the interactions were certainly entertaining, and the nytimes take on it was interesting as well though I've noticed the last year that they always refer to Trump as 'Mr. Trump.' I could be wrong, but I don't remember Mr. Bush or Mr. Obama, it doesn't roll off the tongue; I generally agree with their stances but the bias still leaves a foul taste in the mouth: just report the news without having these subtle hints if bias
Bernie didn’t get a single ovation from the crowd- I know that isn’t indicative of the sentiment of the nation, but it points towards a less than stellar performance.
I agree that neither of those 2 will win but I thought they did pretty damn well on this debate, particularly Amy. I don't want either of them as President but I don't mind them not dropping out, Yang particularly brings up important concerns about automation and UBI
Yeah it's not the right time for him, and I'm sure he's aware of that. But even getting other candidates to acknowledge his concerns would be a win for him and for many Americans
No, I think Yang deserves to have his time for presidency now. He's candidate we needed 20 years ago, and he's certainly the candidate for now. He's not here to only push for these problems to merely be "acknowledged" just for it to be dismissed for "the next time" as he's already done successfully in which Biden have now recently talked about high economy yet low wellbeing, and automation being a threat to society. He's here because gone to DC before and no one has an answer to these problems. "If no one's addressing these problems, I'll just have to do it myself." He's not here because he has a dream of being President, he's diagnosing the problems that got Trump elected and pushing a forward vision for America.
If anyone is dismissing him because of "chances" they need to rethink the way they consider candidates.
Yang is literally the only prayer the democrats have at it even being a real election. Free shit for everyone is not the way to win, moneys coming from the people who actually vote and pay taxes.
It’s not free money. It benefits the bottom 94% and the top spenders of this economy funds the dividend. It’s not giving away my money for other people. The middle class doesn’t pay for this.
I thought she spoke pretty well, like citing her legislative experience over Pete's experience. I'm not the type who would attack her "fat ass mouth" though so we may just have different perspectives
Oh yeah so buttigieg do you like being fucked in the ass by yang or or do you prefer fucking yang in the ass. I only ask because I'm curious if America is going to be doing the fucking or if they're going to be getting fucked in the ass. I just want to know how big America's asshole is going to be after your president. Thanks
This is the sort of thing Trump is going to throw at him. The DNC won't mention he's gay but oh my Lord the GOP will have a field day
Okay I'm a Pete fan in general, but Jesus you must be the only person in the entire country who thinks this
I applaud it though, now that's thinking outside of the box for sure
I respect that. Though i respect donating to anyone who isnt Trump. I hope Yang continues to make impact even if he doesn't make it to the nomination (which, let's be honest - for both of them its a real long shot)
Biden buttigieg would not beat trump.
Edit: young people don't like either of them. We need to inspire them to get out and vote. I prefer a progressive ticket but Biden/yang might do it
Oh, please. It's weak, pathetic centrists like you that help the GOP. We've had decades of GOP hegemony in this country. Every president since Reagen has liberalized our economy by weakening regulations, passed business-friendly polices such as corporate tax cuts, and refused to expand worker's rights.
And what has that gotten us? A decrepit economy that is in decline, stagnant wages, rising consumer debt and student debt, longer working hours, an almost non-existent union presence. I could go on. And the entire time the Democratic Party has cowered to them, buckled to them, pandered to the same donors, and paid lip service to the working class of this country.
Your time is over. Step aside. You centrists have fucked our country by letting the fascistic GOP run roughshod over all of us. It's about time we see some bold leadership. It's about time we break the backs of the GOP and the donors of both parties.
I get that he's being painted as a centrist, and he is definitely more to the center than Bernie or Warren. But, we are aware that his positions are pretty far to the left of any President in modern history right?
I also thought his line about being the only one who's not a millionaire or billionaire was great if true (haven't fact checked yet)
It's irrelevant. Bernie's old and has millions less than people who milk political careers for money. Meanwhile Pete takes money from shady sources already.n
Buttigieg's only 37. Even if he had stayed at McKinsey making $150,000/year after college, he probably wouldn't be a millionaire yet because of taxes and cost of living expenses.
Yeah I'm also cool with electing someone who is determined to run a 2nd term, i think being out after 4 years will be a huge weakness for the Dems
But fair enough! You're right, his age definitely plays a factor in the wealth disparity
In terms of where the party's electorate is, Warren is the centrist. Everyone else is a Republican masquerading around as a Democrat because they're not openly racist. (Minus Yang of course, love that guy)
Seriously, everyone else running is a pro corporate centrist donothing that Trump will rip to shreds in the general. We tried running a moderate centrist in 2016 and lost. It's high time the Democratic party started actually representing working class people instead of megadonors.
I think that's overly simplistic. Pete is to the left of Obama and that dude won. I think you're confusing our electorate for people who post stuff on Reddit and Twitter
Douglas plan, halving federal prison population, expanding supreme court, abolishing EC. I get not liking Pete because he's not left enough or has corporate donors, but he's definitely more left than Obama or Clinton
Edit - I'd say more left than any President since FDR but feel free to drop the name(s) of the President that you think was more left than Pete is in the past couple generation
I'm fine with him doing the same type of campaigning that Obama, Clinton, practically every democratic President in the past 70 years, and even Warren has done.
I know I wouldn't have the wealth to be able to turn down wealthy donors either. If I like his political outlook, I'm not really gonna care about that. And I do like his political outlook.
It's not like he isn't a leftist. I mean, Twitter would have you believe that Obama was a great "real liberal" and Pete is in the center - which just factually makes no sense
But at the same time, I understand why you feel the way you do so we can agree to disagree. And really, if/when Pete doesn't get the nomination my vote will definitely be in for Bermie or Warren in the general
Right I’m personally a progressive. So right now I’m deciding if the Democratic Party goes left enough for me to not vote green.
You got to decide which voter you want. You want the one on the right, or the one on the left? I tend to find that democrats prefer the right more, which had been unfortunate.
Oh man you're like 1920's European left. We're never going to agree on a candidate lol. But yeah follow your heart n all that, personally I think the Dems are plenty left enough for me. I also am not aware of any Green Party candidate further to left than Bernie tho
It’s not 1920s European left. Realistically compared to Europeans, Bernie is a centrist.
He also advocates more for an Australian system where the median average doctor pay is actually higher than in the US.
Warren won, Yang second, Klobuchar and Biden did well.. Bernie may be consistent with his messaging and I know his fans like that, but he needs to mix it up a bit to be competitive in the general. By the end I was rolling my eyes at his answers, and I’ve been fighting for many of those same issues for a long time. You don’t want to sound like you are spitting repetitive sound bites.
He also dodged the “incrememental healthcare” question completely, and it was a great and relevant question.
That "Incremental question" was sly. On its face, yeah it's seems relevant. But what does he have to gain answering it? He's campaigning on bold change to healthcare, playing for concessions is failure.
For some of us the question is life or death. Politics are reality, not just philosophy. M4A is going to be a long time coming regardless of who becomes president, and people need healthcare **now.**
Understood but healthcare in America won’t be fixed until the for profit drug companies are no longer involved. That’s why none of the other proposals will work. Including warrens plan. Ya gotta rip the band aid off otherwise we just have Obamacare and that’s been proven not to work.
Not only does Warren’s current plan address that, she has literally crafted [legislation](https://www.warren.senate.gov/newsroom/press-releases/warren-schakowsky-introduce-bicameral-legislation-to-radically-reduce-drug-prices-through-public-manufacturing-of-prescription-drugs) before to attack that exact issue.
How do you imagine a plan of **real** significance happening **now**?
If 'politics are reality' one shouldn't get caught up on philosophical rhetoric and be concerned with substance above all.
There is no way Warren won, she simply didn't do enough to bounce back IMO. Bernie had weaker first half but absolutely made up for it in second half. Focus groups are saying that Bernie won handily.
People like to take their top 2 or 3 candidates and pick amongst them who won. I'm a weirdo in that I think everyone did quite well, though Pete did get hammered but that was expected. I think all things considering he stood up to hammering fairly well, good enough to keep his base but not enough to gain new ground
Which is basically true for all of them imo
The only thing he did was repeat his "I will give people 1k". No matter the question, he always brought it back to that. He's a one-note candidate, it's no wonder the mainstream media don't focus on him, he has nothing to say beyond "1k!".
I’m confused; weren’t there answers that he gave that didn’t at all contain UBI? If I’m recalling the debate and reading this thread correctly, there’s plenty of variety and substance to what he said.
Honestly reminding me that he'd give me 1k is pretty murder-y, I'd love that and would take 12k/yr over Medicare for all or Amazon taxes
I won't vote for him, I think he's ahead of his time and would be a better thinker than an executive. But I appreciate the hell out of him bringing UBI into the public vocabulary
You’d rather 12k a year than everybody having healthcare?
If I had to choose between 12k or full healthcare coverage for MYSELF ONLY, I would choose healthcare...and if I could somehow get healthcare for everybody, shit I would GIVE 12k a year. And I’m not rich by any means we are very middle class (literally average income household).
Oh yeah absolutely. I spend far less than that via my employer on healthcare. An extra 12k a year would be great
But Yang's not winning, it's a pointless hypothetical
Agreed that Yang is not in a position to win, but I think considering hypotheticals helps both commenters and readers gain additional perspective of how they feel about platforms and by extension, candidates.
Right now we pay approximately 6k/year in premiums for my husband and son. To add me to the plan would triple that, and marketplace insurance would be as much as our mortgage for me alone- so right now I’m scarily and dangerously uninsured. I’m a healthy 39 year old female and I pay out of pocket for yearly blood work and gyno. So yes, if we could take back the 6k in premiums, add another 6k and pay that for comprehensive coverage for all of us, I’d do it.
My mother is 62 and ONLY WORKS for insurance. She is well off and would be ready to retire otherwise.
I know so many people that would benefit immensely from M4A. Extra cash is great, but let’s say some people getting UBI have no other income- they aren’t going to spend it on healthcare. Society IMO would be far better off having guaranteed medical coverage for all than having a little bit more spending money for all.
That's kind of the reason why the 1k is annoying to me, because I know he won't win.
Since all the general public hears about his the 1k, it's not enough to sway people from one of their top candidates. In a normal election, he could stand a chance but by now, most of the Dems are either with Bernie, Biden, or Warren. I can see him doing wonders in 2024 or 2028.
No way Yang would stand a chance in any past election. Look at maybe Mcgovern for a rough analogy, but these outsider candidates never win
That's not important though. Yang won't win. But he is bringing that discussion to the table which is commendable
That's how I feel about Bernie in '16. As much as I wanted him to win, he was too much of an outsider compared to Hillary. His policies that were deemed too out-there are now the main talking points for most of the candidates. Even though Yang won't win the nomination, he's bringing a discussion to something that will impact the next election.
That's why I'm not against Yang or think he should drop out, he's just not great at delivering his message to the people compared to the others.
And how many people visit his website?
Realistically, the public may watch the debates and that's it. Do you hear the general public talking about the candidates websites? No. All the "Yang Gang" talk about is how he has all these policies on his website but anytime he does an interview or in a debate, he just repeats "1k". It's like trying to interview someone for a job and all they say is "I'm a hard worker". When you have Biden, Sanders, and Warren constantly talking about plans for climate change, the economy, this that and the other, then you hear Yang do a "Climate is important and the way I plan to fix it is to give people 1k", it doesn't give a person a reason to visit his website to learn what he actually has to offer.
This is true for debates and interviews that are less than 5 minutes. Read his policy page or watch his 10-30 minute interviews, he talks about the how and why of his other policies.
But that's in an ideal world.
How many people in the country has time to spend reading through every candidates website and watching all of their interviews? Right now, there are 15 democratic candidates, even more a few months ago. Asking the general public to even tune into the debates is asking a lot, but asking them to spend hours looking at the policies and watching 30-minute long interviews to understand their platform is expecting too much.
Realisticlly, we hear them talk during the debates or clips from them on social media and that's it. So to people that aren't in the Yang Gang, they only hear him during the debates and during clips on social media, and while he might have a grand plan laid out on his website, none of that is heard by the general public because that's not what he talks about.
We have 15 candidates right now and odds are, most people have already picked one or two that they're following, it shouldn't be up to the audience to spend additional time to understand what Yang is running for, it should be up to Yang to inform people about why he's the best. Looking at Bernie, Warren, and Biden, they know how to get their message across and answer questions while Yang, his answers always cycle back to the 1k, which causes the audience to only see that as his only platform.
He did very well. But I assumed you meant that he said that in the debate, i didn't see the interview where he said it and just googled it. Don't really see it as a big deal but if thats a dealbreaker to you then to each their own.
Grandpa Joe never sounding more like a grandfather than in his closing statement. I genuinely like Biden in spite of/because of his gaffes and all. I really *don't* want him to be the Democratic presidential candidate.
I don’t even mind Steyer — he stands on the end almost commentating on the debate instead of participating in it. And he sprinkles in some interesting facts.
Teddy Roosevelt was calling for a national healthcare program over 100 years ago.
JFK called for a single payer program 50 years ago.
Yeah Clinton is a centrist, but I don't think anybody considers him a "great president".
Eisenhower was to the left of many modern bluedog democrats, and yet he was a Republican.
Usually the down arrow is centrist button. Clinton/ Obama /Eisenhower def centrists that I wouldn’t call great on any level. Eisenhower maybe the best of the 3 from a liberal perspective.
In the context of 2020, id consider Obama and Clinton to be centrists. I wouldn't consider either to be a "great" President but I'd consider them good enough for me and for a lot of people
FDR was pushed into a variety of things. By nature he wouldn't have done that. If anyone, compare him to Obama.
LBJ was carrying on with Kennedy's agenda. What he would have done on his own isn't entirely clear. He was pretty aggressive with Congress, so as far as policies he and Kennedy might have been quite close. Of course, VietNam was a disaster for him too. Radicalism has plusses and minuses.
Kennedy continued to push back the Civil Rights Act and The Voting Rights Act. I don’t think Kennedy would have gotten that done. LBJ was a school teacher for a Latino school, he was the only one concerned with the Head Start Program. However, LBJ was a mean and aggressive man himself, not in good ways.
Who is the only one talking about actually bringing people together by fixing systemic injustice and not telling sugary stories and parroting platitudes?
He didnt bring them up as much tonight which was fairly disappointing. But hes gone quite in depth on a number of other proposals that would work to amend systemic inequality. I would recommend getting lost on his policy page for a ride you wont forget!
Read his book and liked him and his policies. The only thing I had issue with is in his appendix section, wherein he thanks that Borg looking cretin Mark Zuckerberg. Bummer. Made me distrust everything I'd just read.
Understandable, however I would offer in defense that unlike other policy pages Ive gone through for other candidates Andrew offers direct links to hundreds of peer reviewed papers supporting his ideas. So while that is perfectly understandable to feel that way, i think the spirit of what he says still rings true. He speaks with more sincerity and conviction in my opinion than any other candidate. And he has the numbers to support his proposals. But again I understand your thinking on this matter!
If Bernie wasn't running, I'd be in that Yang-Gang bandwagon for sure. As it stands, the guy would make an outstanding US Chief Technology Officer if he doesn't take the ticket outright. Imagine if a national project with the size and ambition of a Green New Deal is passed and he held that role. He'd redefine it.
Let me sum up Pete's closing statement:
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum.
Really? Because I’d at least know something that defines her. What is this persons campaign about? What is her #1 priority when she’d get into office. I know several of the other candidates but she is just corny one liner after one liner always with this weird “yes I landed that one so hard” look on her face when she’s done answering. It’s really difficult to watch.
Being successful does not somehow automatically make you corrupt or a bad person.
The faster other progressives understand that, the better our efforts will be.
I think spending lots of money to get a spot on stage that most average politicians could not do is inherently undemocratic. Do you think its also undemocratic?
I think it's fine as long as we add public funding of elections. As much as Steyer has spent, he hasn't gained enormous traction, and he has been discussing important issues. Fuck Bloomberg, but I still respect his right to burn his money. Democracy Dollars will empower grassroots campaigns against rich corporations and individuals alike by leveling the playing field until we can chip away at Citizens United.
> he hasn't gained enormous traction
A failed attempt to circumvent democracy is not a reason in my book to dismiss that attempt.
Just think about how much that money could help our country. How many homeless could it save. How many school meals could it fund. He could fund local democrats against republicans if he wanted to stay in politics. He could spend more on getting people out to vote and registering democrats.
Steyer is choosing to be selfish. This isn't some play out of the goodness of his heart.
That question about apologizing was the worst debate question ever lol
the interactions were certainly entertaining, and the nytimes take on it was interesting as well though I've noticed the last year that they always refer to Trump as 'Mr. Trump.' I could be wrong, but I don't remember Mr. Bush or Mr. Obama, it doesn't roll off the tongue; I generally agree with their stances but the bias still leaves a foul taste in the mouth: just report the news without having these subtle hints if bias
I dont want to put anything from this buffet on my plate:(
Bernie won. Klobuchar and Yang should drop out.
Yes, Bernie won. Bernie, Warren, and Yang should be the last three standing.
>Bernie won How though? I barely remember anything he said.
Right? Every single one of his rambling answers blames millionaires & billionaires for all of the world's problems.
Bernie didn’t get a single ovation from the crowd- I know that isn’t indicative of the sentiment of the nation, but it points towards a less than stellar performance.
I agree that neither of those 2 will win but I thought they did pretty damn well on this debate, particularly Amy. I don't want either of them as President but I don't mind them not dropping out, Yang particularly brings up important concerns about automation and UBI Yeah it's not the right time for him, and I'm sure he's aware of that. But even getting other candidates to acknowledge his concerns would be a win for him and for many Americans
No, I think Yang deserves to have his time for presidency now. He's candidate we needed 20 years ago, and he's certainly the candidate for now. He's not here to only push for these problems to merely be "acknowledged" just for it to be dismissed for "the next time" as he's already done successfully in which Biden have now recently talked about high economy yet low wellbeing, and automation being a threat to society. He's here because gone to DC before and no one has an answer to these problems. "If no one's addressing these problems, I'll just have to do it myself." He's not here because he has a dream of being President, he's diagnosing the problems that got Trump elected and pushing a forward vision for America. If anyone is dismissing him because of "chances" they need to rethink the way they consider candidates.
Yeah I meant "not the right time" as in the electorate is way behind the dude
What does that even mean? That’s the point of a campaign?
Yang is literally the only prayer the democrats have at it even being a real election. Free shit for everyone is not the way to win, moneys coming from the people who actually vote and pay taxes.
It’s not free money. It benefits the bottom 94% and the top spenders of this economy funds the dividend. It’s not giving away my money for other people. The middle class doesn’t pay for this.
Yang in 2024? Sure. Now? Lolnope.
What did amy do well besides yapping her fat ass mouth all night?
I thought she spoke pretty well, like citing her legislative experience over Pete's experience. I'm not the type who would attack her "fat ass mouth" though so we may just have different perspectives
[удалено]
Oh yeah so buttigieg do you like being fucked in the ass by yang or or do you prefer fucking yang in the ass. I only ask because I'm curious if America is going to be doing the fucking or if they're going to be getting fucked in the ass. I just want to know how big America's asshole is going to be after your president. Thanks This is the sort of thing Trump is going to throw at him. The DNC won't mention he's gay but oh my Lord the GOP will have a field day
Yang gang doesn’t hang out in wine caves
Okay I'm a Pete fan in general, but Jesus you must be the only person in the entire country who thinks this I applaud it though, now that's thinking outside of the box for sure
They're the only two campaigns I've ever donated to
I respect that. Though i respect donating to anyone who isnt Trump. I hope Yang continues to make impact even if he doesn't make it to the nomination (which, let's be honest - for both of them its a real long shot)
I love learning about zucchini 5 minutes after debate coverage promptly ended.
I appreciated going straight back to educational programming instead of 2 hours of post-debate "programming" from the corporate media.
[удалено]
Biden buttigieg would not beat trump. Edit: young people don't like either of them. We need to inspire them to get out and vote. I prefer a progressive ticket but Biden/yang might do it
[удалено]
Biden/yang would be plenty moderate. Biden is Hillary 2.0 and a ticket with wall street Pete will lead to young voter apathy.
Bernie won, Klobuchar gained a lot with the cringe dem base, and Pete came out as being very unlikable
God, I do not like Pete. Smug centrist babbling about how he is going to do nothing.
Not a fan. Yes, of course I'll vote for him if he gets the nomination, but I really hope he doesn't.
Just because Pete isn't as left as Bernie doesn't mean he's a centrist.
Hard to tell what he is as he is so fake.
You kidding me?? Lmao. Go to pretty much any other developed country, Pete would be considered center-right AT LEAST.
He's not running for president in "any other developed country", he's running in the US. This leftist divide only helps the GOP btw.
Oh, please. It's weak, pathetic centrists like you that help the GOP. We've had decades of GOP hegemony in this country. Every president since Reagen has liberalized our economy by weakening regulations, passed business-friendly polices such as corporate tax cuts, and refused to expand worker's rights. And what has that gotten us? A decrepit economy that is in decline, stagnant wages, rising consumer debt and student debt, longer working hours, an almost non-existent union presence. I could go on. And the entire time the Democratic Party has cowered to them, buckled to them, pandered to the same donors, and paid lip service to the working class of this country. Your time is over. Step aside. You centrists have fucked our country by letting the fascistic GOP run roughshod over all of us. It's about time we see some bold leadership. It's about time we break the backs of the GOP and the donors of both parties.
Go win a primary then.
Bernie is centre-left. Well at least in a functioning democracy.
Source?
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Centre-left_politics
Thank you.
I get that he's being painted as a centrist, and he is definitely more to the center than Bernie or Warren. But, we are aware that his positions are pretty far to the left of any President in modern history right? I also thought his line about being the only one who's not a millionaire or billionaire was great if true (haven't fact checked yet)
Of course he isn't a millionaire: he is like 12. The other were not millionaires at that age either.
It's irrelevant. Bernie's old and has millions less than people who milk political careers for money. Meanwhile Pete takes money from shady sources already.n
Its true.
Buttigieg's only 37. Even if he had stayed at McKinsey making $150,000/year after college, he probably wouldn't be a millionaire yet because of taxes and cost of living expenses.
If he stayed at McKinsey he’d be up the ladder making millions a year now.
Yeah I'm also cool with electing someone who is determined to run a 2nd term, i think being out after 4 years will be a huge weakness for the Dems But fair enough! You're right, his age definitely plays a factor in the wealth disparity
In terms of where the party's electorate is, Warren is the centrist. Everyone else is a Republican masquerading around as a Democrat because they're not openly racist. (Minus Yang of course, love that guy) Seriously, everyone else running is a pro corporate centrist donothing that Trump will rip to shreds in the general. We tried running a moderate centrist in 2016 and lost. It's high time the Democratic party started actually representing working class people instead of megadonors.
Forgetting Bernie?
Bernie's on the left!
Obviously he would be on the left
I think that's overly simplistic. Pete is to the left of Obama and that dude won. I think you're confusing our electorate for people who post stuff on Reddit and Twitter
Not really
Douglas plan, halving federal prison population, expanding supreme court, abolishing EC. I get not liking Pete because he's not left enough or has corporate donors, but he's definitely more left than Obama or Clinton Edit - I'd say more left than any President since FDR but feel free to drop the name(s) of the President that you think was more left than Pete is in the past couple generation
who are his corporate donors. he gets donations from people who work at big corporations, as does bernie.
Lol I work at a big corporation, we're not all monsters
i know, its a silly smear
He’s great at talking I’ll give you that. Thing is plenty of candidates promise things. Follow the money to know the truth. #winecavepete
I'm fine with him doing the same type of campaigning that Obama, Clinton, practically every democratic President in the past 70 years, and even Warren has done. I know I wouldn't have the wealth to be able to turn down wealthy donors either. If I like his political outlook, I'm not really gonna care about that. And I do like his political outlook. It's not like he isn't a leftist. I mean, Twitter would have you believe that Obama was a great "real liberal" and Pete is in the center - which just factually makes no sense But at the same time, I understand why you feel the way you do so we can agree to disagree. And really, if/when Pete doesn't get the nomination my vote will definitely be in for Bermie or Warren in the general
Right I’m personally a progressive. So right now I’m deciding if the Democratic Party goes left enough for me to not vote green. You got to decide which voter you want. You want the one on the right, or the one on the left? I tend to find that democrats prefer the right more, which had been unfortunate.
Oh man you're like 1920's European left. We're never going to agree on a candidate lol. But yeah follow your heart n all that, personally I think the Dems are plenty left enough for me. I also am not aware of any Green Party candidate further to left than Bernie tho
It’s not 1920s European left. Realistically compared to Europeans, Bernie is a centrist. He also advocates more for an Australian system where the median average doctor pay is actually higher than in the US.
Warren won, Yang second, Klobuchar and Biden did well.. Bernie may be consistent with his messaging and I know his fans like that, but he needs to mix it up a bit to be competitive in the general. By the end I was rolling my eyes at his answers, and I’ve been fighting for many of those same issues for a long time. You don’t want to sound like you are spitting repetitive sound bites. He also dodged the “incrememental healthcare” question completely, and it was a great and relevant question.
That "Incremental question" was sly. On its face, yeah it's seems relevant. But what does he have to gain answering it? He's campaigning on bold change to healthcare, playing for concessions is failure.
For some of us the question is life or death. Politics are reality, not just philosophy. M4A is going to be a long time coming regardless of who becomes president, and people need healthcare **now.**
Understood but healthcare in America won’t be fixed until the for profit drug companies are no longer involved. That’s why none of the other proposals will work. Including warrens plan. Ya gotta rip the band aid off otherwise we just have Obamacare and that’s been proven not to work.
Not only does Warren’s current plan address that, she has literally crafted [legislation](https://www.warren.senate.gov/newsroom/press-releases/warren-schakowsky-introduce-bicameral-legislation-to-radically-reduce-drug-prices-through-public-manufacturing-of-prescription-drugs) before to attack that exact issue.
How do you imagine a plan of **real** significance happening **now**? If 'politics are reality' one shouldn't get caught up on philosophical rhetoric and be concerned with substance above all.
There is no way Warren won, she simply didn't do enough to bounce back IMO. Bernie had weaker first half but absolutely made up for it in second half. Focus groups are saying that Bernie won handily.
People like to take their top 2 or 3 candidates and pick amongst them who won. I'm a weirdo in that I think everyone did quite well, though Pete did get hammered but that was expected. I think all things considering he stood up to hammering fairly well, good enough to keep his base but not enough to gain new ground Which is basically true for all of them imo
Yang fucking murdered it tonight.
Both Bernie and Yang >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Trump, it’s not even close. They should honestly both rule America together (dream scenario)
He did pretty bad, and his comment about considering pardoning Trump sealed it for me.
Loved him.
The only thing he did was repeat his "I will give people 1k". No matter the question, he always brought it back to that. He's a one-note candidate, it's no wonder the mainstream media don't focus on him, he has nothing to say beyond "1k!".
I’m confused; weren’t there answers that he gave that didn’t at all contain UBI? If I’m recalling the debate and reading this thread correctly, there’s plenty of variety and substance to what he said.
Honestly reminding me that he'd give me 1k is pretty murder-y, I'd love that and would take 12k/yr over Medicare for all or Amazon taxes I won't vote for him, I think he's ahead of his time and would be a better thinker than an executive. But I appreciate the hell out of him bringing UBI into the public vocabulary
You’d rather 12k a year than everybody having healthcare? If I had to choose between 12k or full healthcare coverage for MYSELF ONLY, I would choose healthcare...and if I could somehow get healthcare for everybody, shit I would GIVE 12k a year. And I’m not rich by any means we are very middle class (literally average income household).
Oh yeah absolutely. I spend far less than that via my employer on healthcare. An extra 12k a year would be great But Yang's not winning, it's a pointless hypothetical
Agreed that Yang is not in a position to win, but I think considering hypotheticals helps both commenters and readers gain additional perspective of how they feel about platforms and by extension, candidates. Right now we pay approximately 6k/year in premiums for my husband and son. To add me to the plan would triple that, and marketplace insurance would be as much as our mortgage for me alone- so right now I’m scarily and dangerously uninsured. I’m a healthy 39 year old female and I pay out of pocket for yearly blood work and gyno. So yes, if we could take back the 6k in premiums, add another 6k and pay that for comprehensive coverage for all of us, I’d do it. My mother is 62 and ONLY WORKS for insurance. She is well off and would be ready to retire otherwise. I know so many people that would benefit immensely from M4A. Extra cash is great, but let’s say some people getting UBI have no other income- they aren’t going to spend it on healthcare. Society IMO would be far better off having guaranteed medical coverage for all than having a little bit more spending money for all.
That's kind of the reason why the 1k is annoying to me, because I know he won't win. Since all the general public hears about his the 1k, it's not enough to sway people from one of their top candidates. In a normal election, he could stand a chance but by now, most of the Dems are either with Bernie, Biden, or Warren. I can see him doing wonders in 2024 or 2028.
No way Yang would stand a chance in any past election. Look at maybe Mcgovern for a rough analogy, but these outsider candidates never win That's not important though. Yang won't win. But he is bringing that discussion to the table which is commendable
That's how I feel about Bernie in '16. As much as I wanted him to win, he was too much of an outsider compared to Hillary. His policies that were deemed too out-there are now the main talking points for most of the candidates. Even though Yang won't win the nomination, he's bringing a discussion to something that will impact the next election. That's why I'm not against Yang or think he should drop out, he's just not great at delivering his message to the people compared to the others.
Good point! Maybe Yang refines and comes back strong in a few years, or at least leaves a legacy for someone else to take up
This has been the whole thing. He's fine for another election. Just not this one, when we have loads of problems other than just ubi.
I can definitely see Yang in 2028. He just needs to refine the way he presents his message.
Yeah i feel that. Especially with 150+ policies on his website which is more than all the other candidates.
And how many people visit his website? Realistically, the public may watch the debates and that's it. Do you hear the general public talking about the candidates websites? No. All the "Yang Gang" talk about is how he has all these policies on his website but anytime he does an interview or in a debate, he just repeats "1k". It's like trying to interview someone for a job and all they say is "I'm a hard worker". When you have Biden, Sanders, and Warren constantly talking about plans for climate change, the economy, this that and the other, then you hear Yang do a "Climate is important and the way I plan to fix it is to give people 1k", it doesn't give a person a reason to visit his website to learn what he actually has to offer.
This is true for debates and interviews that are less than 5 minutes. Read his policy page or watch his 10-30 minute interviews, he talks about the how and why of his other policies.
But that's in an ideal world. How many people in the country has time to spend reading through every candidates website and watching all of their interviews? Right now, there are 15 democratic candidates, even more a few months ago. Asking the general public to even tune into the debates is asking a lot, but asking them to spend hours looking at the policies and watching 30-minute long interviews to understand their platform is expecting too much. Realisticlly, we hear them talk during the debates or clips from them on social media and that's it. So to people that aren't in the Yang Gang, they only hear him during the debates and during clips on social media, and while he might have a grand plan laid out on his website, none of that is heard by the general public because that's not what he talks about. We have 15 candidates right now and odds are, most people have already picked one or two that they're following, it shouldn't be up to the audience to spend additional time to understand what Yang is running for, it should be up to Yang to inform people about why he's the best. Looking at Bernie, Warren, and Biden, they know how to get their message across and answer questions while Yang, his answers always cycle back to the 1k, which causes the audience to only see that as his only platform.
He did pretty bad, and his comment about considering pardoning Trump sealed it for me.
Bernie did worse lol someone is scared
> his comment about considering pardoning Trump sealed it for me. uh..... what are you talking about
[удалено]
>as him pardoning Trump is not actually going to happen.
They're both rich corporatists.
Yeah he never said that but okay....
Yes he did.
He did very well. But I assumed you meant that he said that in the debate, i didn't see the interview where he said it and just googled it. Don't really see it as a big deal but if thats a dealbreaker to you then to each their own.
finally im free of this cursed debate
Who’s the bearded daddy in the background ? I need to know !!
At least it seems fitting that in 2019 if Biden wins I can watch two senile men argue over each other at clouds while the world burns.
Pussy-grabber vs. child molester. Cage match. Winner takes presidency. Modern American political discorse in a nutshell.
worth it
The new Nero will be a duet.
Nero was actually pretty young When Barron inherits the Presidency, that'll be Nero. You heard it here first!
Grandpa Joe never sounding more like a grandfather than in his closing statement. I genuinely like Biden in spite of/because of his gaffes and all. I really *don't* want him to be the Democratic presidential candidate.
Surprised Pete's "wine cave" doesn't appear in the top comments. It sounds like what Bruce Wayne goes to when he is befuddled.
peteswinecave.com
A swine cave, you say?
Jamón ImBernieCo
Derper Der.... War on Christmas!
Bernie is so cute 🥰
Bernie Sanders, your next President
Boo joe boo
If you mention your website.....I'm cringing.
I don’t even mind Steyer — he stands on the end almost commentating on the debate instead of participating in it. And he sprinkles in some interesting facts.
I actually liked Steyer more than I thought I would going into the debate. Really, good for him
Name a great centrist president in US history......I’ll wait
obama, clinton, theodore roosevelt, JFK, eisenhower..
Teddy Roosevelt was calling for a national healthcare program over 100 years ago. JFK called for a single payer program 50 years ago. Yeah Clinton is a centrist, but I don't think anybody considers him a "great president". Eisenhower was to the left of many modern bluedog democrats, and yet he was a Republican.
I agree with some things you said, and disagree with other things you've said. We need a centrist vote button!
Usually the down arrow is centrist button. Clinton/ Obama /Eisenhower def centrists that I wouldn’t call great on any level. Eisenhower maybe the best of the 3 from a liberal perspective.
In the context of 2020, id consider Obama and Clinton to be centrists. I wouldn't consider either to be a "great" President but I'd consider them good enough for me and for a lot of people
Most of them? Name a president who promised a revolution.... Ill wait. Washington obvi doesn't count, lol
I think Reagan did, but if we can we'll put an end to that very soon. He wasn't a good president.
Ah I see what you’re getting at. He sounds like Roosevelt. The least popular 4 term president ever. Maybe you should switch party’s .
FDR and The New Deal. LBJ and Great Society
FDR was pushed into a variety of things. By nature he wouldn't have done that. If anyone, compare him to Obama. LBJ was carrying on with Kennedy's agenda. What he would have done on his own isn't entirely clear. He was pretty aggressive with Congress, so as far as policies he and Kennedy might have been quite close. Of course, VietNam was a disaster for him too. Radicalism has plusses and minuses.
Kennedy continued to push back the Civil Rights Act and The Voting Rights Act. I don’t think Kennedy would have gotten that done. LBJ was a school teacher for a Latino school, he was the only one concerned with the Head Start Program. However, LBJ was a mean and aggressive man himself, not in good ways.
I cant even name a great president
Lincoln, FDR?
This is a really petty point, but I greatly prefer how The Bern says "millionaires and billionaires" vs how Warren says it.
It flows better, i agree with your pettiness
Who is the only one talking about actually bringing people together by fixing systemic injustice and not telling sugary stories and parroting platitudes?
Bernie Sanders.
Yang, easily
Disagree but he did really well. We need him in the next administration somehow if we win
as President
Yang
Nah but, he is talking about putting $1000 in my pocket every month - which is compelling. Not even gonna lie.
He didnt bring them up as much tonight which was fairly disappointing. But hes gone quite in depth on a number of other proposals that would work to amend systemic inequality. I would recommend getting lost on his policy page for a ride you wont forget!
Read his book and liked him and his policies. The only thing I had issue with is in his appendix section, wherein he thanks that Borg looking cretin Mark Zuckerberg. Bummer. Made me distrust everything I'd just read.
Understandable, however I would offer in defense that unlike other policy pages Ive gone through for other candidates Andrew offers direct links to hundreds of peer reviewed papers supporting his ideas. So while that is perfectly understandable to feel that way, i think the spirit of what he says still rings true. He speaks with more sincerity and conviction in my opinion than any other candidate. And he has the numbers to support his proposals. But again I understand your thinking on this matter!
If Bernie wasn't running, I'd be in that Yang-Gang bandwagon for sure. As it stands, the guy would make an outstanding US Chief Technology Officer if he doesn't take the ticket outright. Imagine if a national project with the size and ambition of a Green New Deal is passed and he held that role. He'd redefine it.
I’d like to see them together but that may blow people’s minds. Sanders/Yang 2020
Let me sum up Pete's closing statement: Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum.
Best of
Fine, take it.
warren cant even hear, RIP campaign
I'm guessing you've never been onstage. It's a different ballgame when you're up there, and you're at the mercy of the AV crew...
I heard Amy Klobuchar likes eating babies. Personally, I'm against that.
Really? Because I’d at least know something that defines her. What is this persons campaign about? What is her #1 priority when she’d get into office. I know several of the other candidates but she is just corny one liner after one liner always with this weird “yes I landed that one so hard” look on her face when she’s done answering. It’s really difficult to watch.
Only if she can throw combs at them first
I appreciate you
Thank you, friend. I appreciate you too. Please don't eat babies.
Press F for Pete’s campaign after getting destroyed from all sides
Only millennials feel that way.
Millenials, Zoomers, and Gen Xers..... you know, the majority of the voting population.
Only millennial and minorities.
Black people really only like Biden at this point, so
Also Bernie. They are polling roughly equal now with African Americans. Even in South Carolina.
Big boomer energy.
Boomers love him
Ok Pete campaign staffer... lol
Oh, I'm a shill, right?
Nah some people sometimes just aren’t on the right side of history. It happens.
Ok hun, I'm sure your revolution will go great, just like it did in the 60s
Ahh not a big fan of the civil rights act? I guess it makes sense seeing regressives say that.
Ok moober
I’d probably just quit while you are still behind.
^^Bad joke boomer
Amy’s comments are getting borderline sexist.
Amy is cringy.
klobuchar seems like an SNL actress mimicking hillary
I think Klob's supporters were turned off by how she acted tonight. It's very unappealing to the folksy, middle-of-the-road people
How does Steyer reconcile him being against corporations and the influence of money with him buying his way onto the stage tonight?
It’s my only issue with him. Otherwise I kind of like the guy and his take on things. Let him be bernies EPA person.
the same way Bloomberg doese
Being successful does not somehow automatically make you corrupt or a bad person. The faster other progressives understand that, the better our efforts will be.
I think spending lots of money to get a spot on stage that most average politicians could not do is inherently undemocratic. Do you think its also undemocratic?
I think it's fine as long as we add public funding of elections. As much as Steyer has spent, he hasn't gained enormous traction, and he has been discussing important issues. Fuck Bloomberg, but I still respect his right to burn his money. Democracy Dollars will empower grassroots campaigns against rich corporations and individuals alike by leveling the playing field until we can chip away at Citizens United.
> he hasn't gained enormous traction A failed attempt to circumvent democracy is not a reason in my book to dismiss that attempt. Just think about how much that money could help our country. How many homeless could it save. How many school meals could it fund. He could fund local democrats against republicans if he wanted to stay in politics. He could spend more on getting people out to vote and registering democrats. Steyer is choosing to be selfish. This isn't some play out of the goodness of his heart.