The Democratic Presidential Nomination 2020

[Ark2]

Originally Posted by afc wimbledon

In some ways though having the Trumpers go after Warren as the easy target would be a good thing, it would leave Biden as the face of decent normalcy the voters want back, he would get to rise above the fray largely untouched and look like the bigger and kinder man

Biden looks like he could drop dead at any minute. Whomever he chooses as his running mate, this person will get a lot of scrutiny as the odd are very good that should Biden win, his VP will become president within the next 4 years.

[JohnnyB]

Originally Posted by Ark2

Biden looks like he could drop dead at any minute. Whomever he chooses as his running mate, this person will get a lot of scrutiny as the odd are very good that should Biden win, his VP will become president within the next 4 years.

I doubt he will drop dead, but if Biden wins we'll probably be looking at the most powerful VP since Cheyney. Biden looks like he's already well into mental decline, and the presidency is a job that ages people dramatically. The VP pick better be someone very competent to keep things together in a Weekend at Bernie's type presidency.

[zamler]

Originally Posted by Ark2

Biden looks like he could drop dead at any minute. Whomever he chooses as his running mate, this person will get a lot of scrutiny as the odd are very good that should Biden win, his VP will become president within the next 4 years.

Then the VP should be running for POTUS not Biden. I feel sorry for the man his mind clearly is going and he's being thrust into the most demanding situation there is. The reason he keeps getting angry is he's frustrated with himself, not the people around him. This is classic behaviour of dementia, anger, confusion, belligerence brought on by mild provocation.

[JohnnyB]

Originally Posted by zamler

Then the VP should be running for POTUS not Biden. I feel sorry for the man his mind clearly is going and he's being thrust into the most demanding situation there is. The reason he keeps getting angry is he's frustrated with himself, not the people around him. This is classic behaviour of dementia, anger, confusion, belligerence brought on by mild provocation.

The democratic candidates with the greatest mental acuity in my eyes were probably Warren and Harris, but there doesn't seem to be confidence in having anything risky at the head of the ticket in this election, and people see a female candidate as higher risk than an old white guy who's tight with the other guy everyone likes. This is probably a good opportunity for a very competent woman to get into the white house and eventually into the presidency though. Four years of great competence as a VP followed by Biden stepping down at the end of one term might be just what's needed to break through for someone who has what it takes to step up to the responsibilities of the job but is seen as risky because of their gender.

[zamler]

Warren is a fraud through and through, Harris is not a leader from what I've seen. Tulsi Gabbard is very strong and capable but for reasons that escape me the Dems are hell bent on cheating their assess off to keep her out.

[Johnny Makarov]

Sign me up for 1 Cory Booker please.

[Ark2]

Originally Posted by JohnnyB

The democratic candidates with the greatest mental acuity in my eyes were probably Warren and Harris, but there doesn't seem to be confidence in having anything risky at the head of the ticket in this election, and people see a female candidate as higher risk than an old white guy who's tight with the other guy everyone likes. This is probably a good opportunity for a very competent woman to get into the white house and eventually into the presidency though. Four years of great competence as a VP followed by Biden stepping down at the end of one term might be just what's needed to break through for someone who has what it takes to step up to the responsibilities of the job but is seen as risky because of their gender.

Female candidates aren't risky. They get elected in virtually every other position in the country. When they lose their bid for the presidency, it is often due to the fact that they are poor candidates. Warren was easily the most dishonest politician on the Democratic ticket. On top of that, she is very scripted and comes off as disingenuous.

Harris was actually doing quite well until Tulsi Gabbard absolutely destroyed her during the debate, at which point, her poor record as attorney general was scrutinized and ultimately sunk her. Gabbard and Klobuchar are actually much better politicians in my mind, but they don't get the fanfare that Warren and Harris attract for some reason.

[burn_this_city]

Originally Posted by zamler

Warren is a fraud through and through, Harris is not a leader from what I've seen. Tulsi Gabbard is very strong and capable but for reasons that escape me the Dems are hell bent on cheating their assess off to keep her out.

Gabbard had the audacity to stand up to Clinton and DNC in 2016. She's been a pariah ever since.

[CliffFletcher]

Klobuchar is an expert at working the Senate and getting legislation passed - which is ultimately what government is all about. I think she'd be a big asset as a VP.

[Senator Clay Davis]

Originally Posted by CliffFletcher

Klobuchar is an expert at working the Senate and getting legislation passed - which is ultimately what government is all about. I think she'd be a big asset as a VP.

And she helped deliver a rust belt state to Biden with her endorsement. I think she's got a pretty good shot to be VP.

[CorsiHockeyLeague]

Klobuchar has some rust belt appeal I guess, as well as being a pretty good "suburban mom appeal" candidate, if you just want to focus on winning through PA, MI, WI and OH. I just think Biden is already appealing to those states, while Abrams gives you more oomph in the south - it's a better balance. I'm sure the Biden campaign will have some electoral math as to which strategy is the best, I'm pretty agnostic about it.

Originally Posted by Ark2

Terrible idea that would be impossible to administer and is probably unconstitutional anyway. Were I an American, I would likely vote for Biden, but not if he were in favour of a wealth tax.

Really? That'd be a deal breaker for you? I that it's totally ineffective and impossible to administer properly, and he probably couldn't get it passed if he won, but it's popular among the "WE HATE BILLIONAIRES" crowd (i.e., Warren and Biden supporters), so it just seems like a really harmless bone to throw their way.

[troutman]

Originally Posted by zamler

Warren is a fraud through and through, Harris is not a leader from what I've seen. Tulsi Gabbard is very strong and capable but for reasons that escape me the Dems are hell bent on cheating their assess off to keep her out.

Reasons that are escaping you? My impression of Tulsi is that she has more in common with Republicans, and she has strange Russian connections that she has not addressed?

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/10/12/u...i-gabbard.html
https://www.latimes.com/opinion/stor...set-republican
https://www.vox.com/policy-and-polit...ight-explained

[2Stonedbirds]

Christ.

[Ark2]

Originally Posted by CorsiHockeyLeague

Really? That'd be a deal breaker for you? I that it's totally ineffective and impossible to administer properly, and he probably couldn't get it passed if he won, but it's popular among the "WE HATE BILLIONAIRES" crowd (i.e., Warren and Biden supporters), so it just seems like a really harmless bone to throw their way.

Yep, that's a deal breaker for me, same with an estate tax. Even though I will never be wealthy enough for a tax like this to target me, it just strikes me as legalized theft and immoral.

[CorsiHockeyLeague]

Er, okay. Weird position, unless you're also against all progressive marginal tax rates, aka every income tax system in the developed world, as far as I know.

[stone hands]

look at the altruistic temporarily embarrassed millionaire looking out for those poor billionaires, such integrity, much wow

[nfotiu]

Has there been a successful implementation of a wealth tax anywhere? I read the article earlier in this thread about some of the reason's why it might work better in the US, but I'm still skeptical. It seems to me to be one of those ideas that sounds good in theory, but in practice doesn't accomplish the intent, and has unforeseen negative effects. Plus it might unconstitutional as mentioned. Also I think it loses more votes than it wins. It doesn't seem like something I'd want to defend in this campaign. Maybe toy with it after you win.

[CorsiHockeyLeague]

Again, I don't want to be mistaken as saying a wealth tax would work once implemented. I'm saying it's one example of a thing Biden could add to his platform to appease the mobs of idiots who are now saying they won't vote at all because there's no functional difference for them between Trump and an establishment Democrat.

I guess if there are enough people like Ark who rather puzzlingly think it's anathema to suggest such a thing, it might be a bad example, but you get what I'm saying. Make it seem a bit more like Bernie's platform has made its way into your own a bit, without doing anything actually revolutionary. Or maybe there's no point in even attempting to placate those people.

[afc wimbledon]

You don't run on a 'wealth tax' you run on 'we need to make the tax system fairer, simpler and make sure everyone pays their fair share' ,you know, something hard to pin down as to what it actually means

[Lanny_McDonald]

Originally Posted by nfotiu

Has there been a successful implementation of a wealth tax anywhere? I read the article earlier in this thread about some of the reason's why it might work better in the US, but I'm still skeptical. It seems to me to be one of those ideas that sounds good in theory, but in practice doesn't accomplish the intent, and has unforeseen negative effects. Plus it might unconstitutional as mentioned. Also I think it loses more votes than it wins. It doesn't seem like something I'd want to defend in this campaign. Maybe toy with it after you win.

Please review the presidency of Eisenhower for the perfect example. The country flourished and had its greatest period of expansion when taxation on the rich was at its highest.