Elections 2020 Democratic Primary Thread: The Announcements

Status
Not open for further replies.
Used to be big on Bernie until he claimed white people dont understand what it’s like to be “poor”

And he talked about ending racism and homophobia etc in his newest campaign which is just totally off base with me. This country has major issues that I felt in 2016 he was fighting to improve but it seems at this point he’s trying to pander to the far leftists

My only hope on the left lies on Andrew Yang and Tulsi Gabbard

I haven’t heard either make identity politics a major part of their campaign, which automatically earns some points with me.

That was a badly phrased line. That doesn't translate to actual policy though. Tulsi endorsed Bernie even though it was proven she was threatened(careerwise) as told by her and revealed in the leaked emails.

What's wrong with ending racism and homophobia? SJW's distorting noble pursuits into some twisted abominations doesn't make the actual pursuits any less noble.
 
D07JfcBV4AApwi8.jpg

BLOOMBERG: NO
BILLIONAIRES BAIL ON BIDS
 
All of these moves are confirming Biden is in. Bloomberg was supposedly only running if Biden didnt.

Interesting theory. You don't think he gets the "too old/white" hammer? I think 4 years later, even Bernie will fall victim to that hammer in fairly short order, myself.
 
Interesting theory. You don't think he gets the "too old/white" hammer? I think 4 years later, even Bernie will fall victim to that hammer in fairly short order, myself.

I don’t think who gets the “too old/ too white” hammer?
 
I also feel Biden is gearing up for an announcement. I also believe O'Rourke will declare within the next month. That will take the "major candidate" count to 13, not counting John Delaney and Pete Buttigieg.

I suspect inconsistency in the definition of "major" here.
 
Biden himself? And Bernie as well, but was referring first to Biden.

My comment wasn’t a prediction on who wins but whether Biden is running or not. This weekend, information was pushed that he is now securing donors and will be running. Bloomberg is an odd duck where he would either be a candidate or a donor and his staffers have said he planned to only run if Biden didn’t and if Biden did, he would be a donor for that campaign. I think Eric Holder saying he’s out this week also was a signal since he knew the only edge he would have in the field is being in the Obama administration but Biden > Holder on that. I’m just saying I’m more certain Joe is in than I was last week.
 
Gotcha. I think it's moved so far left that they will eventually seal club Biden or Sanders based on race/age, I don't think they can win the dem nomination in this current "environment".
 
Gotcha. I think it's moved so far left that they will eventually seal club Biden or Sanders based on race/age, I don't think they can win the dem nomination in this current "environment".

There may be an element of that this year but I’ll wait to see if it plays out. I definitely don’t think Biden is just going to sweep. The field is too vast and the front runner(s) aren’t that too far ahead.
 
This isn't really fair. I listened to Kamala Harris's answer on 'reparations' and she made it clear she doesn't support it. She used the answer as an opportunity to promote the "LIFT Act", which is not really reparations legislation at all.

Didn't look into what Booker said about it but I imagine he also declined to support reparations.

It's a talking point, which means they will jump on the wagon by vaguely say they support it, but wouldn't ever specify what it actually entails when pushed for clarification.

Three 2020 Democrats say ‘yes’ to race-based reparations — but remain vague on details
By Jeff Stein | February 22, 2019​

APMBBQBT2UI6TA3V4POPNNUFLA.jpg


Three leading Democratic presidential candidates have recently signaled their support for some form of “reparations” for black Americans, broadly, if vaguely, backing the idea of compensating the descendants of enslaved people in the United States.

Sens. Kamala D. Harris (D-Calif.) and Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), as well as former Obama administration Housing and Urban Development Secretary Julián Castro, have all said in recent weeks they support reparations for African Americans. But the extent of their support remains unclear, with the candidates declining to offer specifics on what the program would entail and one of the nation’s foremost advocates on reparations questioning whether they should be considered in favor of the program.

Harris, asked whether she supports reparations by “The Breakfast Club” in an interview earlier this month, cited her support for several programs to help black Americans, including investing in historically black colleges, improving maternal mortality rates for black women and reducing racial disparities in the criminal justice system. Asked again whether she was for “some type” of reparations, Harris said that she was.

“Centuries of slavery, Jim Crow, legal discrimination and segregation, and discrimination that exists today have led to a systemic wealth gap between black and white Americans that demands attention,” Harris said in a statement first given to the New York Times. “We have to be honest that people in this country do not start from the same place or have access to the same opportunities, and I’m serious about taking an approach that would change policies and structures and make real investments in black communities.”

Warren, meanwhile, also answered “yes” when asked by the New York Times whether she supports reparations, adding in a statement also given to The Washington Post that the United States must implement “systemic, structural changes” to help black families. She also pointed to her housing plan, which would offer special help for those affected by “redlining” — the decades-long, systematic practice of discrimination in mortgage practices that has diminished the wealth of black Americans.

“We must confront the dark history of slavery and government-sanctioned discrimination in this country that has had many consequences including undermining the ability of black families to build wealth in America for generations,” Warren said.

Castro, the former mayor of San Antonio, first told the Root in an interview that he would favor reparations for black Americans. A spokeswoman confirmed his comments but declined to elaborate.

"I have long thought that this country would be better off if we did find a way to do that,” Castro said. “I don’t find the notion challenging. What I do find challenging is the best way to do that.”

That three presidential candidates are willing to say they support race-based reparations marks a shift in the Democratic Party, which has overall moved left on issues of racial and economic justice, although some supporters of reparations expressed concern about the depth of the candidates’ support for it.

“I’m pleased to hear a willingness to explore the idea of reparations, but I’m not sure what they have in mind constitutes a reparations program,” said William Darity, a Duke professor who has long been an advocate of reparations. “The danger is the possibility that the label ‘reparations’ is applied to a modest or incremental policy that falls far short of what is required, and political leaders then say the nation’s responsibility has been met.”

Darity said there were three key components of reparations programs in the United States: official acknowledgment of wrongdoing; redress for the crime committed; and a form of closure. For instance, Darity has called for having the federal government write checks available only to the descendants of those who had been enslaved in the United States. Other forms of reparations could include transferring stocks, bonds or other assets to descendants of sharecroppers, slaves or both.

The campaigns for Warren, Castro and Harris did not respond to requests for comment on whether they support this form of reparations or to clarify what exactly they mean by supporting reparations.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/us-p...-remain-vague-details/?utm_term=.f1e94fa5ff24
 
Last edited:
My position on reparations is we should make Spain and Portugal pay them and skip the divisive political process of getting Americans to pay. The wealthiest regions of Spain are seeking independence and if they cough up the cash they can have it.
 
I suspect inconsistency in the definition of "major" here.

I was going with "Has served in at least one of (1) US House (2) US Senate (3) White House (4) governor's mansion".

Bernard Sanders is major. Marianne Williamson is not major, but Robert O'Rourke is.

Obviously, this definition is far from ideal. It would have excluded Trump in 2016. I still think it's a good first-pass for the current situation.

Edit: Just realized that my previous message contained an inadvertent error. Obviously, Delaney should be 'major' according to my definition. The number should still be accurate.
 
Last edited:
It's a talking point, which means they will jump on the wagon by vaguely say they support it, but wouldn't ever specify what it actually entails when pushed for clarification.

I totally agree. I just find it hard to criticize them for it. They think it's necessary to dance around the issue in order to appease some of the nutters in the "social justice" and "black lives matter" movements. Klobuchar's approach ("No.") is not going to win over that crowd.
 
CNN Democratic voter panel, all say Joe Biden should not run ("his time is done.") and Hillary Clinton should not get involved ("No. Stay away!"). At least two of the women are anti-Sanders ("he's too divisive.")


 
Washington Post wrote an article about Harris' crime lab scandal when she was AG. Loads of ammunition to attack her for. Covering up the crime lab tech taking cocaine home with them, not disclosing the undependable and criminal history of that person to defendant lawyers when they testified to court to get convictions. Having no structured policy for what to do in certain situations speaks to poor management skills and caring about being re-elected more than doing the job properly. Dismissing thousands of cases to just try and make the scandal die down quicker rather than seeing which convictions were actually wrongfully impacted by the poor crime lab operations.

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/polit...cisco-district-attorney/ar-BBUsAn3?ocid=ientp
 
Montana Gov. Bullock hires top adviser with eye on 2020
Politco
90

Montana Gov. Steve Bullock has hired veteran Democratic operative Jenn Ridder to work for his PAC, in the latest sign that the Western Democrat is nearing a presidential run.

Ridder will join Bullock's Big Sky Values PAC as a senior adviser, but she would be an obvious choice to manage Bullock's campaign should he decide to run for president. Ridder ran Colorado Gov. Jared Polis' successful campaign in 2018 and previously worked at the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee and was former Colorado Sen. Mark Udall's deputy campaign manager in 2014.
 
Biden could get boost by back-to-back 2020 departures
ABC News
WireAP_50b8deda3274405b82c32105e367e45c_12x5_992.jpg

Joe Biden isn't a presidential candidate yet. But with two key rivals already getting out of the way, the former vice president has more space to court voters who could help him claim the Democratic nomination.

Ohio Sen. Sherrod Brown said Thursday he wouldn't run for president, following an announcement earlier this week from former New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg that he would also sit out 2020.

Both men have vastly different political profiles. Brown has deep connections to blue-collar, union-friendly voters in the Midwest while Bloomberg saw his path to the nomination run through centrists uncomfortable with the party's move to the left. But together, their decisions could give Biden a greater opportunity to appeal to the middle-America voters who sided with President Donald Trump in 2016 and could be crucial to Democratic hopes of winning back the White House.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top