actually picked Pence of his own free will, I have a nice bridge over some lovely swamp land for sale. Family discount for you.
    I agree with you there. Although there has been EO overreach under Obama too, particularly with regard to so-called "dreamers".
    I did not disagree with the end result that he wanted but I really did not like the means by which he achieved it. For all that Trump has done his best to erase Obama, he also copies him as much as his demented mind and huge ego allow.

    Age is disqualifying to me. If someone does not expect to be able to fulfill the duties of the job of POTUS for a full term, they have zero business running. ZERO.
    To paraphrase Rumsfeld, you go to elections with the field you have, not with the field you might want or wish to have at a later time.
    Sure. I will vote for almost any candidate the Dems nominate. There is no power on earth that could convince me or force me to vote for Gabbard. I'm really sorry that some of the candidates who have dropped out are no longer options. But I do have a couple of candidates remaining that I think would be good POTUS.

  8. Top | #78
    Contributor
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    NOT laying back and thinking of England
    Posts
    9,487
    Archived
    3,655
    Total Posts
    13,142
    Rep Power
    46
    Quote Originally Posted by Derec View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Toni View Post
    You have not lived through the circumstance of having a POTUS replaced by a VP. I have. It’s not like switching out a piece of LEGO. Someone who was NOT elected as VP must be sought out, vetted, and confirmed. People do not necessarily embrace someone that did not win the election as POTUS. Example? See Gerald Ford
    Ascension of Gerald Ford to the presidency was an unusual situation in that both the elected vice president, Spiro Agnew, and elected president, Richard Nixon, resigned. So a new vice president was appointed and confirmed and then he became president almost a year later. Should President Bernie (or Biden or Bloomberg or Warren or, for that matter Buttigieg - death is far less likely for younger people but not impossible) die in office, the person elected as vice president would become president unless the vice president is replaced after the election. So it would likely not be much like the case of Gerald Ford. More like Theodore Roosevelt or Harry Truman or Lyndon Johnson.
    Of course Ford was an unusual case. However, it left him as a POTUS that left a bad taste in the mouths of a lot of people because of how he came to office.

    There is nothing at all that is usual about Trump's presidency or the political situation we find ourselves in right now.

    I think it is extremely irresponsible to run as POTUS if you do not have a very good chance of being able to physically and mentally carry out the duties of the office. See Trump for a glaring example of someone who is unfit mentally and physically (and temperamentally and morally and in every other way one can measure) but only physical and mental health are being considered here. He's a pretty sick person and I expect every day to wake up to news that he's dead or in a coma or something similar.

  9. Top | #79
    Veteran Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2001
    Location
    Georgia, US
    Posts
    3,231
    Archived
    3,862
    Total Posts
    7,093
    Rep Power
    75
    Well I was alive when LBJ replaced Kennedy. I don't remember it being such a terrible transition, but I was a teenager and the country was grieving for the loss of JFK. I do think it's important to choose a VP who can help you win, and who can easily replace you, as people of any age can suddenly die. One night a 23 year old where I used to work died of a sudden heart condition during her shift. She appeared young and healthy and had no preexisting conditions. I'm not as worried about age as I am about other issues, but I agree with Toni that having a heart attack when you're in your late 70s, is often, but not always the beginning of more serious heart disease.

    But, considering that Trump is also in his 70s and appears to have a much less healthy life style than the other old guys, should age really matter at this point?

  10. Top | #80
    Veteran Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2001
    Location
    Georgia, US
    Posts
    3,231
    Archived
    3,862
    Total Posts
    7,093
    Rep Power
    75
    I agree with what you said about Trump, Toni, but most Americans wouldn't be grieving the sudden demise of the man from a CVA or MI.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •