2020 Presidential Election

[RockOn]

Yes that would be so refreshing to have one who respects the office and law!!!

Thanks for your post.

[cathexis]

Originally Posted by kittygrrl

we have over 200 bills pending in the Senate. I am hoping fervently that somehow we win majority in the Senate and keep our majority in House...and have a new president that respects the office and the law.

What a wishful thing, happy ever after dream. There are times I certainly wish humankind deserved that kind of break from this pessimistic thinking cynic.

What do you intend to do with those 200+ pieces of stagnant legislation? Won't they expire prior to resolution.

[Orema]

How ‘White Guilt’ in the Age of Trump Shapes the Democratic Primary

The changing racial attitudes of white liberals are changing how 2020 candidates try to win votes.


A crowd listening to Senator Kamala Harris in Ankeny, Iowa.
Credit: Daniel Acker for The New York Times

By Astead W. Herndon

ANKENY, Iowa — When Donald Trump was elected, John Olsen felt enraged by the racial tension that fueled his rise, the silence of his white neighbors and the stories of racial discrimination he heard from his nonwhite friends.

Black friends said they were followed around department stores, so Mr. Olsen, who is white, became a member of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People. He thought that white Americans were scared of the country’s growing Latino population, so he joined the League of United Latin American Citizens. He now registers voters weekly, including with the League of Women Voters, to atone for his “white privilege,” he said.

“I try to have my bases covered,” said Mr. Olsen, 50, who wore a N.A.A.C.P. T-shirt to a campaign rally for Senator Kamala Harris here last week. “It just hurts my heart that white people are afraid of the country’s growing Hispanic population. And I just can’t allow that to continue.”

White liberals — voters like Mr. Olsen — are thinking more explicitly about race than they did even a decade ago, according to new research and polling. In one survey, an overwhelming majority said that racial discrimination affects the lives of black people. They embrace terms like “structural racism” and “white privilege.”

The shift in white liberal attitudes on race might be a permanent one, helped along by a changing media environment and heightened cultural sensitivity, or it could be a more fleeting reaction to the current polarized moment.

Either way, it means that in the Democratic primary, candidates have an incentive to talk to white voters explicitly about race — an incentive that is especially apparent now that a half-dozen Democrats are intensifying their campaigning in the key early states of Iowa and New Hampshire.

In Iowa last week, Ms. Harris delivered a revamped stump speech that seemed tailored to these changing attitudes. At an outdoor market in Ankeny, just outside Des Moines, she spoke to the fears some white voters might have about supporting a woman of color. In her pitch, she cast herself as an embodiment of racial progress.

“People are asking, ‘Oh, I don’t know, is America ready for that? Are they ready for a woman of color to be elected president of the United States?’” Ms. Harris told the crowd.

“Look, it’s not a new conversation for me. In fact, it’s a conversation that’s come up every single time in every election that I have — and here’s the operative word — won,” she said. Her largely white audience liked the pitch, responding with rapt silence and then with raucous applause when she talked candidly about her own accomplishments.

For years, prospective Democratic nominees came to Iowa to talk ethanol and pork subsidies and saved any rhetoric about the injustice of racial profiling for crowds in South Carolina and Nevada — the only early voting states where black and Latino voters made up a significant portion of the Democratic electorate.

But in the era of Mr. Trump, and after social movements such as Black Lives Matter pushed racial inequality to the forefront of national politics, it’s white Democrats in Iowa and New Hampshire — not black ones in South Carolina — who, to this point, are embracing the candidates who promise to upend society in the name of racial equity.

Former Vice President Joseph R. Biden Jr. has held a commanding lead in national polls with nonwhite Democrats, but surveys show that white liberals in Iowa and New Hampshire are less inclined to support him. At events for Mr. Biden, some white voters cite his confounding September debate answer on the legacy of slavery and previous Senate work with segregationists as reasons to support other candidates.

At events for Senator Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts, and Pete Buttigieg, the mayor of South Bend, Ind. — two white candidates who have particularly excelled with college-educated liberals — supporters pointed to policies addressing racial inequalities as part of the candidates’ appeal.

These policies may give cover to those seeking to support a white candidate in a historically diverse Democratic field, which includes Ms. Harris, Senator Cory Booker of New Jersey, and former cabinet secretary Julián Castro — candidates who are themselves racial minorities and who are struggling to gain traction in the polls.

“My daughter is marrying an Asian man and diversity has become very important to me,” said Julie Neff, a 57-year-old Iowa Democrat who attended the Harris rally. Ms. Neff, who is white, said she was embarrassed that she started thinking about race and discrimination only later in life.

“I should’ve been paying attention to this stuff sooner. But when Trump is making these decisions, I just realized it would be bad for my son-in-law and my grandchildren,” she said.


Ms. Harris cast herself as racial progress personified at an event in Ankeny, Iowa, on Monday.
Credit: Daniel Acker for The New York Times

According to research by Zach Goldberg, a Georgia State University doctoral student, the attitudes of white liberals like Ms. Neff have moved dramatically in a short time.

In 2010, about 40 percent of white liberals said “blacks who can’t get ahead in this country are mostly responsible for their own condition.” Now, that number has dropped to 24 percent, and more than 70 percent of white liberals say “racial discrimination is the main reason why many black people can’t get ahead these days.”

Mr. Goldberg said he believed that Mr. Trump’s election combined with a digital media environment where race has been covered more explicitly have pushed white liberals into adopting new positions.

“Before, if a black person was shot by police you could read about it in a newspaper, now you see a video,” Mr. Goldberg said. “A video is morally evocative and that has effect on the moral psychology of liberals."

The result, Mr. Goldberg said, is that white liberals want “to be the exact opposite of racist. They go adopt positions to prove they’re different than the morally tainted collective.”

But this is not a strategy without risk, Mr. Goldberg noted. Voters in a general election, including Republicans and independents, do not share the liberal views about race that white Democrats do. Positions that some leading Democrats have embraced, including reparations for black Americans, could become liabilities.

“When you think about it, this is why blacks may be supporting Biden the way they do,” Mr. Goldberg said. “They know this may not sell to the rest of white America come general election time.”

In the early days of Ms. Warren’s candidacy, the differences among Democratic primary voters were most clear when she discussed low black homeownership rates — a standard portion of her policy-heavy stump speech. Black audiences in Mississippi and Alabama often seemed unmoved, already well aware of the problem Ms. Warren outlined. In Iowa, predominantly white groups reacted dramatically — often with oohs and ahhs and the occasional applause.

At events for Ms. Harris last week, several white voters said that the president’s reliance on white identity politics to motivate his conservative base had forced them to reorganize their own voting priorities.

Ms. Neff’s husband, Bill, wore a Black Lives Matter T-shirt to the evening rally.

“We had Obama and we thought this racial stuff was over — and then we went backward,” he said. “We’ve seen so many old white guys who are O.K. with the status quo, and that’s not O.K. anymore.”

People like the Neffs and Mr. Olsen could have an outsize effect on the 2020 primary, and the Democratic Party going forward. The largely white voters in the earliest nominating contests in Iowa and New Hampshire determine which candidates appear viable by the time people in more diverse states head to the voting booth.

Barack Obama famously exploited this playbook in 2008, winning white liberals in Iowa before unlocking his support among black voters. This year’s most prominent black candidates — Mr. Booker and Ms. Harris — are both seeking to repeat that strategy, and have staked their candidacies on a good showing with those same white liberals in the first-in-the-nation caucus.


People were eager to ask former Vvice President Joseph R. Biden Jr. questions during an event in Manchester, N.H., on Wednesday.
Credit: Elizabeth Frantz for The New York Times

But the candidate most affected by the attitude shift among white liberals may be Mr. Biden. He has crafted his campaign pitch around replacing Mr. Trump with a steady hand, and in his campaign announcement video featured the president’s waffling response to the racist and anti-Semitic marchers in Charlottesville, Va.,.

Mr. Biden enjoys a significant advantage among black voters, fueled by their pragmatic desire to see Mr. Trump replaced and good feelings carried over from his time as Mr. Obama’s vice president. For white liberal voters, though, the affection for Mr. Biden is not as firm.

Martha Wasmund, 64, said at the Harris event in Ankeny that she preferred the California senator, and was rejecting Mr. Biden’s candidacy because of the fond way he recalled working with segregationist lawmakers. Ms. Wasmund is white.

“That good ol’ boy network doesn’t work,” she said, referring to Mr. Biden’s legislative work with avowed racists in the 1970s and 1980s.

Janelle Turner, 50, brought her 12-year-old daughter to Ms. Harris’s rally. She is white and said she’s seen a change in Democrats in her majority-white community.

“People have realized that this stuff is important and that Trump has made racial division greater,” Ms. Turner said. “I’m a breast cancer survivor and health care is a huge issue for me, but this stuff is too.”

Some black voters see privilege in such responses. Dacia Randolph, a 43-year-old in Reno, Nev., said black voters are sticking with Mr. Biden not because they are unaware of his past, but because they see defeating Mr. Trump as an urgent priority.

She called Mr. Biden a “safe bet,” pointing to polls that show him ahead of Mr. Trump in the general election and the surprising results of the 2016 election.

“Black people go with who we trust,” Ms. Randolph said. “We make people prove themselves.”

Astead W. Herndon is a national political reporter based in New York. He was previously a Washington-based political reporter and a City Hall reporter for The Boston Globe.

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/10/13/u...gtype=Homepage

[dark_crystal]

I used to get really indignant about Republican hypocrisy and be all...

"how can they say lgbt discrimination is about religious freedom when there are religions who don't support lgbt discrimination?"

"how can they say they want low taxes when they force the military to pay for aircraft they already said they don't want or need?"

"How can they claim to want law and order and then protect law-breaking politicians?"

"how can they say they want traditional values when they are all divorced?"

"how can they say they are pro-life when they block laws that would save lives?"

"How can they say they are pro-2nd amendment and not be furious about the murder of Philando Castile?"

My head would explode!

But now i understand that you can't listen to what they say they want. They claim whatever they have to in order to make a plausible cover story, all they actually want is white supremacy.

"Conservatives" do not want to "conserve" traditional values, what they want to "conserve" is traditional hierarchies.

They don't want to save babies, they want to stop feminists. They don't want safe streets, they want jailed minorities. They don't want low taxes, they want to starve poor people, they don't want religious freedom, they want theocracy.

Every policy they promote is designed to make sure the people on top get to stay on top. Rhetoric has no meaning to them because the text is always subtext.

We keep trying to argue from the text and it has no effect because they are all in on this secret.

We point out glaring contradictions and they just roll their eyes. That's not because they are stubborn or stupid, it's because words don't matter to them. There's an inside joke only they get and it's that they all know their official rhetoric is just a series of cover stories and the real goal is (well, was) never spoken aloud.

For the record, they think we are also doing this. They say our policies of social justice are actually a secret agenda to destroy the church, get free stuff, and punish white folks.

[CherylNYC]

Originally Posted by Orema

How ‘White Guilt’ in the Age of Trump Shapes the Democratic Primary

The changing racial attitudes of white liberals are changing how 2020 candidates try to win votes.


A crowd listening to Senator Kamala Harris in Ankeny, Iowa.
Credit: Daniel Acker for The New York Times

By Astead W. Herndon

ANKENY, Iowa — When Donald Trump was elected, John Olsen felt enraged by the racial tension that fueled his rise, the silence of his white neighbors and the stories of racial discrimination he heard from his nonwhite friends.

Black friends said they were followed around department stores, so Mr. Olsen, who is white, became a member of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People. He thought that white Americans were scared of the country’s growing Latino population, so he joined the League of United Latin American Citizens. He now registers voters weekly, including with the League of Women Voters, to atone for his “white privilege,” he said.

“I try to have my bases covered,” said Mr. Olsen, 50, who wore a N.A.A.C.P. T-shirt to a campaign rally for Senator Kamala Harris here last week. “It just hurts my heart that white people are afraid of the country’s growing Hispanic population. And I just can’t allow that to continue.”

White liberals — voters like Mr. Olsen — are thinking more explicitly about race than they did even a decade ago, according to new research and polling. In one survey, an overwhelming majority said that racial discrimination affects the lives of black people. They embrace terms like “structural racism” and “white privilege.”

The shift in white liberal attitudes on race might be a permanent one, helped along by a changing media environment and heightened cultural sensitivity, or it could be a more fleeting reaction to the current polarized moment.

Either way, it means that in the Democratic primary, candidates have an incentive to talk to white voters explicitly about race — an incentive that is especially apparent now that a half-dozen Democrats are intensifying their campaigning in the key early states of Iowa and New Hampshire.

In Iowa last week, Ms. Harris delivered a revamped stump speech that seemed tailored to these changing attitudes. At an outdoor market in Ankeny, just outside Des Moines, she spoke to the fears some white voters might have about supporting a woman of color. In her pitch, she cast herself as an embodiment of racial progress.

“People are asking, ‘Oh, I don’t know, is America ready for that? Are they ready for a woman of color to be elected president of the United States?’” Ms. Harris told the crowd.

“Look, it’s not a new conversation for me. In fact, it’s a conversation that’s come up every single time in every election that I have — and here’s the operative word — won,” she said. Her largely white audience liked the pitch, responding with rapt silence and then with raucous applause when she talked candidly about her own accomplishments.

For years, prospective Democratic nominees came to Iowa to talk ethanol and pork subsidies and saved any rhetoric about the injustice of racial profiling for crowds in South Carolina and Nevada — the only early voting states where black and Latino voters made up a significant portion of the Democratic electorate.

But in the era of Mr. Trump, and after social movements such as Black Lives Matter pushed racial inequality to the forefront of national politics, it’s white Democrats in Iowa and New Hampshire — not black ones in South Carolina — who, to this point, are embracing the candidates who promise to upend society in the name of racial equity.

Former Vice President Joseph R. Biden Jr. has held a commanding lead in national polls with nonwhite Democrats, but surveys show that white liberals in Iowa and New Hampshire are less inclined to support him. At events for Mr. Biden, some white voters cite his confounding September debate answer on the legacy of slavery and previous Senate work with segregationists as reasons to support other candidates.

At events for Senator Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts, and Pete Buttigieg, the mayor of South Bend, Ind. — two white candidates who have particularly excelled with college-educated liberals — supporters pointed to policies addressing racial inequalities as part of the candidates’ appeal.

These policies may give cover to those seeking to support a white candidate in a historically diverse Democratic field, which includes Ms. Harris, Senator Cory Booker of New Jersey, and former cabinet secretary Julián Castro — candidates who are themselves racial minorities and who are struggling to gain traction in the polls.

“My daughter is marrying an Asian man and diversity has become very important to me,” said Julie Neff, a 57-year-old Iowa Democrat who attended the Harris rally. Ms. Neff, who is white, said she was embarrassed that she started thinking about race and discrimination only later in life.

“I should’ve been paying attention to this stuff sooner. But when Trump is making these decisions, I just realized it would be bad for my son-in-law and my grandchildren,” she said.


Ms. Harris cast herself as racial progress personified at an event in Ankeny, Iowa, on Monday.
Credit: Daniel Acker for The New York Times

According to research by Zach Goldberg, a Georgia State University doctoral student, the attitudes of white liberals like Ms. Neff have moved dramatically in a short time.

In 2010, about 40 percent of white liberals said “blacks who can’t get ahead in this country are mostly responsible for their own condition.” Now, that number has dropped to 24 percent, and more than 70 percent of white liberals say “racial discrimination is the main reason why many black people can’t get ahead these days.”

Mr. Goldberg said he believed that Mr. Trump’s election combined with a digital media environment where race has been covered more explicitly have pushed white liberals into adopting new positions.

“Before, if a black person was shot by police you could read about it in a newspaper, now you see a video,” Mr. Goldberg said. “A video is morally evocative and that has effect on the moral psychology of liberals."

The result, Mr. Goldberg said, is that white liberals want “to be the exact opposite of racist. They go adopt positions to prove they’re different than the morally tainted collective.”

But this is not a strategy without risk, Mr. Goldberg noted. Voters in a general election, including Republicans and independents, do not share the liberal views about race that white Democrats do. Positions that some leading Democrats have embraced, including reparations for black Americans, could become liabilities.

“When you think about it, this is why blacks may be supporting Biden the way they do,” Mr. Goldberg said. “They know this may not sell to the rest of white America come general election time.”

In the early days of Ms. Warren’s candidacy, the differences among Democratic primary voters were most clear when she discussed low black homeownership rates — a standard portion of her policy-heavy stump speech. Black audiences in Mississippi and Alabama often seemed unmoved, already well aware of the problem Ms. Warren outlined. In Iowa, predominantly white groups reacted dramatically — often with oohs and ahhs and the occasional applause.

At events for Ms. Harris last week, several white voters said that the president’s reliance on white identity politics to motivate his conservative base had forced them to reorganize their own voting priorities.

Ms. Neff’s husband, Bill, wore a Black Lives Matter T-shirt to the evening rally.

“We had Obama and we thought this racial stuff was over — and then we went backward,” he said. “We’ve seen so many old white guys who are O.K. with the status quo, and that’s not O.K. anymore.”

People like the Neffs and Mr. Olsen could have an outsize effect on the 2020 primary, and the Democratic Party going forward. The largely white voters in the earliest nominating contests in Iowa and New Hampshire determine which candidates appear viable by the time people in more diverse states head to the voting booth.

Barack Obama famously exploited this playbook in 2008, winning white liberals in Iowa before unlocking his support among black voters. This year’s most prominent black candidates — Mr. Booker and Ms. Harris — are both seeking to repeat that strategy, and have staked their candidacies on a good showing with those same white liberals in the first-in-the-nation caucus.


People were eager to ask former Vvice President Joseph R. Biden Jr. questions during an event in Manchester, N.H., on Wednesday.
Credit: Elizabeth Frantz for The New York Times

But the candidate most affected by the attitude shift among white liberals may be Mr. Biden. He has crafted his campaign pitch around replacing Mr. Trump with a steady hand, and in his campaign announcement video featured the president’s waffling response to the racist and anti-Semitic marchers in Charlottesville, Va.,.

Mr. Biden enjoys a significant advantage among black voters, fueled by their pragmatic desire to see Mr. Trump replaced and good feelings carried over from his time as Mr. Obama’s vice president. For white liberal voters, though, the affection for Mr. Biden is not as firm.

Martha Wasmund, 64, said at the Harris event in Ankeny that she preferred the California senator, and was rejecting Mr. Biden’s candidacy because of the fond way he recalled working with segregationist lawmakers. Ms. Wasmund is white.

“That good ol’ boy network doesn’t work,” she said, referring to Mr. Biden’s legislative work with avowed racists in the 1970s and 1980s.

Janelle Turner, 50, brought her 12-year-old daughter to Ms. Harris’s rally. She is white and said she’s seen a change in Democrats in her majority-white community.

“People have realized that this stuff is important and that Trump has made racial division greater,” Ms. Turner said. “I’m a breast cancer survivor and health care is a huge issue for me, but this stuff is too.”

Some black voters see privilege in such responses. Dacia Randolph, a 43-year-old in Reno, Nev., said black voters are sticking with Mr. Biden not because they are unaware of his past, but because they see defeating Mr. Trump as an urgent priority.

She called Mr. Biden a “safe bet,” pointing to polls that show him ahead of Mr. Trump in the general election and the surprising results of the 2016 election.

“Black people go with who we trust,” Ms. Randolph said. “We make people prove themselves.”

Astead W. Herndon is a national political reporter based in New York. He was previously a Washington-based political reporter and a City Hall reporter for The Boston Globe.

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/10/13/u...gtype=Homepage

Oh, MAN! Where can we even begin to deconstruct this mess? White people can't be legitimately concerned with racial justice, we can only be victims of white guilt? We can't work towards equality because it's the right thing to do, but because we're trying to "atone (for our) white privilege"?? We're so guilty that we're willing to "upend society" by voting for a person of color?!! Soooo, I was kinda sad about it, but I noticed that Barack Obama was President for eight years and society didn't 'upend'. Not even a little.

This reporter cynically paints anti-racist sentiment amongst white people as an unsophisticated strategy and as a reactive stance, not as a legitimate point of view. Gah!

[Orema]

Originally Posted by CherylNYC

Oh, MAN! Where can we even begin to deconstruct this mess? White people can't be legitimately concerned with racial justice, we can only be victims of white guilt? We can't work towards equality because it's the right thing to do, but because we're trying to "atone (for our) white privilege"?? We're so guilty that we're willing to "upend society" by voting for a person of color?!! Soooo, I was kinda sad about it, but I noticed that Barack Obama was President for eight years and society didn't 'upend'. Not even a little.

This reporter cynically paints anti-racist sentiment amongst white people as an unsophisticated strategy and as a reactive stance, not as a legitimate point of view. Gah!

It is a reactive stance for some white people who are now interested in fighting racism. Not because its the right thing to do, but because now it affects them. And that's how change is usually made—as a reactionary measure against something that is touching someone's life.

This isn't an indictment against white people, especially not anti-racists—it's an examination on how SOME liberal voters in Iowa are changing their views on race and as a result, the politicians are changing how the speak with those voters.

[C0LLETTE]

Does anyone know the positions of the individual presidential Democratic candidates on the American withdrawal from the Syrian/Turkish border?

[CherylNYC]

Originally Posted by Orema

It is a reactive stance for some white people who are now interested in fighting racism. Not because its the right thing to do, but because now it affects them. And that's how change is usually made—as a reactionary measure against something that is touching someone's life.

This isn't an indictment against white people, especially not anti-racists—it's an examination on how SOME liberal voters in Iowa are changing their views on race and as a result, the politicians are changing how the speak with those voters.

Yes, I agree that some people won't care about justice until injustice touches them personally. That's a universal truth, but the writer seems to think anti-racism activism is slightly ridiculous. He doesn't write about 'some' liberals. He generalizes about liberals. Period. He specifically claims that the entire Democratic party is being pushed to a reactive stance by liberal white guilt. The thing that gives his bias away is that he doesn't ever mention the possibility that people who are not black might be interested in racial justice because it's simply the right thing to do. Only that they're feeling guilty and/or that it's a new strategy.

I think the headline sets the tone. Mildly derisive. Scare quotes around 'White Guilt'. The tone of the rest of article doesn't get any better. I get upset about this sort of thing because it's so important. The faint whiff of ridicule will turn a person sour.

[kittygrrl]

i think doing the right thing means different things depending on who you are and your experience..frankly i don't give a damn why someone changes their view on the harm racism causes..as long as they change..i'm happy..it's a beginning

[Orema]

Originally Posted by CherylNYC

Yes, I agree that some people won't care about justice until injustice touches them personally. That's a universal truth, but the writer seems to think anti-racism activism is slightly ridiculous. He doesn't write about 'some' liberals. He generalizes about liberals. Period. He specifically claims that the entire Democratic party is being pushed to a reactive stance by liberal white guilt. The thing that gives his bias away is that he doesn't ever mention the possibility that people who are not black might be interested in racial justice because it's simply the right thing to do. Only that they're feeling guilty and/or that it's a new strategy.

I think the headline sets the tone. Mildly derisive. Scare quotes around 'White Guilt'. The tone of the rest of article doesn't get any better. I get upset about this sort of thing because it's so important. The faint whiff of ridicule will turn a person sour.

I think you're reading more into this than there is. He writes about (all) White liberals having stronger attitudes on race than ever before, but that's not assigning guilt to all White anti-racists. His stance on changing attitudes explains why candidates are discussing race as never before—they are forced to (thank goodness) because of those changing attitudes. This is the crux of the article.

I found all of his points valid and felt no sense of ridicule nor intentional derisiveness.

We will continue to disagree on this.

[Martina]

So, if you had to choose between Elizabeth Warren and Pete Buttigieg, which one would get your vote and why?

[Kätzchen]

I am leaving room in my mind so I can make an decision later about who will get my vote. Bottom line: I'm voting for any democrat on the ticket. No matter who is endorsed by the Democrats for President.

Super proud of US Diplomat's overseeing Ukraine affairs, who have spoke out about the latest fiasco caused by you-know-who.

I have no idea how dirty and down right ugly it will get with removing that monster from the WH, but I'm sure it will be as ugly and dirty as it could possibly be because that's how controlling, manipulative, and pathologically disturbed personalities seem to operate. They never leave quietly. They have no conscience and are unable to care about anything. Which is sad and heartbreaking.

All I know is I am so grateful for those who DO have a conscience and remain committed to upholding democracy for the sake of everyone in our country. Their efforts are beyond heroic and I do not take their vigilance and tireless efforts for granted.

[CherylNYC]

Originally Posted by Martina

So, if you had to choose between Elizabeth Warren and Pete Buttigieg, which one would get your vote and why?

I'm for Warren. She worked hard to generate sophisticated, viable plans, and she gets better and better at campaigning. I prefer Buttigeig's health plan- 'Medicare for All Who Want It', to Warren and Sanders's 'Medicare For All', but I doubt any of them will be able to shepherd either of those plans through the legislature. Otherwise I like everything about Warren. I think she's going to win the nomination, too.

That said, I agree with Katzchen. I'm voting for the Democrat, even if it's Biden.

[dark_crystal]

Originally Posted by Martina

So, if you had to choose between Elizabeth Warren and Pete Buttigieg, which one would get your vote and why?

Warren. I started out liking Pete but as a candidate he seems a little Manchurian to me now

[charley]

Originally Posted by Martina

So, if you had to choose between Elizabeth Warren and Pete Buttigieg, which one would get your vote and why?

Warren was the only one who got my attention, and who I actually watched attentively in the debate. I don't trust any of the men (ditto in Canadian politics). [P.S.: Jody Wilson-Raybould - the Canadian Attorney-General and justice minister who lost her job in the majority Liberal govt because of the SNC-Lavalin scandal and Trudeau's lack of integrity, ran as an Independent in B.C., and won! ] As a Canadian, obviously, I can't vote. But as a member of this site, am only throwing in my 2 cents.

[~ocean]

we need to physically remove Trump ~ the republicans looked like school yard fools w/ their activity today ~ desperate actions ~ we are even more divided the longer Trump is left in office ~ now I know why some ctry's throw shoes lol DUCK TRUMP incoming !!!

[cathexis]

Originally Posted by Martina

So, if you had to choose between Elizabeth Warren and Pete Buttigieg, which one would get your vote and why?

Warren has the experience necessary for representing the US in the International arena. Her healthcare model is one of the better among the candidates. Buttigieg may improve with more experience, but he is a little too religious and conservative.
Like many others here, I will vote for any of the Democrats. Would rather vote third party Socialist, but will not waste my vote risking Trump remaining in office. I would vote for a lemur if it would get Trump OUT.

[Martina]

Well, Beto is gone. From The Guardian, discussing reasons the campaign failed:

O’Rourke came up against a younger, smarter version of himself: Pete Buttigieg, the 37-year-old mayor of South Bend, Indiana, a military veteran who spoke more fluently, offered crisper policy prescriptions and stole O’Rourke’s thunder – as well as many of his potential voters.

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/...2020-democrats

[dark_crystal]

Texas Democratic Primary (3/3/2020) Polling as of 9/15/2019

Biden
28%
O'Rourke
19%
Sanders
17%
Warren
11%
Booker
6%
Harris
6%
Castro
4%
Buttigieg
4%

It will be VERY interesting to see who benefits most from Beto quitting. It could be Buttigieg! He's doing better nationally than he has any right to be

Also I think a whole bunch of them are about to quit.

[Kätzchen]

I rarely watch TV, but I am sitting at a family member's home this morning, watching a GOP controlled local TV station, whose anchor is interviewing someone who the majority of GOP viewers view as a credible source of information. *PUKE*

They're talking about how Walden (R-Oregon) is stepping down from his twenty year tenure of reigning on the Oregon House Committee for Power/Energy/Utilities. I'm glad he is stepping down for a multitude of reasons, one of which he is in cahoots with Berkshire/Hathaway's Warren Buffett who is a gazillionaire of extraordinary means, and most likely has steered policy in favor of Buffett for years and years.

All this to say, is that I am worried sick over who Republicans will help elect another puppet to take Walden's place. It's a complication in Oregon politics because Oregon, with the exception of the 'Pale Blue Dot', is a bonafide "RED" state.

The GOP is not the GOP of the Eisenhower years … or maybe the GOP has been that way all along and it's only now, nearly after 50 years of my life, that I truly am able to see how sick the GOP actually is and has been, all along.

I'm grateful we have Gov Kate Brown (DEM) in office still, but when it's time to elect an governor in two years or so, it's worrisome to me the problematic issues that still dominate Oregon politics (Labor issues, Tax issues, Corporate Raider issues, Toxic members of the GOP who pass policy that is harmful to residents of Oregon, etc).

I actually saw an article online at CNN about how you-know-who is forecast to win the Presidential election in 2020.

I was like: When will people rise to say, NO F^CKING WAY?

Now that I am in a better work situation, I plan to devote as much free time I have on weekends, to help network in face-to-face situations to help people understand how important it is, to not let the GOP or that monster in the WH have any access at all to any seat of power in the US.

We, the general we, in my estimation, are sitting at an all time high of major change that will impact people for generations to come.

Will people elect a dictator to power again, or will people wake the fuck up and elect a person from the Democratic party to help usher in and promote social order, rather than the daily tide of toxic lies and social harm?

I won't stand by and watch our country go down in flames.

12 months from today. Make it count. Vote BLUE.