Democrat party candidates for POTUS

[MackStrongIsMyHero]

So Beto is out. Don't think I had him going far anyway.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/pol ... 127539002/

[RiverDog]

Castro said he reached his fundraising goal, a modest $800k, so he's going to slug it out for another month or so. There's still 15+ that are actively campaigning, but I suspect several more will drop out soon. The next debate is scheduled for Nov. 20th and there's several qualification thresholds, so I suspect you'll see several toss in the towel before then. It's pretty hard to justify spending money when you can't even get on the stage. Everyone's hoping for a Hail Mary in Iowa.

I also see where Elizabeth Warren finally outlined how she's going to pay for her Medicare for All proposal, claiming that she won't be raising taxes on the middle class. At least Bernie is being honest by telling people that everyone's taxes will be going up. The dirty little secret is that most economists are saying that even without higher taxes that the middle class will suffer in the form of lower wages as employers struggle to cover the increased costs of the government's new requirements without raising prices on their goods and services. And that's assuming that the courts don't shoot down some of her revenue schemes, like a wealth tax that almost certainly won't make it past a conservative SCOTUS. And, of course, there's $800 billion that she plans to cut out of the Pentagon's budget.

[Hawktawk]

IMO the worst possible slate of Democrats for a victory in Nov 2020 is emerging. Warren is clearly the frontrunner and her new out in the open Medicare for all plan ripping away my wife and I's plan along with 150 million others and all the associated taxes will get an A for honesty. But it will be as helpful in reality as the release of Trump's phone call to Ukraine on the campaign trial.She will be easy to attack.

Biden is clearly flagging, less money in the bank than any other frontrunner but the pro vs con #s poll #s regarding impeaching Trump are an indication of his overall popularity with the electorate. He's still the sure bet but the Dem "progressives" meaning radical liberal/socialists are winning the day.

Bernie is a fundraising machine but he's a 78 year old socialist mad scientist. He of all the guys on top is the most vulnerable to trump as hes got a low ceiling in terms of who will actually support him. Then there's mayor pete who would be the next president if he weren't married to a man but who would draw about 0 among conservative republicans and especially evangelicals.
Amy Klobuchar has shown signs of life recently which is a good thing.

Beto was a shock to me, no traction whatsoever then his far left forced confiscation of guns and remove anti gay church tax exemptions proposals not only put dirt on his grave but provided the Trump campaign easy talking points. Gabbard got a small bump due to HRCs attacks but let's face it, at 4% shes going nowhere. Castro, Yang, Kamela Harris are all just playing out the string.

Make no mistake, I think the current infestation of the white house is worse than any ideology, any other person on this list and i will accept any of them. I just worry enough people won't. We will see, he is the most historically unpopular president in history to this point in his first term and these open hearings with him attacking on twitter vs any number of career public servants, selfless patriots doing the right thing will not play well with a public increasingly inclined to support his removal.

[Aseahawkfan]

No matter who wins if Trump is removed or loses the election, the market and economy will get hammered as his tax cuts are reversed. One bad thing about tax cuts is when they boost your economy, the reverse happens when they are taken away as corporate profits and income to expand is reduced by the level of the tax increase. Then they start looking to take their money and jobs to cheaper nations with friendlier tax cuts. I'm wondering if a Democrat wins office, they'll be one term because of the way the economy is currently set up and it's propensity to crash as they implement increased taxes.

Republicans could set themselves up well for the next election by sacrificing Trump, letting a Dem have the Presidency for four years, and watching them implement policies that will causes a recession, then put forward a Republican centrist that can actually speak and act in a professional manner. Then they could set up for another era of Republican control given the dumpster fire that is the current Democratic Party and their ideas of how govern a free nation.

We will see. If Warren or Sanders win, this nation will likely experience economic pain on a large scale again or both of them will face the reality of not being able to pay for what they want. Even their party won't support what they want. Which will lead to some serious compromises as is usual.

Though I am still interested in having health insurance decoupled from employment in an affordable manner. If some plan to do this can be managed, I would support it. I would really love to have that happen in my lifetime. I am tired of being forced to immediately find some crap job to maintain affordable insurance.

[RiverDog]

IMO the worst possible slate of Democrats for a victory in Nov 2020 is emerging. Warren is clearly the frontrunner and her new out in the open Medicare for all plan ripping away my wife and I's plan along with 150 million others and all the associated taxes will get an A for honesty. But it will be as helpful in reality as the release of Trump's phone call to Ukraine on the campaign trial.She will be easy to attack.

Biden is clearly flagging, less money in the bank than any other frontrunner but the pro vs con #s poll #s regarding impeaching Trump are an indication of his overall popularity with the electorate. He's still the sure bet but the Dem "progressives" meaning radical liberal/socialists are winning the day.

Bernie is a fundraising machine but he's a 78 year old socialist mad scientist. He of all the guys on top is the most vulnerable to trump as hes got a low ceiling in terms of who will actually support him. Then there's mayor pete who would be the next president if he weren't married to a man but who would draw about 0 among conservative republicans and especially evangelicals.
Amy Klobuchar has shown signs of life recently which is a good thing.

Beto was a shock to me, no traction whatsoever then his far left forced confiscation of guns and remove anti gay church tax exemptions proposals not only put dirt on his grave but provided the Trump campaign easy talking points. Gabbard got a small bump due to HRCs attacks but let's face it, at 4% shes going nowhere. Castro, Yang, Kamela Harris are all just playing out the string.

Make no mistake, I think the current infestation of the white house is worse than any ideology, any other person on this list and i will accept any of them. I just worry enough people won't. We will see, he is the most historically unpopular president in history to this point in his first term and these open hearings with him attacking on twitter vs any number of career public servants, selfless patriots doing the right thing will not play well with a public increasingly inclined to support his removal.

Warren gets an 'A' for honesty? Are you talking about the same woman that tried everything she could think of to wiggle out of the Pocahontas scandal that has so defined her rather than take responsibility for it? She's been ducking questions regarding how she's going to fund her "Medicare for All" by her Democratic opponents for months. The only reason she addressed the issue was because she's now a front runner, and as such, is being attacked by the wanna be's and could no longer avoid them. Warren is no more honest than Donald Trump, the difference being that she's a helluva lot smarter than Trump (most people are), not nearly as lazy, and actually prepares and practices her responses. Warren speaks with the slick fluency of a life long lawyer/politician whereas Trump speaks like a professional wrestler.

Additionally, none of the Dems are talking about the obvious Constitutional problems the are sure to encounter if they try to seek an additional revenue stream like a wealth tax, the realities of a conservative SCOTUS, or the economic perils they'll face if they make companies based in the United States a bad place to invest in. They don't talk about how their plans will hugely complicate tax collection. They don't talk about how taking money out of the hands of consumers and giving it to the government always results in an economic slowdown. They don't talk about what a government take over of a health care industry that represents 15% of the world's largest economy is going to do to our 401K's, and IRA's, and pension plans that many of us are counting on to fund our retirement. And that's before they pursue their other grand plans, like free college tuition, debt forgiveness, reparations, and the Green New Deal.

They all talk about it like it's all going to be completely painless except for the super rich, like it's no big deal, we'll just tax the rich and confiscate the profits of the evil slave driving Wall Street empires like Amazon, cut our defense to the level of Sweden's and ignore the chaos that would ensue with a defense industry meltdown when in reality, their plans, if realized, is going to lead to the biggest world wide social and economic upheaval since the 1930's, the Great Depression, the New Deal, and the fodder that led to World War 2.

[Hawktawk]

Wow RD thats a lot....What I mean by Warren being honest is she put forth a plan. I'm not a fan. Trump is so bad she might beat him but I think she gives him maybe the best shot.But as for all the sky is falling talk regarding Dems/Socialists crashing the economy etc we appear to have had a role reversal, ie you're the pessimist and I'm optimistic about what a dem takeover might mean .

Economies come and go and the fact is Obama inherited a 64.5% workforce participation rate, a cratering of our financial institutions, 9+% unemployment etc etc etc. 8 years and 3 trillion in chinese money later Trump inherited a 7 year economic expansion and equally long bull market. Unemployment was 4.7% on Nov 8 2016.Labor force participation was now nearer 63%.To put that in perspective were the LFPR 64.5% now unemployment would be more like 8%

Growth was modest but steady the last few years under Obama averaging 2 % give or take GDP growth. And he passed obamacare which I hated at the time but having spoken with some of the approximately 22 million it insures I think it is a good plan that should be worked with, not completely dismantled by the Repubs with NO PLAN to replace it with anything.

My point is a liberal like Obama who was fond of executive orders etc did not take anyone's guns, didn't crater the economy,did not wreck your retirement, it went up most of his presidency.His administration created 15 million jobs, Trumps has created about 7 million.He didn't get in a war. ( I know it's big for you and asea


Frankly I'm sick and tired of hearing both parties attack one another as being un american or just about politics for having a particular view or in this case fulfilling their constitutional responsibility at risk of their jobs. It's never been this bad, particularly in my former party that will normalize lawlessness and chaos to hold onto power.

Politics aint beanbag but when it comes to this impeachment inquiry it wasn't started over politics. Pelosi resisted it as long as she could even though I felt it should have happened the day after Mueller testified which ironically we now know was the same day the illegal phone call was placed by Trump after a rogue operation lasting months.
.The democratic house did not reach a majority in favor until learning the POTUS tried to strongarm an ally using half a billion in lethal aid as the carrot and the stick. When they launched their investigation they were 10 points upside down in the polls but as I correctly predicted when the facts began to get out public approval would begin to resemble job approval since this dolt does absolutely nothing to endear himself to any but the most radical wild eyed believer. Latest polls show him with a 75% approval among REPUBLICANS, nearly a 20 point drop.

As i've said i'm no Liberal.No Democrat. Other than Biden there's nobody with a pulse I like much at all. Well I digress I love Buttigeigs speaking ability, his thinking on lots of things. Hes just got no support in the black community whatsoever and I cant see him taking the next step other than maybe by winning in Iowa's caucuses due to the overwhelming money and organization he has, Sanders? too old and too radical. He would be easy to attack, maybe easier than Warren. Really hoping for Biden.
But regardless make no mistake. Anyone but Trump. Any of them have a proven record of legislating, managing people, at least being able to act dignified and respectful. Country over party, country over politics.
ABT. Preferably Pence 2019

[LTH]

LTH[/quote]

Hey, LTH! Glad to see you're dipping your toes into The Jungle. Careful, though, we've had several posters get upset and leave because they couldn't take the heat and a couple that got banned due to their behavior in here.

I haven't researched Gabbert very much. There's so many Dems in the race that it's impossible to keep up with what each one of them stand for. If she ever gets up to 10% in the polls, I'll probably check her out. I do know that I like her bio and the way she reacted to Hillary's completely unjustified attack on her regarding Gabbard being a stooge for the Russians, something I'll never understand. It's almost as if Hillary is trying to rationalize her 2016 defeat. Gabbard would be a good candidate for VP if one of the Dem males like Biden or Bernie get the nomination.

As far as your comments regarding both parties being controlled by the military industrial complex, I don't agree. Like all special interest groups, the military and their private industry partners have their people in Congress, particularly those that represent districts where there's a lot of defense employment, but I don't feel it's to the degree where they control both parties. It's certainly no more influence than various unions have over the Dems or the NRA's influence over the R's.[/quote]

The Democratic Primary is rigged first of all...

https://observer.com/2017/08/court-admi ... kyzxX2fkJg

This court case in which I read in detail says that the DNC has the right to make up its own rules being that it is not a public entity it is actually a private corporation ...This kinda blew my mind. So say your candidate is Warren, just for example, if Warren doesnt get 50% or better in say NH then the super delegates kick in and actually the DNC has the right to put in whatever candidate it wants... Look it up...

This court case has set a precedent that is screwing us out of our right to vote which is actually hampering candidates like Tulsi Gabbard, and others, from gaining traction due to the mandates to get into the debates for public exposure etc.

and so what is happening is the DNC is being run by an agenda from the corporate world which includes MIC. People like Rick Larsen are being supported by Boeing, Raytheon ETC, as well banking institutions and big pharma... these politicians all are controlled by this agenda. Remember Eisenhower and his speech beware of the MIC... remember Kennedy's speech in 63 to the media?

The reason I like Tulsi is because of the way she thinks and the way she articulates policy, especially foreign policy. She always looks at things as what is best for the American people rather than just following along with the agenda set by the DNC.

Here we are in all of these regime change wars which really dont have an objective that makes sense...Oh were in Syria to fight terrorism? If that's the case then why is the US supporting and arming Al Qaeda and ISIS to fight the ground war in Syria? If the US is worried about Human rights violations then why are they not worried about Saudi Arabia's human rights violations in Yemen or for that matter the human rights violations on the west bank against the Palestinians in which are being funded by the American tax dollar.

https://www.globalresearch.ca/u-s-milit ... sh/5548960

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vRVe64eOCqA

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vDJPf_JY-AE

So the US media is also being controlled by this agenda. The mainstream media is taking talking points from this agenda. CNN, MSNBC it's totally ridiculous. The main population has no idea what's really happening as the believe everything on the news. we are being played my friends...

LTH

[Aseahawkfan]

Wow RD thats a lot....What I mean by Warren being honest is she put forth a plan. I'm not a fan. Trump is so bad she might beat him but I think she gives him maybe the best shot.But as for all the sky is falling talk regarding Dems/Socialists crashing the economy etc we appear to have had a role reversal, ie you're the pessimist and I'm optimistic about what a dem takeover might mean .

Economies come and go and the fact is Obama inherited a 64.5% workforce participation rate, a cratering of our financial institutions, 9+% unemployment etc etc etc. 8 years and 3 trillion in chinese money later Trump inherited a 7 year economic expansion and equally long bull market. Unemployment was 4.7% on Nov 8 2016.Labor force participation was now nearer 63%.To put that in perspective were the LFPR 64.5% now unemployment would be more like 8%

Growth was modest but steady the last few years under Obama averaging 2 % give or take GDP growth. And he passed obamacare which I hated at the time but having spoken with some of the approximately 22 million it insures I think it is a good plan that should be worked with, not completely dismantled by the Repubs with NO PLAN to replace it with anything.

My point is a liberal like Obama who was fond of executive orders etc did not take anyone's guns, didn't crater the economy,did not wreck your retirement, it went up most of his presidency.His administration created 15 million jobs, Trumps has created about 7 million.He didn't get in a war. ( I know it's big for you and asea


Frankly I'm sick and tired of hearing both parties attack one another as being un american or just about politics for having a particular view or in this case fulfilling their constitutional responsibility at risk of their jobs. It's never been this bad, particularly in my former party that will normalize lawlessness and chaos to hold onto power.

Politics aint beanbag but when it comes to this impeachment inquiry it wasn't started over politics. Pelosi resisted it as long as she could even though I felt it should have happened the day after Mueller testified which ironically we now know was the same day the illegal phone call was placed by Trump after a rogue operation lasting months.
.The democratic house did not reach a majority in favor until learning the POTUS tried to strongarm an ally using half a billion in lethal aid as the carrot and the stick. When they launched their investigation they were 10 points upside down in the polls but as I correctly predicted when the facts began to get out public approval would begin to resemble job approval since this dolt does absolutely nothing to endear himself to any but the most radical wild eyed believer. Latest polls show him with a 75% approval among REPUBLICANS, nearly a 20 point drop.

As i've said i'm no Liberal.No Democrat. Other than Biden there's nobody with a pulse I like much at all. Well I digress I love Buttigeigs speaking ability, his thinking on lots of things. Hes just got no support in the black community whatsoever and I cant see him taking the next step other than maybe by winning in Iowa's caucuses due to the overwhelming money and organization he has, Sanders? too old and too radical. He would be easy to attack, maybe easier than Warren. Really hoping for Biden.
But regardless make no mistake. Anyone but Trump. Any of them have a proven record of legislating, managing people, at least being able to act dignified and respectful. Country over party, country over politics.
ABT. Preferably Pence 2019

Economy will recede because of math, not because the Dems are bad. Tax cuts juiced the economy. Dems will want to reverse them. That will hammer corporate profits in the same way the tax cuts juiced them. It's unavoidable with a tax increase. How that affects things long-term has more factors involved. Short-term though markets will get hammered.

If they push through Medicare for All or a nationalized health plan, that will hammer taxes as well though I believe corporations will actually save money. Healthcare benefits are a huge expense for companies. If they no longer have to provide or manage them and can just put in their tax money without administration costs, that might be good for them.

[c_hawkbob]

So the US media is also being controlled by this agenda

The 'US' or 'main stream media' is not a single entity, 'it' is not controlled by anyone. Loosen the tin foil hat a bit.

[RiverDog]

So the US media is also being controlled by this agenda

The 'US' or 'main stream media' is not a single entity, 'it' is not controlled by anyone. Loosen the tin foil hat a bit.

I'm not even sure what the "main stream media" is anymore. I thought it meant all news organization that was part of the White House press corps, but it obviously means different things to different people. Does it include conservative outlets like Fox News and talk radio? Conservatives like Idahawkman use the term to describe the liberal media or any other source that espoused a philosophy that he didn't agree with his so he could accuse you of being a stooge of the evil MSM when he wanted to discredit a source that was presented.

The same is true of the MIC, or Military-Industrial Complex, a term coined 60 years ago by Dwight Eisenhower in his farewell address during the Cold War to warn the public of the perils of over spending on defense and the arms race, particularly on nukes, in an era where the public suffered from a huge paranoia over the red scare. That threat, or at least the perception of that threat, has changed dramatically. In today's world, defense contractors like Boeing and General Electric are competitors and do not cooperate on very much of anything except for overall defense spending where they lobby Congress just like any other special interest group like unions, the NRA, AARP, and so on.

I can understand a concern about the influence special interest groups have on elected members of Congress, but I see no more evil in the "MIC" than I do the NEA.

[Hawktawk]

The free and ADVERSARIAL press is the lifeblood of democracy. Their job is to hold power accountable. What Fox has done in the last 4 or so years is go from being the network to most likely hold democrats accountable to utter shills for Trump until just recently when a few guys like Chris Wallace and the departed Shep Smith began reporting news again. Of course it was met by angry tweets from POTUS enraged that his volunteer pravda was growing a pair.

Of all the many american institutions that have suffered irreparable damage from this president it is the free and adversarial press that has been hurt the most. I've never heard it referred to as "the enemy of the people" by anyone but Joseph Stalin and the orange baboon.
Having perused the so called left wing news outlets exclusively in terms of my tv intake the last few years of Trump I find them to be left leaning but also accurate in their reporting. If the release of the Mueller report proved anything it was that most all these "fake news" leaks were TRUE. Its not a left wing liberal thing to ask hard questions and report on collusion with foreign powers, paying off porn stars, tax evasion, violations of the emoluments clause etc etc. That's called REPORTING THE FACTS whether its CNN, MSNBC,ABC or whoever and now increasingly even Fox with certain anchors.They are doing their job.Republicans are routinely invited on the MSM to defend their position on Trump, his policy etc, but 99% of them just take potshot soundbites and refuse to actually sit down on the record for a pressing interview.

Trump gets a lot of bad press because he is an incompetent ,chaotic, dishonest corrupt president. There's no shortage of material to write about. His accomplishments as it were don't get much press because he spends his time ranting and raving about his enemies he has created instead of highlighting his record.

Then to boot he just keeps breaking laws and rules like calling the Ukrainian Pres THE DAY AFTER MUELLER'S TESTIMONY to shake him down for dirt on a political opponent. Should this not be reported on???? The media isn't even remotely the biggest problem right now...

[LTH]

The media is one of the biggest problems right now. Here is a great example of what's happening. This example concerns Tulsi Gabbard. This example also gives a look into the so called mainstream media and how its controlled by agenda's... Read it... if you dont read it then you wont understand my point. Read the whole thing...

https://medium.com/@RobletoFire/tulsi-g ... fa7da05284

[LTH]

The other thing that is going on is that journalists and whistle blowers are being prosecuted for telling the truth... Look what's happening to Max blumenthal for reporting what's going on in Syria and Venezuela...

I think another area where we are missing is that people think the country is being totally run by the president and congress.... well... thats not the case totally. This country is being run behind the scenes by the establishment government.


LTH

[LTH]

Look if the Media is not a problem then how come its not common knowledge that the US is supporting and arming ISIS and Al Qaeda to fight the ground war in Syria? The same terrorist groups that cut off our journalist heads and attacked us on 9-11.... People should be completely outraged about this ... But most dont even know its been happening for years and then a big majority dont even believe it because they dont take the time to research it... This should be front line news on every TV in America... But its not... because they are suppressing it.

LTH

[Aseahawkfan]

The free and ADVERSARIAL press is the lifeblood of democracy. Their job is to hold power accountable. What Fox has done in the last 4 or so years is go from being the network to most likely hold democrats accountable to utter shills for Trump until just recently when a few guys like Chris Wallace and the departed Shep Smith began reporting news again. Of course it was met by angry tweets from POTUS enraged that his volunteer pravda was growing a pair.

Of all the many american institutions that have suffered irreparable damage from this president it is the free and adversarial press that has been hurt the most. I've never heard it referred to as "the enemy of the people" by anyone but Joseph Stalin and the orange baboon.
Having perused the so called left wing news outlets exclusively in terms of my tv intake the last few years of Trump I find them to be left leaning but also accurate in their reporting. If the release of the Mueller report proved anything it was that most all these "fake news" leaks were TRUE. Its not a left wing liberal thing to ask hard questions and report on collusion with foreign powers, paying off porn stars, tax evasion, violations of the emoluments clause etc etc. That's called REPORTING THE FACTS whether its CNN, MSNBC,ABC or whoever and now increasingly even Fox with certain anchors.They are doing their job.Republicans are routinely invited on the MSM to defend their position on Trump, his policy etc, but 99% of them just take potshot soundbites and refuse to actually sit down on the record for a pressing interview.

Trump gets a lot of bad press because he is an incompetent ,chaotic, dishonest corrupt president. There's no shortage of material to write about. His accomplishments as it were don't get much press because he spends his time ranting and raving about his enemies he has created instead of highlighting his record.

Then to boot he just keeps breaking laws and rules like calling the Ukrainian Pres THE DAY AFTER MUELLER'S TESTIMONY to shake him down for dirt on a political opponent. Should this not be reported on???? The media isn't even remotely the biggest problem right now...

How can you believe this when the press is information from different sources with different agendas? It is the American people that hold power accountable. If the press gives information and the American people are asleep at the wheel like they've been for years, then nothing changes. Press doesn't get to decide the president. They give information. The people decide what they're government. Even you have admitted you don't care unless you're raging at Trump.

You're the guy asking me why I have a such a big beef with Saudi Arabia because you don't take the time or care what they've done and are doing in the Middle East. They are far worse than Iran or Syria, but here we have a press and government that keeps us focused on how bad Iran and Syria are solely because they aren't our "allies." The American people just keep on ignoring all the vile crap they do even when certain members of the press report the information. Books are written about the crap they're doing. Foreign news agencies report what they're doing. And literally there is a laundry list dating back decades showing our relationship with Saudi Arabia has been toxic with the only benefit to the American people being cheap gas and energy prices. American people ignore a lot of vile crap their government does as long as the right guy is the one speaking from the podium.

[idhawkman]

Michael Bloomberg is talking about running as a Dem. His problem is that he doesn't share many of the views embraced by the far left, but on the other hand, this same attribute could siphon away moderate Trump voters. He also has a huge bankroll he can spend on the campaign.

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/09/17/us/p ... ocrat.html

I usually don't post during the season but I see where Bloomberg is making moves to enter the race. That should make Biden nervous and should really split the dem party along Bernie-Warren vs Wealthy Bloomberg lines.

Not sure what the requirements are now for the dem debates but does Bloomberg even meet the requirements to get on stage now?

[idhawkman]

IMO the worst possible slate of Democrats for a victory in Nov 2020 is emerging. Warren is clearly the frontrunner and her new out in the open Medicare for all plan ripping away my wife and I's plan along with 150 million others and all the associated taxes will get an A for honesty. But it will be as helpful in reality as the release of Trump's phone call to Ukraine on the campaign trial.She will be easy to attack.

Biden is clearly flagging, less money in the bank than any other frontrunner but the pro vs con #s poll #s regarding impeaching Trump are an indication of his overall popularity with the electorate. He's still the sure bet but the Dem "progressives" meaning radical liberal/socialists are winning the day.

Bernie is a fundraising machine but he's a 78 year old socialist mad scientist. He of all the guys on top is the most vulnerable to trump as hes got a low ceiling in terms of who will actually support him. Then there's mayor pete who would be the next president if he weren't married to a man but who would draw about 0 among conservative republicans and especially evangelicals.
Amy Klobuchar has shown signs of life recently which is a good thing.

Beto was a shock to me, no traction whatsoever then his far left forced confiscation of guns and remove anti gay church tax exemptions proposals not only put dirt on his grave but provided the Trump campaign easy talking points. Gabbard got a small bump due to HRCs attacks but let's face it, at 4% shes going nowhere. Castro, Yang, Kamela Harris are all just playing out the string.

Make no mistake, I think the current infestation of the white house is worse than any ideology, any other person on this list and i will accept any of them. I just worry enough people won't. We will see, he is the most historically unpopular president in history to this point in his first term and these open hearings with him attacking on twitter vs any number of career public servants, selfless patriots doing the right thing will not play well with a public increasingly inclined to support his removal.

The only one I wouldn't want to see go against Trump is Gabbard. Good thing the dems will never nominate her though.

[idhawkman]

The other thing that is going on is that journalists and whistle blowers are being prosecuted for telling the truth... Look what's happening to Max blumenthal for reporting what's going on in Syria and Venezuela...

I think another area where we are missing is that people think the country is being totally run by the president and congress.... well... thats not the case totally. This country is being run behind the scenes by the establishment government.


LTH

Here's a truth you won't hear other places. All 5 whistle blowers during the Obama Administration were fired. I guess the media and dems didn't care too much about protecting those folks.

[RiverDog]

Michael Bloomberg is talking about running as a Dem. His problem is that he doesn't share many of the views embraced by the far left, but on the other hand, this same attribute could siphon away moderate Trump voters. He also has a huge bankroll he can spend on the campaign.

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/09/17/us/p ... ocrat.html

I usually don't post during the season but I see where Bloomberg is making moves to enter the race. That should make Biden nervous and should really split the dem party along Bernie-Warren vs Wealthy Bloomberg lines.

Not sure what the requirements are now for the dem debates but does Bloomberg even meet the requirements to get on stage now?

It's pretty complicated, but they have donation thresholds and percent of polling in both nation wide as well as state polls (3 and 5 percent respectively) in order to qualify for the next debate. But it doesn't limit him from entering any primaries or caucuses.

I agree with you that it is bad news for Biden as Bloomberg would be going after the same voters that now support Biden. But the reason why Bloomberg is getting back into the fray is that he sees Biden slipping, and if it continues, Bloomberg could become a viable option for moderate Dems and dissatisfied R's that could cross over in primary balloting. If Trump keeps shooting himself in the foot, it could drive moderate R's into Bloomberg's camp.

If Biden does keep slipping, it wouldn't surprise me at all if he decided to bag it after the early primaries. After all, he's been very tepid about pursuing the nomination in the recent past, was late getting into this race, and he may not want to be a distraction for the impeachment hearings that are probably going to stretch into the primary season. In that case, Bloomberg would immediately thrust himself into the top 2-3 in the field as he'd inherit Biden's base.

[Hawktawk]

How can you believe this when the press is information from different sources with different agendas? It is the American people that hold power accountable. If the press gives information and the American people are asleep at the wheel like they've been for years, then nothing changes. Press doesn't get to decide the president. They give information. The people decide what they're government. Even you have admitted you don't care unless you're raging at Trump.

You're the guy asking me why I have a such a big beef with Saudi Arabia because you don't take the time or care what they've done and are doing in the Middle East. They are far worse than Iran or Syria, but here we have a press and government that keeps us focused on how bad Iran and Syria are solely because they aren't our "allies." The American people just keep on ignoring all the vile crap they do even when certain members of the press report the information. Books are written about the crap they're doing. Foreign news agencies report what they're doing. And literally there is a laundry list dating back decades showing our relationship with Saudi Arabia has been toxic with the only benefit to the American people being cheap gas and energy prices. American people ignore a lot of vile crap their government does as long as the right guy is the one speaking from the podium.

I dont recall ever saying I dont care about anything unless Im raging at Trump. I agree it's about the people who supposedly decide on their government and the future doesn't look promising. And the decline in discourse is really a spectacle. It makes me sad what tens of millions of people will defend on both ends of the political spectrum. People are low information idiots for the most part.

Now about Saudi Arabia.Asea I know we disagree on lots of stuff but I have never to my knowledge voiced support for them. I'm in complete agreement they are a major sponsor of terror including 19 of the 20 hijackers on 911. Its been all about the $$$$$$ Doesn't seem to matter Dem or R saudi arabia gets a pass. I believe its totally wrong. This Khashoggi thing....Trump basically shrugging off the strangulation and dismemberment of a permanent US resident and dissident journalist in a foreign embassy just shows hes sold his soul to the highest bidder. Our Saudi policy has always been corrupt but Trump has taken it to a new level.

[RiverDog]

I dont recall ever saying I dont care about anything unless Im raging at Trump.

Perhaps not, but you rage about Trump so often, with such fervor, and utilizing so many colorful metaphors that it's easy to get that impression.

This Khashoggi thing....Trump basically shrugging off the strangulation and dismemberment of a permanent US resident and dissident journalist in a foreign embassy just shows hes sold his soul to the highest bidder. Our Saudi policy has always been corrupt but Trump has taken it to a new level.

I agree 100%. Trump's response was despicable. He ignored the findings of our own intelligence community as well as that of our allies and simply believed what he wanted to believe. It's all too typical of Trump's inability to look at issues with an objective mind and rather than take the information that's presented to him and process it, he reacts strictly on his gut feel.

[Hawktawk]

Perhaps not, but you rage about Trump so often, with such fervor, and utilizing so many colorful metaphors that it's easy to get that impression.
There's something to rage about. Kind of the rage equivalent of bad press. Its totally deserved so thank you I think.


I agree 100%. Trump's response was despicable. He ignored the findings of our own intelligence community as well as that of our allies and simply believed what he wanted to believe. It's all too typical of Trump's inability to look at issues with an objective mind and rather than take the information that's presented to him and process it, he reacts strictly on his gut feel.

I disagree here RD. Trump knows its a lie. He knows what happened in the Saudi consulate in Turkey. He knows the intelligence community is correct about this as well as Russian interference etc. He knew his statements about having nothing to do with Russia were lies, his comments about the Porn star were lies. His university? Lies. Charitable foundation? Lies. He is a remorseless pathological liar who will lie as a reflex knowing the Trumptard base believes everything he says.

And yes sad to say he knows the Crown Prince personally ordered the brutal slaying of a reporter for the washington post. Trump is lying to protect him just like he lies to Protect Putin. With Putin its blackmail but with Saudi Arabia its about the $,not so much for america under Trump but for lining his own pockets. Either way it's a sad state of affairs how this country treats Saudi Arabia with kid gloves.That did not start with Trump but its never been worse, not only the Khashoggi deal but also Trump vetoing a bipartisan bill to sanction Saudi Arabia and freeze military aid. Not only does the murderous Crown prince get his weapons but they also get to manufacture smart bombs in Saudi Arabia basically ripping off the US patent and costing american workers jobs as part of this sweetheart deal. John Bolton, in private remarks yesterday reportedly said Trump " OFTEN makes foreign policy decisions based on personal interests". How can a man like this be allowed to stay in power?

[RiverDog]

I disagree here RD. Trump knows its a lie. He knows what happened in the Saudi consulate in Turkey. He knows the intelligence community is correct about this as well as Russian interference etc. He knew his statements about having nothing to do with Russia were lies, his comments about the Porn star were lies. His university? Lies. Charitable foundation? Lies. He is a remorseless pathological liar who will lie as a reflex knowing the Trumptard base believes everything he says.

At the risk of aligning myself with the "Trumptard base", none of us, even those closest to Trump, know for sure what he believes and what he doesn't believe. You believe that he knows it's a lie, and that's fine. It's obviously a possibility. But it's also very possible that my POV is the correct version, ie that he's extremely naïve and believes what he wants to believe.

Some people can repeat a lie so often that after a period of time, they honestly believe it to be the truth. I was a victim of that phenomena myself. I "knew" that my ex-wife was cheating on me, but I had talked myself into believing that she wasn't. I feel that Trump honestly believes that a lot of the stuff that he makes up is the truth.

[Hawktawk]

At the risk of aligning myself with the "Trumptard base", none of us, even those closest to Trump, know for sure what he believes and what he doesn't believe. You believe that he knows it's a lie, and that's fine. It's obviously a possibility. But it's also very possible that my POV is the correct version, ie that he's extremely naïve and believes what he wants to believe.

Some people can repeat a lie so often that after a period of time, they honestly believe it to be the truth. I was a victim of that phenomena myself. I "knew" that my ex-wife was cheating on me, but I had talked myself into believing that she wasn't. I feel that Trump honestly believes that a lot of the stuff that he makes up is the truth.

Hes stupid, dense, mentally in decline but not naive IMO. He knows right from wrong, he knows what he's doing, he does it all deliberately. His lies regarding his scandals are further evidence of knowledge of and attempts to conceal guilt.

I understand your personal story as I had a similar one. But its one thing to lie to yourself about everything being alright and lying to the world to conceal wrongdoing by yourself or a foreign leader.It's fair enough to say nobody knows what he really believes. I just see the clues and come to my conclusion. Its why I bristled at the notion of this guy ever becoming president within 2 weeks of his entering the race. I knew, sensed what kind of man he was, what kind of a steward of the most powerful office on the planet he would be. I've been exactly right in most areas. Don't ask me, ask politifact which has calculated Trump has made 12 THOUSAND false statements as president. That's beyond naivete. That's a disorder.

[Aseahawkfan]

Here's a truth you won't hear other places. All 5 whistle blowers during the Obama Administration were fired. I guess the media and dems didn't care too much about protecting those folks.

And Snowden, the ultimate whistleblower, is in Russia. But according to the media and certain posters, only Trump treats whistleblowers badly. I'm talking about you hawktawk and you're continuous avoidance of the truth about what other administrations do that is equally corrupt because you don't hate them like you do Trump.

[RiverDog]

Hes stupid, dense, mentally in decline but not naive IMO. He knows right from wrong, he knows what he's doing, he does it all deliberately. His lies regarding his scandals are further evidence of knowledge of and attempts to conceal guilt.

I agree that Trump is stupid and dense. Personally, I believe it's due to his spoiled rich kid/laziness that has caused him not to have a good handle on basic facts. They tell older people to do crossword puzzles, Sudako, word jumbles, read books, etc, to help keep their minds sharp. IMO Trump has never had to challenge his mind and give it proper exercise, and combined with his advancing age, he does not have a good storage of information to draw on and a limited ability to recall information when told, a good example being his Alabama hurricane incident. I don't feel comfortable calling that a mental illness because I'm not a psychiatrist.

...its one thing to lie to yourself about everything being alright and lying to the world to conceal wrongdoing by yourself or a foreign leader. It's fair enough to say nobody knows what he really believes. I just see the clues and come to my conclusion....Trump has made 12 THOUSAND false statements as president. That's beyond naivete. That's a disorder.

You just contradicted yourself. You can't in one sentence say that it's fair to say that no one really knows what he believes and the next one diagnose him with a mental disorder due to his false statements.

[Hawktawk]

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics ... ar-BBWHTRw

Heres a guy I could vote for. Id prefer him to Pence other than that would mean the orange baboon was in his cage where he belongs.

Of course Weld has no chance nationally because so many republican state party hacks are cancelling primaries. But what about NH? Polls showed him at 7% and Trump at 86% among NH voters but that was July. A lot has changed. By the time votes are cast in a couple of months I can't see Trump gaining any traction in the meantime while being impeached and tweeting a few dozen times a day. I saw a poll quite a while back before this most recent controversy that said as many as 30% of NH voters wouldn't object to a second choice on the republican ballot. I know, Weld and I are like Don Quixote tilting at windmills but WTF, one can always dream.

[RiverDog]

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/weld-files-to-run-in-gop-presidential-primary-in-new-hampshire/ar-BBWHTRw

Heres a guy I could vote for. Id prefer him to Pence other than that would mean the orange baboon was in his cage where he belongs.

Of course Weld has no chance nationally because so many republican state party hacks are cancelling primaries. But what about NH? Polls showed him at 7% and Trump at 86% among NH voters but that was July. A lot has changed. By the time votes are cast in a couple of months I can't see Trump gaining any traction in the meantime while being impeached and tweeting a few dozen times a day. I saw a poll quite a while back before this most recent controversy that said as many as 30% of NH voters wouldn't object to a second choice on the republican ballot. I know, Weld and I are like Don Quixote tilting at windmills but WTF, one can always dream.

I could vote for him, too, but he doesn't have a snowball's chance in hell of winning, either the R nomination or as an independent. As we're seeing the impeachment hearings, the Republican Party is Trump's party and no one else's.

[Aseahawkfan]

I might vote for Buttgieg. I don't know. He seems like a reasonable Democrat with some energy and sense.

[RiverDog]

I might vote for Buttgieg. I don't know. He seems like a reasonable Democrat with some energy and sense.

Although he could never top the amount of material that Donald Trump has provided for them, I'll bet the writers at Saturday Night Live would just love to have a President Buttigieg to work with.

But seriously, Buttigieg seems like a reasonable Dem to me, too, except that I think he's for Medicare for All, which for me is a deal breaker. The only Dem candidates that I know of that haven't embraced a single payer health care system is Biden and Klobuchar.

I haven't had a chance to examine Bloomberg, but I know he's a moderate Dem and wouldn't subscribe to the all out attack on Wall Street that Sanders and Warren will wage if they get elected.

[Aseahawkfan]

I'm ok with a single payer system. The facts don't support that our increased expenditures are providing us with improved health outcomes. The only arguments against are fear-mongering theoreticals like funding of future medicine, most of which we don't even need or use as well as there being near zero proof that the insane profits somehow pay for future medicines. I think a good single-payer system decoupled from our jobs could be good for the future as a whole. The medical insurance industry fighting Trump to stop him from releasing pricing information is more proof they are engaging in underhanded practices to price the consumer out of the medical market. They don't want their insane pricing to be visible to the public.

Medicine in America is out of a control and a detriment to the people who lack a high end plan, which is probably 50% or more of Americans.

[RiverDog]

I'm ok with a single payer system. The facts don't support that our increased expenditures are providing us with improved health outcomes. The only arguments against are fear-mongering theoreticals like funding of future medicine, most of which we don't even need or use as well as there being near zero proof that the insane profits somehow pay for future medicines. I think a good single-payer system decoupled from our jobs could be good for the future as a whole. The medical insurance industry fighting Trump to stop him from releasing pricing information is more proof they are engaging in underhanded practices to price the consumer out of the medical market. They don't want their insane pricing to be visible to the public.

Medicine in America is out of a control and a detriment to the people who lack a high end plan, which is probably 50% or more of Americans.

I realize that we have a difference of opinion on socialized medicine and I wasn't trying to promote my POV. I was simply noting what my priorities are in the 2020 election and why I wouldn't vote for Buttigieg.

[Hawktawk]

I think Buttegig is tacking to the center to steal some of Bidens supporters and at least its working in Iowa with some polls showing him in first there.Regardless when Nancy Pelosi has made it clear she's not a fan of the lunatic fringe left wing blow everything up with our medical system crowd it just aint gonna happen with stuff like Medicare for all. At least not right now but it sure as hell will be a Trump talking point assuming he hasn't been impeached and removed, choked on a cheeseburger or whatever.

I've said of mayor Pete he looks and acts presidential, intelligent, thoughtful . I still rather doubt America is ready for a gay married couple in the White house. Id definitely support him at this time minus some miraculous event giving me a republican choice other than the orange baboon but I'm guessing any evangelicals looking to escape the crazy train of Trump will never vote for him. Never mind they are OK with the POTUS grabbing women by the genitals and bragging about it, paying off the porn stars and playboy bunnies he was bonking while his trophy wife was home with his son, mass corruption etc. The only thing that upsets them is when he curses using the lord's name in vain. But a gay man with ten times the brain power and class of their hero? No way.

The evangelical movement is right with the Trump party, in the toilet enjoying their last hurrah because there's a time coming soon when they may well be a permanent minority.

[RiverDog]

I think Buttegig is tacking to the center to steal some of Bidens supporters and at least its working in Iowa with some polls showing him in first there.Regardless when Nancy Pelosi has made it clear she's not a fan of the lunatic fringe left wing blow everything up with our medical system crowd it just aint gonna happen with stuff like Medicare for all. At least not right now but it sure as hell will be a Trump talking point assuming he hasn't been impeached and removed, choked on a cheeseburger or whatever.

I've said of mayor Pete he looks and acts presidential, intelligent, thoughtful . I still rather doubt America is ready for a gay married couple in the White house. Id definitely support him at this time minus some miraculous event giving me a republican choice other than the orange baboon but I'm guessing any evangelicals looking to escape the crazy train of Trump will never vote for him. Never mind they are OK with the POTUS grabbing women by the genitals and bragging about it, paying off the porn stars and playboy bunnies he was bonking while his trophy wife was home with his son, mass corruption etc. The only thing that upsets them is when he curses using the lord's name in vain. But a gay man with ten times the brain power and class of their hero? No way.

The evangelical movement is right with the Trump party, in the toilet enjoying their last hurrah because there's a time coming soon when they may well be a permanent minority.

Agreed about Buttigieg and the country not being quite ready for a gay POTUS. Maybe in another cycle or two. The other problem with him is that having only been a mayor of a mid sized city, he hasn't ran a major campaign or had to appeal to a diverse group of voters like the others have.

The problem regarding the possibility of socialized medicine is that the Democratic Party is on a definite move to the left, especially as it relates to health care. Pelosi doesn't have that much power. If the libs win enough elections, they can boot her out of the Speakership. Combine that with a Dem POTUS, a strong likelihood of a Dem Senate as the R's will be at a mathematical disadvantage in 2020, and there's a very real possibility that we could see some sort of socialized medicine by 2022.

The evangelical movement is going the way that union influence has since the 1960's. Fewer and fewer people are going to church, and fewer and fewer people are identifying themselves with any religion.

[Aseahawkfan]

Agreed about Buttigieg and the country not being quite ready for a gay POTUS. Maybe in another cycle or two. The other problem with him is that having only been a mayor of a mid sized city, he hasn't ran a major campaign or had to appeal to a diverse group of voters like the others have.

The problem regarding the possibility of socialized medicine is that the Democratic Party is on a definite move to the left, especially as it relates to health care. Pelosi doesn't have that much power. If the libs win enough elections, they can boot her out of the Speakership. Combine that with a Dem POTUS, a strong likelihood of a Dem Senate as the R's will be at a mathematical disadvantage in 2020, and there's a very real possibility that we could see some sort of socialized medicine by 2022.

The evangelical movement is going the way that union influence has since the 1960's. Fewer and fewer people are going to church, and fewer and fewer people are identifying themselves with any religion.

Union movement will see a resurgence if medical, student loans, and wage levels don't move in the right direction. The level of stupid management on an institutional and individual level in those areas is hard to imagine. It's like watching the National Debt which is the Titanic (U.S.A.) heading towards the iceberg (The National Debt) except we know it's going to crash at some point and neither party will do anything about it because one party wants to keep taxes low and the other party wants to raise taxes and spending so the tax increases don't help pay down the debt they keep increasing. Neither group has any realistic fiscal sense.

[RiverDog]

Union movement will see a resurgence if medical, student loans, and wage levels don't move in the right direction. The level of stupid management on an institutional and individual level in those areas is hard to imagine. It's like watching the National Debt which is the Titanic (U.S.A.) heading towards the iceberg (The National Debt) except we know it's going to crash at some point and neither party will do anything about it because one party wants to keep taxes low and the other party wants to raise taxes and spending so the tax increases don't help pay down the debt they keep increasing. Neither group has any realistic fiscal sense.

I'm not sure how student loans will affect union membership, but wages are obviously a factor in any union's campaign to attract new members. And I agree that if insurance premiums continue to rise, as they obviously will, it could put more pressure on employees to join a union. But that doesn't outweigh the disadvantages that unions have in today's world.

There's enough government protections that were not available in the 40's and 50's that have compromised the need for a union, and companies are a lot more afraid of federal and state governments than they are a union. If a union rep walks into the plant, the highest manager that will take notice will be HR. But if a OSHA or USDA inspector walks in, everybody's phone starts ringing. Indeed, most union members are government workers, ie police unions, teachers, et al. Union membership in the private sector has been in a free fall for decades.

The other factor is the employment level. With unemployment at historic lows, it's a buyer's market for prospective employees, and less of a need to join a union to advance their cause. Unions are going to have to re-define themselves if they want to remain relevant in the 21st century.

The point I was making was less about the effectiveness of unions to prosecute employee grievances than the political power they have lost. Unions will never again represent anywhere close to the percentage of the workforce that they did in the middle of the 20th century, and even if they did, their members will have a much stronger voice in how their dues are spent and which political parties and candidates they support. No more smoke filled union halls with their goons patrolling the audience looking for members that aren't "good 'ole boys". As a result, they do not have the large blocks of voters that politicians drooled over. I see a similar trend with the religious right.

[Aseahawkfan]

I'm not sure how student loans will affect union membership, but wages are obviously a factor in any union's campaign to attract new members. And I agree that if insurance premiums continue to rise, as they obviously will, it could put more pressure on employees to join a union. But that doesn't outweigh the disadvantages that unions have in today's world.

There's enough government protections that were not available in the 40's and 50's that have compromised the need for a union, and companies are a lot more afraid of federal and state governments than they are a union. If a union rep walks into the plant, the highest manager that will take notice will be HR. But if a OSHA or USDA inspector walks in, everybody's phone starts ringing. Indeed, most union members are government workers, ie police unions, teachers, et al. Union membership in the private sector has been in a free fall for decades.

The other factor is the employment level. With unemployment at historic lows, it's a buyer's market for prospective employees, and less of a need to join a union to advance their cause. Unions are going to have to re-define themselves if they want to remain relevant in the 21st century.

The point I was making was less about the effectiveness of unions to prosecute employee grievances than the political power they have lost. Unions will never again represent anywhere close to the percentage of the workforce that they did in the middle of the 20th century, and even if they did, their members will have a much stronger voice in how their dues are spent and which political parties and candidates they support. No more smoke filled union halls with their goons patrolling the audience looking for members that aren't "good 'ole boys". As a result, they do not have the large blocks of voters that politicians drooled over. I see a similar trend with the religious right.

We will see. It all comes down to if unions ever catch on in the tech industry. Tech companies are notoriously anti-union. Tech employees don't like unions and are notoriously anti-conformity. Unions encourage conformity. But at the same time tech companies are also very exploitative with workers and grind them up and spit them out. They do not like to keep employees long-term. They have no interest in long-term retirement management or anything of the kind.

So you would prefer government management of labor rather than unions? That will be what happens if people don't go to unions. They will just vote a federal and state government "union" equivalent. I'm not sure that is preferable.

[RiverDog]

So you would prefer government management of labor rather than unions? That will be what happens if people don't go to unions. They will just vote a federal and state government "union" equivalent. I'm not sure that is preferable.

Government "management" of labor? That's not a good choice of terms as the government doesn't "manage" any part of business or labor. What they have done is pass legislation that regulates what companies can and can't do in the work place, such as safety regulations, minimum wage, discriminatory practices, rules regarding medical leaves, etc, and provided agencies that enforce compliance with those regulations. It's an area that used to be the domain of unions.

As far as who I trust more, I can't give you a fair answer as I've seen good and bad in both organizations. I've dealt with some really good business agents ("union reps") and what I felt was competent, fair state and federal inspectors and arbitrators (USDA, DOT, L&I, etc). My point wasn't so much as who can you trust as it is who has the larger authority. Unions authority is very limited as the can affect just one aspect of company operations, ie labor. The government can literally shut down a company and has scores of agencies at their disposal, from the IRS to the EPA to the SEC. That's why my managers were much more sensitive to any government agency than they ever were with a union.

The problem I've seen is that in general, most employees are unaware that they can file complaints against their employer via many of these federal and state agencies because it's not advertised beyond the required posting of notices.

[Aseahawkfan]

Government "management" of labor? That's not a good choice of terms as the government doesn't "manage" any part of business or labor. What they have done is pass legislation that regulates what companies can and can't do in the work place, such as safety regulations, minimum wage, discriminatory practices, rules regarding medical leaves, etc, and provided agencies that enforce compliance with those regulations. It's an area that used to be the domain of unions.

As far as who I trust more, I can't give you a fair answer as I've seen good and bad in both organizations. I've dealt with some really good business agents ("union reps") and what I felt was competent, fair state and federal inspectors and arbitrators (USDA, DOT, L&I, etc). My point wasn't so much as who can you trust as it is who has the larger authority. Unions authority is very limited as the can affect just one aspect of company operations, ie labor. The government can literally shut down a company and has scores of agencies at their disposal, from the IRS to the EPA to the SEC. That's why my managers were much more sensitive to any government agency than they ever were with a union.

The problem I've seen is that in general, most employees are unaware that they can file complaints against their employer via many of these federal and state agencies because it's not advertised beyond the required posting of notices.

If things get bad enough, they'll use the power. Government socialism and the socialist push is all about resource management including labor. AOCs and such would love the government to replace unions and manage labor using the power of government. Nearly every socialist movement that was successful can be tied to businesses exploiting and abusing the workforce, watching them fall into poverty, debt, and all that comes with it, while pretending they didn't orchestrate it through bad policy and poor morals. Like the debt load right now is very, very bad and unethical and yet businesses like to play that, "But they had a choice card." Let's be real here. Debt is in essence a form of agreed upon servitude where you agree to work for someone else to borrow their money and pay them interest on the sum as well as the principle. If you get someone in deep enough debt, you own a lot of their productive capacity meaning you own a lot of their work time. What did we call that in the past when you owned someone else's productive capacity?

[Hawktawk]

https://www.nationalreview.com/corner/q ... one-month/
Excellent news for democrats unless her former supporters flock to Sanders. I heard a pundit say a while back that either of those 2 lose in a landslide. I would agree.