US Elections 2020 thread

[rjd2]

She's exercising the center right's ability to get the media to publish smears against their enemies. A bit of a practice smear on a low-value target before they have to mobilize to take down an actual threat.

Some positive thoughts about Elizabeth Warren's campaign: a very Christian, close-minded, gen-x hispanic acquaintance is extremely passionate about Warren, and will be attending her official announcement in Lawrence this weekend. An anecdotal single-point of non-data, but it gives me hope that an economically progressive candidate has broad appeal.

I think they will be happy with everyone in the race bar Tulsi and Sanders. Warren is not ideal, but not the end of the world. Gillibrand has spent her career by pivoting hugely so I think for many she would be the dream candidate.

[Dog Botherer]

Cory Booker by contrast could go far. He's not everyone's cup of proverbial tea, but he has a solid long history in NJ. He'll get faster to a presser than Chris Christie to a fat feast, without any Bridgegate history clouding his run.

Cory Booker may be too centrist for some tastes, but he's worked damn hard to get where he is. Back in his Newark Mayoral days, he would hang with the hard drug dealers all night to boost his credentials and demonstrate his taste for his home town and local environs  (where he still lives).

Booker is a steaming pile of centrist garbage who'd spout any old shit to get votes. Although he seems to have really misread the room by doing fundraising for loathed charter schools a few days ago in the midst of a hugely popular teachers strike against charter schools. Also, he fucking loves big pharma and Israel, going so far as to co-sponsor a bill to block BDS. He's going to get absolutely no support from the left of the party, and nothing from the centre who are rallying around Harris. He can't even cynically run on identity politics since Harris beats him by being black and a woman.

Also, he completely made up the drug dealer mate T-bone. Fucking odd little man. He'll get about 2% in the first primary and immediately drop out.

[garnish]

Also he claims to have a girlfriend, but no one has seen her yet.  He really is an odd little liar.

[Mister Six]

To be fair, she lives in Canada.

[Monsieur Verdoux]

i thought he was dating Rosario Dawson

[Urinal Cake]

Sanders has too big a target on his back. After 'spoiling ' 2016 and allowing  a path for AOC etc  he's going to be targeted early. I expect Gillibrand, Booker and others will gang up on him. Warren and Harris will offer make overtures towards his policies but without really defending him.

Warren should have this if she can hold her nerve against personal attacks against her. Gabbard has a chance as an outsider and should drag the Dems towards an anti-interventionism foreign policy.

[Mister Six]

Reluctant to try to second guess things after 2016, especially this early, but I wouldn't expect much from Gabbard. The homophobia, Islamophobia and Modi-friendliness will not endear her to the wider Dem audience, regardless of her subsequent backtracking.

[Urinal Cake]

Gabbard has to simply promise to turnover transgender bans in the bathroom and military and I expect for most progressives it will be a sign of her growth and acceptance.
The Modi/Islam/Zionist things I don't think people will care about unless they have a stake in the argument or it's seen that she's in their pocket.

Sanders and Warren have been cautious with their foreign policy while Gabbard has been clear.

[Pearly-Dewdrops Drops]

Booker is not as terrible as The Internet Left has declared (grading on the scale where every single candidate is terrible). I'm not convinced that he's not more progressive than Warren, for example.

[Twed]

Oh you've convinced me then

[Pearly-Dewdrops Drops]

Oh you've convinced me then

My primary goal in life.

[Dog Botherer]

Warren isn't particularly progressive, which shows how useless Booker is in that he can't even fake being more progressive than her.

Early days yet, but I can't see past Harris, Warren, or Bernie. And only one of those will beat Trump handily.

[Paul Calf]

Cory Booker sounds like the name of a talent agent for male strippers.

You don't need to thank me for this contribution.

[greencalx]

I keep reading Cory Booker as Charlie Brooker and get mightily confused.

[biggytitbo]

The problem with the anti interventionist candidates is i'm not sure how much we should believe any of them. Gabbard has gone further than normal but it's actually quite de rigeur to campaign on an anti war platform, the last 3 presidents did to various extents and it tends to play well with the voters. What's not allowed is to actually have an anti interventionist policy when you win.

[Urinal Cake]

Considering Gabbard met with Assad, met with Trump, stopped taking donations from Defence contractors and has been on tours of duty I think she's pretty sincere. Plus it's pretty hard to call a Democrat weak on terror if they've aerved. Obviously the deep state/BAU would try and stop that and I think the exception of terrorism will be broadened.

I think with Sanders etc it still is that problem of being seen as weak or naive.

[Twed]

Oh my Jesus Christ. Tomorrow, mainstream Dems are announcing their "Medicare For More" plan, a sensible adult alternative to the childish ideas of made old Bernie Sanders. It offers the plebs this: the option to buy into Medicare at 50 instead of 65.

They have got to go. Imagine doing this. Imagine fucking thinking this will trick the people into thinking you're good, because it sounds a bit like "Medicare For All". To them this is progressive, because what they really want is to give people a Voucher Incentive Work To Live Program, where $2000 a month is funneled directly in savings accounts for sixth yachts for health industry executives, which buys workers the right to be entered into a lottery draw to authorise the possibility of being maybe allowed to make a GoFundMe to raise money for their insulin for a week.

[Twed]

Here is a Republican response:



Make no mistake in thinking that this in opposition to the Democrat's announcement. It is absolutely the system working with itself. The Republican party's job is to make the Democrat's measly suggestions look objectionable to shift the window waaaay to the right and keep the public's expectations where they want them to be. As long as the rich win, both parties win.

[greencalx]

I had an interesting round of email correspondence with a colleague in the US who apologised for being away from work and recounted his experience with the health service. He is recently retired, and fairly well-to-do, also a native and understands the system well. To cut a long story short, he explained that he had experienced some very long waits going through the system. I remarked that I had understood one of the main advantages of a private / insurance based system is that you at least get seen quickly.  To this he responded that this is only the case if you're a Saudi Prince.

[Twed]

Yeah, the idea that mandatory health insurance means that you get a Bupa-level of service is a complete myth. It's unheard of to get a same-day appointment where I live. The dreaded death panels are an everyday fact of life. Insurers regularly deny things that the doctor has prescribed for a patient if they don't like how it looks for them financially. They also run tricks to get their customers to supply data about themselves to give them a reason to put together a profile that lets them deny as much as possible, e.g. "hey, here's a free Fitbit!". Did you know that home medical equipment like CPAP machines are fitted with sim cards to give them mobile data? They upload your usage patterns so that the insurer can say "sorry, you're not using it as prescribed, we're going to stop paying for it".

This isn't anecdotal evidence that is an example of the worst-case scenario. These are pulled straight from my immediate social circle/partners. These have happened on my health insurance plan. These are the middle-class level of fuckery - just imagine how bad it gets for people who struggle financially.

Any politician who isn't giving full-throated support to a single-payer, government healthcare system is a cunt. Simple as that. There's no grey area, no subtlety in this one. They are prickish cunts who think that people should die to support their own careers, and I will see them up against the wall.

[Twed]

Did you know that home medical equipment like CPAP machines are fitted with sim cards to give them mobile data? They upload your usage patterns so that the insurer can say "sorry, you're not using it as prescribed, we're going to stop paying for it".

I know that sounds mad, but hey: https://www.resmed.com/us/en/healthcare-professional/airsolutions/air-solutions-support/data-faqs.html

compliance data

[greencalx]

It's just as well that when we are able to strike our own trade deal with the US, we will be able to enforce an NHS style model on them, and not the other way round.

[Twed]

Kamala receiving a stream of high-profile endorsements, each one covered in news headlines. The DNC has chosen its candidate. They will align everything in her favour, the media will include super-delegates in her delegate totals to make it seem like she's 100+ ahead of where she actually is at all times. The voting process for her demographics will be smooth and uneventful. Please enjoy Kamala 2020.

[Twed]

Oh, well, would you look at that: https://twitter.com/politico/status/1096836623982100485

[Ferris]

I'm not paying that much attention - what is the lowdown on Harris?

[Twed]

Hillary 2.0. Corporate. Has put a generation of black people in jail. Tried to put parents of truant children in jail and cackled about it. Has no populist policies, but sure does have a lot of merchandise on her campaign website and probably can't grasp the problem with that.

https://www.jacobinmag.com/2017/08/kamala-harris-trump-obama-california-attorney-general

Probably the most balanced take I could give you. I don't necessarily want to just share the rabid multi-post Twitter takedowns.

tldr; is regularly to the right of Republicans

More Kamala Harris stuff for those interested:

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/01/17/opinion/kamala-harris-criminal-justice.html

https://theintercept.com/2019/01/20/a-problem-for-kamala-harris-can-a-prosecutor-become-president-in-the-age-of-black-lives-matter/

tldr; bad 'un

In short, she very much needs to not happen.

[Satchmo Distel]

If the Dems pick a scumbag like Harris, will it make it less painful when Trump gets back in, compared to Trump beating Bernie or Warren on the back of a red scare social media campaign funded by the Russians?

In other words, can we just ignore the six-month shitshow of a Trump-Warren election and assume Trump continues on, if it's just a scumbag v scumbag election?

Harris would pick Supreme Court judges and piss of the GOP knuckledraggers just by being in the White House, which might be a reason to want her to win, but the price would be 4 years of frustration that a Democrat President is implementing neoliberal neocon policies not that different from those of Reagan and the Bushes.

[Urinal Cake]

Harris seems better on healthcare than Warren but that could be because Harris has been more vague.

I think Harris is more Obama than Clinton. She does possess some charisma at least with media/Washington types.

[Pearly-Dewdrops Drops]

If the Dems pick a scumbag like Harris, will it make it less painful when Trump gets back in, compared to Trump beating Bernie or Warren on the back of a red scare social media campaign funded by the Russians?

In other words, can we just ignore the six-month shitshow of a Trump-Warren election and assume Trump continues on, if it's just a scumbag v scumbag election?

Harris would pick Supreme Court judges and piss of the GOP knuckledraggers just by being in the White House, which might be a reason to want her to win, but the price would be 4 years of frustration that a Democrat President is implementing neoliberal neocon policies not that different from those of Reagan and the Bushes.

They're all scumbags. Bernie Sanders is a scumbag. AOC will shortly turn into a scumbag.

The only question as a voter is who of several options has the least bad policies.

I don't think Harris or Booker are that bad compared to the candidates the Dems have been putting forward for the last 40+ years (by which I mean they are pleasantly not bad compared to those candidates).

[Twed]

That is absolute wet nonsense. No, people with the same politics as Thatcher are not the same as the closest thing the US has had to a mainstream economic left since FDR.