Author Topic: 2020 presidential candidate 'crats  (Read 535027 times)

0 Members and 4 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline sys

  • Contributor
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *****
  • Posts: 40472
  • your reputation will never recover, nor should it.
    • View Profile
Re: 2020 presidential candidate 'crats
« Reply #1050 on: March 23, 2019, 01:07:17 PM »
Beto needs to take much stronger policy positions, frankly any policy positions really, or he's going to be chewed up to the point where it'll do damage to his future political aspirations. They'll bully him on the debate stage this summer. Pete is a real bad look for Beto, he's a young relatable white dude but he's coming out of the gate strongly with policy positions and not skateboarding photo ops.


he has policy positions.  the criticism that he doesn't is pure laziness.  what position do you want to know about?  i can tell you what it is.
"experienced commanders will simply be smeared and will actually go to the meat."

Offline Kat Kid

  • Global Moderator
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *****
  • Posts: 20444
    • View Profile
Re: 2020 presidential candidate 'crats
« Reply #1051 on: March 23, 2019, 03:03:48 PM »
Beto needs to take much stronger policy positions, frankly any policy positions really, or he's going to be chewed up to the point where it'll do damage to his future political aspirations. They'll bully him on the debate stage this summer. Pete is a real bad look for Beto, he's a young relatable white dude but he's coming out of the gate strongly with policy positions and not skateboarding photo ops.


he has policy positions.  the criticism that he doesn't is pure laziness.  what position do you want to know about?  i can tell you what it is.

Free College? Child Care/Pre-K? Medicare 4 All? Reparations? Foreign Policy?

Offline sys

  • Contributor
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *****
  • Posts: 40472
  • your reputation will never recover, nor should it.
    • View Profile
Re: 2020 presidential candidate 'crats
« Reply #1052 on: March 23, 2019, 03:24:32 PM »
Free College? Child Care/Pre-K? Medicare 4 All? Reparations? Foreign Policy?

affordable college:  free community college, student loan forgiveness for public service jobs (currently exists, but is unusable, proposed to be made functional and widely available), increase federal subsidies to public universities and pressure them to control costs (this last one from his senate run, i haven't heard if he's said anything about it lately).

child care:  some form of universal pre-k, i haven't paid attention to the specifics if they've been outlined.

medicare 4 all:  supports medicare for america bill

https://www.vox.com/2018/12/13/18103087/medicare-for-all-explained-single-payer-health-care-sanders-jayapal

reparations:  supports the "study reparations" thing most candidates seem to be settling on as their preferred way to dodge the issue.

foreign policy:  foreign policy is very broad.  an aspect that you might find appealing is that he is pretty opposed to intervention in almost all situations.  it's an area that i think will be highly entertaining over the next few months as people that have been told is a bland centrist discover how out of step he is with the status quo.  i'll post a few clips and an article in separate posts.

"experienced commanders will simply be smeared and will actually go to the meat."

Offline sys

  • Contributor
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *****
  • Posts: 40472
  • your reputation will never recover, nor should it.
    • View Profile
"experienced commanders will simply be smeared and will actually go to the meat."

Offline sys

  • Contributor
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *****
  • Posts: 40472
  • your reputation will never recover, nor should it.
    • View Profile
"experienced commanders will simply be smeared and will actually go to the meat."

Offline sys

  • Contributor
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *****
  • Posts: 40472
  • your reputation will never recover, nor should it.
    • View Profile
"experienced commanders will simply be smeared and will actually go to the meat."

Offline MakeItRain

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 44805
    • View Profile
Re: 2020 presidential candidate 'crats
« Reply #1056 on: March 23, 2019, 03:56:45 PM »
Beto needs to take much stronger policy positions, frankly any policy positions really, or he's going to be chewed up to the point where it'll do damage to his future political aspirations. They'll bully him on the debate stage this summer. Pete is a real bad look for Beto, he's a young relatable white dude but he's coming out of the gate strongly with policy positions and not skateboarding photo ops.


he has policy positions.  the criticism that he doesn't is pure laziness.  what position do you want to know about?  i can tell you what it is.

It isn't laziness, he hasn't made them as a part of his campaign. Of course he has opinions about health care, education, foreign policy (who the hell is going to go on record as being someone who doesn't want to bring the troops home from Afghanistan?), drug policy, etc.

https://www.thedailybeast.com/beto-orourke-was-rare-vote-against-tough-on-russia-bills-after-invasion-of-ukraine
Did you post this to show that he might be a policy lightweight? Did you see the line in there about him making these votes without an on the record explanation at the time or since?

Offline Kat Kid

  • Global Moderator
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *****
  • Posts: 20444
    • View Profile
Re: 2020 presidential candidate 'crats
« Reply #1057 on: March 23, 2019, 04:04:33 PM »
Thanks. Honestly, trying to track down a place that shows his positions is pretty scatter shot.  His congressional record is a real mixed bag.  The New Democrats liking him so much and some of his votes on health care, consumer protections and environment. It isn't a big record anyway, but I just don't trust him. He is now saying that he "looks to Barbara Lee" for foreign policy leadership but he is reliable AIPAC vote, even though J Street gave him some money in the Cruz Senate race and it was a minor issue. 

I just legitimately don't know what to make of a lot of what I read.

Offline sys

  • Contributor
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *****
  • Posts: 40472
  • your reputation will never recover, nor should it.
    • View Profile
Re: 2020 presidential candidate 'crats
« Reply #1058 on: March 23, 2019, 04:17:36 PM »
His congressional record is a real mixed bag.

he is not ideologically pure, in many ways, true.  he has positions both to the right and left of the dem consensus.  i would (very broadly) describe him as an obama democrat with a slight left libertarian lean.  he's also quite pragmatic, which, at times, also pushes him into positions that cut against ideology.


but I just don't trust him.

that's fine.  it's completely fair to say you don't agree with him on some particular issue or on a broad range of issues.  it's not accurate to say he avoids taking positions.


He is now saying that he "looks to Barbara Lee" for foreign policy leadership but he is reliable AIPAC vote, even though J Street gave him some money in the Cruz Senate race and it was a minor issue.

that is not accurate in several ways.  1) he did not accept pac or lobbyist money for the 2018 senate race.  2) he voted against funding iron dome, he was a strong supporter of the iran deal, he's repeatedly criticized netanyahu and israeli settlements and in general has not been what i would call a reliable aipac vote.  3) he has been saying the same thing about 9/11 and barbara lee for at least two years.
"experienced commanders will simply be smeared and will actually go to the meat."

Offline sonofdaxjones

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 52963
    • View Profile

Offline Kat Kid

  • Global Moderator
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *****
  • Posts: 20444
    • View Profile
Re: 2020 presidential candidate 'crats
« Reply #1060 on: March 23, 2019, 04:23:13 PM »
https://www.opensecrets.org/members-of-congress/summary?cid=N00033540


what does "top contributors" mean here?  Is this like the thing where a bunch of oil & gas employees gave him money but not actually the companies themselves?

Offline sys

  • Contributor
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *****
  • Posts: 40472
  • your reputation will never recover, nor should it.
    • View Profile
Re: 2020 presidential candidate 'crats
« Reply #1061 on: March 23, 2019, 04:33:38 PM »
It isn't laziness, he hasn't made them as a part of his campaign.

he doesn't emphasize specific policy positions in his stump speech in the way sanders, as an example, does.  but he takes questions from the public and the press at pretty much every event he does.  he avoids specifics on a few issues, but generally answers questions as directly as any politician i've ever seen.

he doesn't have an issue section on his website yet, but only a couple of candidates do.  it's still very early in the campaign.



(who the hell is going to go on record as being someone who doesn't want to bring the troops home from Afghanistan?), drug policy, etc.

trump just caught all sorts of crap for talking about doing so.  as far as i can tell the bipartisan consensus is that it would be irresponsible to withdraw troops from afghanistan.


Did you post this to show that he might be a policy lightweight? Did you see the line in there about him making these votes without an on the record explanation at the time or since?

i posted it to show katkid that beto has an extended record of being pretty extreme in opposition to intervention in almost all situations, even ones where his party was almost unanimous in supporting it.


not many people were terribly interested in how beto voted before he ran for the senate.  one of the interesting (at least to me) things about beto is that he put together a six year record in the house acting like a completely unambitious lifer-to-be, mostly avoiding publicity, concentrating on constituent services, voting for district issues, and quietly breaking from consensus on a few pet issues (especially, immigration, drugs, interventionism).  and then, kinda out of nowhere, he took on a suicide race for the senate and then decided to run for president.

i think he'd promised to only serve eight years when he ran his first campaign for the house, so perhaps the senate run was related to fulfilling that promise.  still unusual, i think.
"experienced commanders will simply be smeared and will actually go to the meat."

Offline Kat Kid

  • Global Moderator
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *****
  • Posts: 20444
    • View Profile
Re: 2020 presidential candidate 'crats
« Reply #1062 on: March 23, 2019, 04:34:25 PM »
It isn't so much that he is ideologically "impure" it is that I think there is some evidence his position on the same issues have changed significantly over time. This is a challenge for Kirsten Gillibrand too. What can you be counted on for and who is your true constituency?  The fact that he never talks about what he actually would like to accomplish compounds this issue.

Offline sys

  • Contributor
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *****
  • Posts: 40472
  • your reputation will never recover, nor should it.
    • View Profile
Re: 2020 presidential candidate 'crats
« Reply #1063 on: March 23, 2019, 04:36:17 PM »
https://www.opensecrets.org/members-of-congress/summary?cid=N00033540


what does "top contributors" mean here?  Is this like the thing where a bunch of oil & gas employees gave him money but not actually the companies themselves?

as i understand it, yes.  the "j street" would be individual contributions from employees of lobbyist firms.
"experienced commanders will simply be smeared and will actually go to the meat."

Offline sys

  • Contributor
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *****
  • Posts: 40472
  • your reputation will never recover, nor should it.
    • View Profile
Re: 2020 presidential candidate 'crats
« Reply #1064 on: March 23, 2019, 04:47:52 PM »
It isn't so much that he is ideologically "impure" it is that I think there is some evidence his position on the same issues have changed significantly over time. This is a challenge for Kirsten Gillibrand too. What can you be counted on for and who is your true constituency?  The fact that he never talks about what he actually would like to accomplish compounds this issue.

yeah.  there are definitely issues on which his position has changed significantly.  but there are others where people sort of accuse him of having changed where it's really more just he pragmatically voted for something or other because he supported half of the bill or some crap like that.

he talks about what he would like to accomplish constantly.  i honestly don't know what to make of people saying crap like that.  it's like, buttigieg proposes some crap like changing how we select supreme court justices, which would require a constitutional amendment and hence is obviously outside the realm of something that could actually happen between 2020 and 2028 and people love it.  beto, at every event he's been to since declaring, has talked about supporting medicare for america, which is an actual bill in the house that possibly (although it is unlikely) could be pushed through in some form in the next eight years and people accuse him of not having any policies.

i mean on some level i get it.  i basically have no idea what, if anything, buttigieg supports other than the supreme court thing.  but that's because i haven't developed enough of a curiosity to find out.  i don't equate me not caring enough to look to him not having positions.
"experienced commanders will simply be smeared and will actually go to the meat."

Offline Spracne

  • Point Plank'r
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *
  • Posts: 20950
  • Scholar/Gentleman, But Super Earthy/Organic
    • View Profile
Re: 2020 presidential candidate 'crats
« Reply #1065 on: March 23, 2019, 04:52:11 PM »
There's nothing in the Constitution that says the Supreme Court shall be compromised of 9 Justices. In fact, the Court as-formed had 6 Justices.

Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk


Offline Kat Kid

  • Global Moderator
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *****
  • Posts: 20444
    • View Profile
Re: 2020 presidential candidate 'crats
« Reply #1066 on: March 23, 2019, 04:59:15 PM »
It isn't so much that he is ideologically "impure" it is that I think there is some evidence his position on the same issues have changed significantly over time. This is a challenge for Kirsten Gillibrand too. What can you be counted on for and who is your true constituency?  The fact that he never talks about what he actually would like to accomplish compounds this issue.

yeah.  there are definitely issues on which his position has changed significantly.  but there are others where people sort of accuse him of having changed where it's really more just he pragmatically voted for something or other because he supported half of the bill or some crap like that.

he talks about what he would like to accomplish constantly.  i honestly don't know what to make of people saying crap like that.  it's like, buttigieg proposes some crap like changing how we select supreme court justices, which would require a constitutional amendment and hence is obviously outside the realm of something that could actually happen between 2020 and 2028 and people love it.  beto, at every event he's been to since declaring, has talked about supporting medicare for america, which is an actual bill in the house that possibly (although it is unlikely) could be pushed through in some form in the next eight years and people accuse him of not having any policies.

i mean on some level i get it.  i basically have no idea what, if anything, buttigieg supports other than the supreme court thing.  but that's because i haven't developed enough of a curiosity to find out.  i don't equate me not caring enough to look to him not having positions.

just go back and look at the roll out of Harris, Inslee, Warren, hell even Booker.  They all came out with very specific, 3-5 top line agenda items and most of them have a very identifiable "signature" issue, I know these off the top of my head.
Harris- $500/month&Medicare4All
Inslee- Environment- Green New Deal?
Warren- Medicare4All/Toughen Consumer Protection Bureau/Break Up Big Banks
Booker- Baby Bonds

What is Beto's issue?  I'm not saying he is the only candidate with this problem, but it is a problem for him.

Offline Kat Kid

  • Global Moderator
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *****
  • Posts: 20444
    • View Profile
Re: 2020 presidential candidate 'crats
« Reply #1067 on: March 23, 2019, 04:59:37 PM »
There's nothing in the Constitution that says the Supreme Court shall be compromised of 9 Justices. In fact, the Court as-formed had 6 Justices.

Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk

Is this Pete's thing?

Offline Spracne

  • Point Plank'r
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *
  • Posts: 20950
  • Scholar/Gentleman, But Super Earthy/Organic
    • View Profile
Re: 2020 presidential candidate 'crats
« Reply #1068 on: March 23, 2019, 05:02:26 PM »
There's nothing in the Constitution that says the Supreme Court shall be compromised of 9 Justices. In fact, the Court as-formed had 6 Justices.

Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk

Is this Pete's thing?

As far as I can tell, he responded to a question and said he had not formed a considered opinion on court-packing, but it's something to consider?

Offline Kat Kid

  • Global Moderator
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *****
  • Posts: 20444
    • View Profile
Re: 2020 presidential candidate 'crats
« Reply #1069 on: March 23, 2019, 05:05:27 PM »
I think sys has Beto-brain.

Offline 8manpick

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 19129
  • A top quartile binger, poster, and friend
    • View Profile
Re: 2020 presidential candidate 'crats
« Reply #1070 on: March 23, 2019, 05:22:22 PM »
Positions should change when new information becomes available. Distrust anyone who tells you otherwise.
:adios:

Offline sys

  • Contributor
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *****
  • Posts: 40472
  • your reputation will never recover, nor should it.
    • View Profile
Re: 2020 presidential candidate 'crats
« Reply #1071 on: March 23, 2019, 06:01:51 PM »
There's nothing in the Constitution that says the Supreme Court shall be compromised of 9 Justices. In fact, the Court as-formed had 6 Justices.

his proposal to have parties select five each and then those ten select an additional five.  increasing the numbers would not require an amendment, but changing the selection process would, would it not?
"experienced commanders will simply be smeared and will actually go to the meat."

Offline sys

  • Contributor
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *****
  • Posts: 40472
  • your reputation will never recover, nor should it.
    • View Profile
Re: 2020 presidential candidate 'crats
« Reply #1072 on: March 23, 2019, 06:10:34 PM »
just go back and look at the roll out of Harris, Inslee, Warren, hell even Booker.  They all came out with very specific, 3-5 top line agenda items and most of them have a very identifiable "signature" issue, I know these off the top of my head.
Harris- $500/month&Medicare4All
Inslee- Environment- Green New Deal?
Warren- Medicare4All/Toughen Consumer Protection Bureau/Break Up Big Banks
Booker- Baby Bonds

What is Beto's issue?  I'm not saying he is the only candidate with this problem, but it is a problem for him.

saying he does not have a unique policy that he emphasizes is not the same thing as saying he doesn't have policies.


i expect that he will lean into immigration and criminal justice and drug legalization stuff quite a bit more than the other candidates.  but you're right that so far he hasn't really pushed a signature issue or proposal.  despite what i speculated about on immigration and criminal justice, to some extent, i suspect that will remain true.  health care, for example is going to be a huge thing for all the candidates and he's already decided to push an existing bill rather than to come up with something unique.

he seems to have been fairly deliberately vague on green new deal stuff so far, so i'd guess he's going to be coming out with a unique environmental policy at some point, but i don't know have a guess as to how hard he'll push it.

"experienced commanders will simply be smeared and will actually go to the meat."

Offline sys

  • Contributor
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *****
  • Posts: 40472
  • your reputation will never recover, nor should it.
    • View Profile
Re: 2020 presidential candidate 'crats
« Reply #1073 on: March 23, 2019, 06:12:50 PM »
I think sys has Beto-brain.

just in the last two weeks i have been very surprised, and at least a little concerned, with how open i am to changing my opinions to better align them with beto's.  i don't know that i've ever really experienced anything similar before.
"experienced commanders will simply be smeared and will actually go to the meat."

Offline Spracne

  • Point Plank'r
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *
  • Posts: 20950
  • Scholar/Gentleman, But Super Earthy/Organic
    • View Profile
Re: 2020 presidential candidate 'crats
« Reply #1074 on: March 23, 2019, 06:19:07 PM »
There's nothing in the Constitution that says the Supreme Court shall be compromised of 9 Justices. In fact, the Court as-formed had 6 Justices.

his proposal to have parties select five each and then those ten select an additional five.  increasing the numbers would not require an amendment, but changing the selection process would, would it not?

There's nothing in Article III about that. The pertinent part of Article II states: " . . . and he shall nominate, and by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, shall appoint . . . Judges of the supreme Court . . . ." Maybe you could shoehorn an act of Congress changing the selection process into the advice-and-consent clause, especially if you had a friendly Executive Branch, as this would undeniably by a power grab by the Legislative Branch. But, yeah, I think the most likely scenario is that an amendment would be required. Can you link me to Pete proposing this?