Author Topic: 2020 Presidential election  (Read 12272 times)

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 48440
    • View Profile
Re: 2020 Presidential election
« Reply #300 on: October 28, 2019, 05:26:03 PM »
The gifts they just keep coming  :-D

ppulatie

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 1018
    • View Profile
Joe Biden corruption
« Reply #301 on: October 28, 2019, 06:40:24 PM »
Hey all!

Thought I would pop in and relay what is happening with Trump with us "simple" people.

The support for Trump is solid. And frankly, we not only don't care about the comments he makes, we actually love it that he is fighting and is crass as time. He speaks as we speak, and understands us.

There are some hard right that claim they will not vote for him because he has not built the wall yet, or else not stopped illegal immigration, but those are a small minority, and most will vote for him in the end.

There is growing support for Trump among blacks and hispanics, those who are not dependent upon government handouts. Just that alone would be enough to put him over the top.

As to Biden, I would direct you to an article I wrote last week. It was a series, The 12 Days of Corrupt Democratic Politicians. 

This was Day 11, Joe Biden day. https://www.spartareport.com/2019/10/193310/

What I got out of doing the series was a true understanding of just how corrupt all politicians are. And why all are fighting Trump and the Ukraine.  The corruption is just unbelievable.

« Last Edit: October 29, 2019, 08:26:48 AM by Crafty_Dog »
PPulatie

DougMacG

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 11586
    • View Profile
Re: 2020 Presidential election, PP
« Reply #302 on: October 29, 2019, 05:41:02 AM »
Good work Pat.  Tracking corruption with Democrats is exhausting work.  I haven't read it all yet but would point out that day 5 on John Brennan is particularly good.

The Pulitzer Prize was awarded to the New York Times And The Washington Post for Russian Collusion stories that all turned out to be false. When they take back that award, maybe they can award it to PP for this series at Spartareport.com.
 

ppulatie

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 1018
    • View Profile
Re: 2020 Presidential election
« Reply #303 on: October 29, 2019, 07:32:03 AM »
Thanks!  It was fun doing it, until the last couple. Just too much info and did not want to write a book.

New series will be the 12 Days of News Media Idiots.  Problem there is that they are all idiots, so how do I select who fits in the 12 Days.
PPulatie

ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 9806
    • View Profile
Re: 2020 Presidential election
« Reply #304 on: October 29, 2019, 11:06:25 AM »
great summary of 'some' of the Clintons scandals.   No doubt there are more we don't even know about.


Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 48440
    • View Profile
Re: 2020 Presidential election
« Reply #305 on: October 29, 2019, 11:46:26 AM »
Pat:

I went to the site and could find only Hillary and Brennan, and could not open the Biden one.

Would love to have the URLs for all 12!

ppulatie

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 1018
    • View Profile
Re: 2020 Presidential election
« Reply #306 on: October 29, 2019, 12:11:58 PM »
Let me see what I can do.
PPulatie


Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 48440
    • View Profile
Re: 2020 Presidential election
« Reply #308 on: October 29, 2019, 01:38:16 PM »
Thank you  8-)

DougMacG

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 11586
    • View Profile
Re: 2020 Presidential election, Trump in 30 seconds
« Reply #309 on: October 31, 2019, 01:16:58 PM »
https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1189715310766645254/video/1

and they missed a few, 8 million people off of food stamps, lowest Hispanic, black, female unemployment in history, etc.

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 48440
    • View Profile
Re: 2020 Presidential election
« Reply #310 on: October 31, 2019, 09:45:41 PM »
 8-) 8-) 8-)

ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 9806
    • View Profile

DougMacG

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 11586
    • View Profile
Re: Not a good idea
« Reply #312 on: November 01, 2019, 05:16:29 PM »
https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2019/nov/1/private-group-seeks-volunteers-conceal-carry-permi/

I think I mentioned wanting a concealed carry escort to the Minneapolis rally and one reason I didn't go was because I didn't feel secure about walking back to the car after the rally to the edges of downtown that already are after-hours murder zones [and not exactly Trump country]:
https://www.arcgis.com/apps/webappviewer/index.html?id=576634548ffc4304bf9df0fb2b802f8d

"Concealed carry" is one thing.  Brandishing the weapon without justification is another, generally the "fear that death or grievous bodily harm is about to come to someone due to the violent actions of another".
https://www.quora.com/If-you-carry-a-concealed-weapon-under-what-circumstance-would-you-pull-it-out

DougMacG

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 11586
    • View Profile
Re: 2020 Presidential election, Beto OUT, OMG!
« Reply #313 on: November 01, 2019, 05:53:29 PM »
Just weeks after saying, "hell yeah!"  [We're gonna come and take your guns.]

They weren't supposed to say that out loud.

Where will his voter go now??

DougMacG

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 11586
    • View Profile
Presidential, Polls: Mondale leads Reagan by 9 points (1983)
« Reply #314 on: November 04, 2019, 03:30:59 PM »
https://theharrispoll.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/12/Harris-Interactive-Poll-Research-MONDALE-LEADS-REAGAN-IN-TRIAL-HEAT-FOR-THE-PRESIDENCY-1983-01.pdf

Harris survey:  In a trial heat for the 1984 presidential election, former Vice President Walter Mondale is now leading President Ronald Reagan by a 53-44 percent margin. This is the first time in modern political history that an incumbent president has run behind his potential opponent so early in his term.
-----------
Results 1984:

-----------

1988, Dukakis Widens lead over Bush, [July 27 1988]
https://www.nytimes.com/1988/07/26/us/dukakis-lead-widens-according-to-new-poll.html
« Last Edit: November 04, 2019, 03:39:26 PM by DougMacG »

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 48440
    • View Profile
Re: 2020 Presidential election
« Reply #315 on: November 04, 2019, 04:02:21 PM »
Far out. :-D

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 48440
    • View Profile

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 48440
    • View Profile
Re: 2020 Presidential election
« Reply #317 on: November 07, 2019, 02:21:13 PM »
I saw on TV that Sanders released his immigration border policy.  Do we anything on the specifics?

ppulatie

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 1018
    • View Profile
Re: 2020 Presidential election
« Reply #318 on: November 07, 2019, 03:36:00 PM »
Sparta Report has Day 1 of the 12 Days of News Media Clowns up.  John Harwood is Day 1.

https://www.spartareport.com/2019/11/pu-presents-the-12-days-of-news-media-clowns-day-1/
PPulatie

ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 9806
    • View Profile
Will Boomer get a ticker tape parade on Madison Ave?
« Reply #319 on: November 07, 2019, 03:53:13 PM »
Anderson Cooper will possibly be his first "interview" - 
Zucker already holding a champaign donor meet in NYC with the big leftest Dems

The elites will love him

pro business
major lib policies ,  but not stupid policies
and he will pretend he is a compromiser and problem solver - of course as long as one accepts major liberal policies.

Not sure how he would do on the national stage

He could be a real threat...

Hillary will likely jump in too.

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 48440
    • View Profile
Re: 2020 Presidential election
« Reply #320 on: November 07, 2019, 04:35:23 PM »
NYC Jew coming to take your guns and your sodas vs. he could really mock Trump the psuedo-billionaire business genius.

ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 9806
    • View Profile
E. Holder
« Reply #321 on: November 08, 2019, 06:05:26 AM »
about Virginia

https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2019/nov/7/eric-holders-idea-fair-all-democrats-all-time/

again read he might well jump in for Prez

Prefers big gov and liberal policies to help minorities
which is his total MO
identity politics

Obama redux....

Lets see , Democrat field to go from Butti, Liz, Joe, Bernie, Kamela , Cory

to Hill, Napoleon Eric, Steys

One worse than the other

Eric, the  reparations king, and corrupt, is justs as polarizing as Hillary.
Sure I see him as representing me and all Americans and my country with uniformity .....    :roll:



« Last Edit: November 08, 2019, 06:10:05 AM by ccp »

DougMacG

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 11586
    • View Profile
Re: Eric Holder
« Reply #322 on: November 08, 2019, 06:28:25 AM »
...
again read he might well jump in for Prez

Prefers big gov and liberal policies to help minorities
which is his total MO
identity politics
Obama redux....
Lets see , Democrat field to go from Butti, Liz, Joe, Bernie, Kamela , Cory
to Hill, Napoleon Eric, Steys
One worse than the other
Eric, the  reparations king, and corrupt, is just as polarizing as Hillary.
Sure I see him as representing me and all Americans and my country with uniformity .....    :roll:

Had anyone heard of him before he was appointed AG?  Never elected to anything.  Because Trump did that, everyone thinks they can, but Holder is not an outside of any sort.  He is perfectly entitled to enter the Dem field and compete for the nomination with his skills and baggage.  Trump would love to run against the record of the Obama administration.

Trump is criticized that he is down to just yes-men serving him.  Yes-man is all Holder brought to the AG job other than being (part) black.
https://outline.com/wxVa5d

I know of another Columbia Law School grad, outsider, that would make a much better President than Holder.
« Last Edit: November 08, 2019, 07:15:20 AM by DougMacG »

DougMacG

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 11586
    • View Profile
Re: Michael Bloomberg
« Reply #323 on: November 08, 2019, 07:10:59 AM »
Anderson Cooper will possibly be his first "interview" - 
Zucker already holding a champaign donor meet in NYC with the big leftest Dems
The elites will love him
pro business
major lib policies ,  but not stupid policies
and he will pretend he is a compromiser and problem solver - of course as long as one accepts major liberal policies.
Not sure how he would do on the national stage
He could be a real threat...
Hillary will likely jump in too.
NYC Jew coming to take your guns and your sodas vs. he could really mock Trump the psuedo-billionaire business genius.

Definitely a wild card, but at this point I think people see him as a Democrat.

In terms of election rules, I don't see why he gets a free ride to the general election when you look at all the hoops Obama, Trump, McCain, Romney, Hillary (and Beto, Kamala, Newt, etc.) have to jump through to (try to) get there.
Don't people resent that he gets there just because of money?

Yes, he is a more authentic billionaire than Trump (Trump isn't rich enough?), he gives more to charity, but this election will be about policies, results and emotions.  He is roughly the same age as Bernie Sanders.  I can't see him filling the Superdome and thrilling the crowd for hours (with his vision of smaller sodas).

"As of November 2019, his net worth was estimated at $53 billion,[3] making him the 9th richest person in the United States and the 14th richest person in the world."
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Bloomberg

He could hurt either side, but more likely the Dems.  If they pick an AOC-Omar Dem like Warren or Bernie, he gives moderate Dems an acceptable anti-Trump choice.  If they pick a moderate he splits their vote.   None of the current Dems are exciting anyone.  He also picks off some Kasich-like, never-Trumpers, but none of the base.

Most likely he finds out like everyone else does that running for President is harder than it looks. 

Bloomberg Agenda:  Coercive Paternalism.  How does a guy who doesn't trust a restaurant or a patron to size their own soda not insult his voters as he explains that?  I'm offended and I don't even like soda.  What will he restrict next?

Yet he trusts you to kill your own baby:  "As mayor, Bloomberg pushed radical pro-abortion policies on New York City, including an ordinance that restricted pro-life pregnancy centers’ free speech."
https://www.lifenews.com/2011/03/16/new-york-mayor-bloomberg-signs-bill-hurting-pregnancy-centers/
https://www.lifenews.com/2018/09/18/pro-abortion-billionaire-michael-bloomberg-considering-2020-presidential-bid/
https://www.lifenews.com/2012/02/02/bloomberg-gives-planned-parenthood-250k-as-40-of-nyc-babies-aborted/
https://www.lifenews.com/2014/05/02/billionaire-mike-bloomberg-promises-to-push-eugenics-after-winning-planned-parenthood-award/

He is a pro-abortion, anti-gun, government-knows-best Democrat who used to be a Republican.  He is not in the Democrat primaries only because he knew he couldn't win, not because he isn't one of  them.

ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 9806
    • View Profile
Re: 2020 Presidential election
« Reply #324 on: November 08, 2019, 07:52:35 AM »
" .Don't people resent that he gets there just because of money?"

I sure do.

Didn't stop Tommy Steyer from getting into a debate only because of his cash.

Though all his cash has not provided dividends :
https://www.nationalreview.com/corner/tom-steyer-proves-money-doesnt-matter/

Boomer the NYC Jewish Napoleon does have more name recognition and has had one elected office (mayor)
then Tommy .

NYC mayors have a lot of ego but have not done well though : Ruddy , Deblasay etc.
  But 20 billion can only help . 

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 48440
    • View Profile
Re: 2020 Presidential election
« Reply #325 on: November 08, 2019, 08:28:06 AM »
Bloomberg is 77?




DougMacG

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 11586
    • View Profile
Re: 2020 / Michael Bloomberg
« Reply #329 on: November 10, 2019, 08:00:01 AM »
Revise and extend...  I wrote yesterday (erroneously?) thinking Bloomberg was jumping in as independent bypassing the primaries but he is (allegedly) jumping in as a Democrat joining the Dem field.  That is a different matter.  He is entirely qualified to join that field, perhaps the most qualified in it.  And he is properly labeled; Bloomberg is a Democrat.

Quoting Ralph Nader, more voices, more choices!

I don't know how 'pro-business' he is, but certainly more so than the AOC Sanders Warren wing. 

His money alone will not buy him a single vote much less win him the nomination and I don't see how, if he is moderate, he unites that party.  His money will help get his message out, whatever that is.  His message will win or lose the race.

Who in this race is the swing state, two term or more former Democrat running with executive experience running (with Hickenlooper out)?  No one.  Not Biden, not Warren, not Harris, not Booker, not Gabbard and so on.  Sanders and Butti were mayors of relatively small towns.  Mayor of NYC counts as real experience.  Whether it was good or bad experience is  a matter for voters to judge. 

I don't know much about his 'business' experience.  Bloomberg (LP) is more than just 'journalism', includes financial services and software.  If he catches on, we will probably learn more about that, but hard to argue he was not successful.

He wrote read the book on coercive paternalism, one component of the current Dem governance.

Looking at it from the Republican side, some wish for Dems to choose their most far Left nominee so that he /she will be easier to beat.  I say, be careful what you wish for, sometimes they win, cf. Barack Obama.  The Republic would survive a Bloomberg presidency.  Not so sure with the others.

I think he won't win the nomination but will be a nice contrast and challenge on stage to the Warren wing rhetoric.  His policies, if they mostly involve sanity, won't placate the base.  I still fear he will enter later as an independent which is unfair; the general election is not a losers bracket for billionaires.  But even then I think he would mostly take from the Dem side.

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 48440
    • View Profile
Re: 2020 Presidential election
« Reply #330 on: November 10, 2019, 08:42:54 AM »
I'm sure it is a coincidence that he entered after  Forked Tongue Warren's Asset Forfeiture Tax on billionaires , , ,

ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 9806
    • View Profile
Wait I thought they thought they do not pay enough.
« Reply #331 on: November 11, 2019, 05:01:12 AM »
" .I'm sure it is a coincidence that he entered after  Forked Tongue Warren's Asset Forfeiture Tax on billionaires , , ,"

That even got Bill Gates' attention.

I haven't read what Warren Buffet thinks.  You know the guy who is mighty happy to pay more because he thinks wealthy people don't pay enough.

Suddenly, the confiscation is no longer in "pocket change" amounts for these billionaires.

My personal opinion is they already pay plenty  -  too much - like most of us little people.
« Last Edit: November 11, 2019, 08:44:33 AM by ccp »

DougMacG

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 11586
    • View Profile
Re: Wait I thought they thought they do not pay enough.
« Reply #332 on: November 11, 2019, 08:06:30 AM »
When they pass the wealth tax, make sure they put the agreed limits in the amendment:

Wealth below $50 million, inflation adjusted, cannot be taxed.  Wealth 50 million to 1 billion, inflation  adjusted, cannot be taxed above 2% and wealth greater than 1 billion, inflation adjusted, cannot be taxed above 3%.

Better yet, in the spirit of equal protection under the law, write the amendment to say that all wealth must be taxed equally or not taxed at all, and see if that gets it stopped.

These morons cannot point to one place where their proposed policies have worked.

There is not transaction or money flow associated with a tax on an unsold asset.  Your family business becomes not your family business.  Your home becomes not your home.  That you support it because it applies only to others and not to you or your family is wrong on so many levels.

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 48440
    • View Profile
Mayor Pete's latest trillions
« Reply #333 on: November 11, 2019, 02:28:29 PM »
Mayor Pete’s Latest Trillions
His ‘economic’ agenda is all spending and taxes and no growth.
By The Editorial Board
Nov. 10, 2019 3:28 pm ET

Democratic presidential hopeful Mayor Pete Buttigieg speaks during a town hall in Lebanon, NH, on November 9, 2019. PHOTO: JIM WATSON/AGENCE FRANCE-PRESSE/GETTY IMAGES
Pete Buttigieg is getting a hard look from anxious Democrats. If Joe Biden can’t perform better and Elizabeth Warren seems unelectable, then who’s on deck? Maybe it’s Pete, the mild Midwestern mayor. Over the past month Mr. Buttigieg has risen steadily in the Real Clear Politics polling average to a solid fourth place, with about 7% support.

Could Mike Bloomberg Win the Democratic Nomination?


SUBSCRIBE
As a result, he’ll be getting more scrutiny for his ideas, and on Friday he released what he called “An Economic Agenda for American Families.” For a candidate who wants to occupy the moderate lane, Mr. Buttigieg’s policy details veer notably left. Some highlights:

• $700 billion—presumably over 10 years, but the plan doesn’t specifically say—for “universal, high-quality, and full-day early learning.” That includes giving “lower-income families” free care “from birth through age five.”

• $500 billion “to make college affordable.” That means free tuition at public universities for the 80% of students whose families earn up to $100,000 a year. Households under $150,000 would get discounts.

• $430 billion for “affordable housing.” That includes enabling “one million low-income families to become homeowners” through support such as “federal down payment assistance.”

• $400 billion to top off the Earned Income Tax Credit, which would “increase incomes by an average of $1,000 per year for 35 million American families.”

• $200 billion to “provide transition assistance for displaced workers and communities.”

• $80 billion to “deliver high-speed broadband internet to underserved communities.”

• $50 billion for “workforce training and lifelong learning.”

• A $15 national minimum wage, which includes eliminating “the tipped minimum wage and the subminimum wage” that today lets disabled workers and students in vocational training get into the job market and learn skills to advance.

• “An end to so-called ‘right-to-work’ laws” in 27 states, plus governance changes to “enable multi-employer bargaining and ensure that gig workers can unionize.”

This isn’t an economic agenda, and there isn’t a pro-growth item anywhere. It’s a social-welfare spending and union wish list. Mr. Buttigieg tosses off these grand plans in a seven-page campaign paper, which mentions not once how he intends to pay for them. Don’t forget the billions more he has allocated to green energy, as well as his $1.5 trillion health-care public option, “Medicare for All Who Want It.”

So far Mayor Pete’s agenda totals $5.7 trillion, as his campaign told the Indianapolis Star last week. Mr. Buttigieg plans to pay for it, the Star reports, “largely through a capital gains tax on the top 1% of all earners and through eliminating President Donald Trump’s tax cuts.” Details to come later, apparently.

Mayor Pete’s policy wish list is shorter and cheaper than Elizabeth Warren’s, but it still includes gigantic tax increases to finance a huge expansion of the welfare and entitlement state. Call it Warren lite.

DougMacG

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 11586
    • View Profile
Re: Mayor Pete's latest trillions
« Reply #334 on: November 11, 2019, 05:42:32 PM »
Some observations of mine in addition to those of the WSJ.

Mr. Buttigieg has risen steadily in the Real Clear Politics polling average to a solid fourth place [of Democrats], with about 7% support [of Democrats].
...
• $700 billion—presumably over 10 years, but the plan doesn’t specifically say—for “universal, high-quality, and full-day early learning.” That includes giving “lower-income families” free care “from birth through age five.”

    - His first point falls right into the Leftist strategy of getting your children from birth.  This is a cultural issue, not just a fiscal issue.  Besides the children, the childcare teachers are indoctrinated too - at your expense.

• $500 billion “to make college affordable.” That means free tuition at public universities for the 80% of students whose families earn up to $100,000 a year. Households under $150,000 would get discounts.

   - His second point falls right into the Leftist strategy of defining upward the income levels that need help from the government.  cf. Life of Julia.  Obamacare assistance went up to 4 times the poverty level.  This is way more than that.

• $430 billion for “affordable housing.” That includes enabling “one million low-income families to become homeowners” through support such as “federal down payment assistance.”

   - More people dependent on the government, right while the private is growing more jobs and paying more income to more people than ever.

• $400 billion to top off the Earned Income Tax Credit, which would “increase incomes by an average of $1,000 per year for 35 million American families.”

   - More people dependent on the government, kind of a theme.

• $200 billion to “provide transition assistance for displaced workers and communities.”

   - More people dependent on the government.  Like Bill Clinton used to say in every SOTU, "we can do more..."

• $80 billion to “deliver high-speed broadband internet to underserved communities.”

   - More people dependent on the government.  The Federal Government.

• $50 billion for “workforce training and lifelong learning.”

   - More people dependent on the federal government.  Eventually he will hit a good program - by accident?  Nothing is private sector.  Nothing is state and local responsibility - because that wouldn't count as an agenda.

• A $15 national minimum wage, which includes eliminating “the tipped minimum wage and the subminimum wage” that today lets disabled workers and students in vocational training get into the job market and learn skills to advance.

   - Repeal the laws of supply and demand, then admit it and try to help the people the policy is hurting.

• “An end to so-called ‘right-to-work’ laws” in 27 states, plus governance changes to “enable multi-employer bargaining and ensure that gig workers can unionize.”

   - Repeal the constitution?  No right to work.  Win the union bosses, but not the workers.

WSJ continued:  This isn’t an economic agenda, and there isn’t a pro-growth item anywhere. It’s a social-welfare spending and union wish list. Mr. Buttigieg tosses off these grand plans in a seven-page campaign paper, which mentions not once how he intends to pay for them. Don’t forget the billions more he has allocated to green energy, as well as his $1.5 trillion health-care public option, “Medicare for All Who Want It.”

So far Mayor Pete’s agenda totals $5.7 trillion, as his campaign told the Indianapolis Star last week. Mr. Buttigieg plans to pay for it, the Star reports, “largely through a capital gains tax on the top 1% of all earners and through eliminating President Donald Trump’s tax cuts.” Details to come later, apparently.

   - Repeal Trump's economic growth and wage growth.  First denuy it, then repeal it.

Mayor Pete’s policy wish list is shorter and cheaper than Elizabeth Warren’s, but it still includes gigantic tax increases to finance a huge expansion of the welfare and entitlement state. Call it Warren lite.

    - Less than Warren is not "Lite".
« Last Edit: November 11, 2019, 05:47:31 PM by DougMacG »

G M

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 17084
    • View Profile
Re: Mayor Pete's latest trillions
« Reply #335 on: November 11, 2019, 05:54:28 PM »
Yeah, but Trump tweets mean things!


Some observations of mine in addition to those of the WSJ.

Mr. Buttigieg has risen steadily in the Real Clear Politics polling average to a solid fourth place [of Democrats], with about 7% support [of Democrats].
...
• $700 billion—presumably over 10 years, but the plan doesn’t specifically say—for “universal, high-quality, and full-day early learning.” That includes giving “lower-income families” free care “from birth through age five.”

    - His first point falls right into the Leftist strategy of getting your children from birth.  This is a cultural issue, not just a fiscal issue.  Besides the children, the childcare teachers are indoctrinated too - at your expense.

• $500 billion “to make college affordable.” That means free tuition at public universities for the 80% of students whose families earn up to $100,000 a year. Households under $150,000 would get discounts.

   - His second point falls right into the Leftist strategy of defining upward the income levels that need help from the government.  cf. Life of Julia.  Obamacare assistance went up to 4 times the poverty level.  This is way more than that.

• $430 billion for “affordable housing.” That includes enabling “one million low-income families to become homeowners” through support such as “federal down payment assistance.”

   - More people dependent on the government, right while the private is growing more jobs and paying more income to more people than ever.

• $400 billion to top off the Earned Income Tax Credit, which would “increase incomes by an average of $1,000 per year for 35 million American families.”

   - More people dependent on the government, kind of a theme.

• $200 billion to “provide transition assistance for displaced workers and communities.”

   - More people dependent on the government.  Like Bill Clinton used to say in every SOTU, "we can do more..."

• $80 billion to “deliver high-speed broadband internet to underserved communities.”

   - More people dependent on the government.  The Federal Government.

• $50 billion for “workforce training and lifelong learning.”

   - More people dependent on the federal government.  Eventually he will hit a good program - by accident?  Nothing is private sector.  Nothing is state and local responsibility - because that wouldn't count as an agenda.

• A $15 national minimum wage, which includes eliminating “the tipped minimum wage and the subminimum wage” that today lets disabled workers and students in vocational training get into the job market and learn skills to advance.

   - Repeal the laws of supply and demand, then admit it and try to help the people the policy is hurting.

• “An end to so-called ‘right-to-work’ laws” in 27 states, plus governance changes to “enable multi-employer bargaining and ensure that gig workers can unionize.”

   - Repeal the constitution?  No right to work.  Win the union bosses, but not the workers.

WSJ continued:  This isn’t an economic agenda, and there isn’t a pro-growth item anywhere. It’s a social-welfare spending and union wish list. Mr. Buttigieg tosses off these grand plans in a seven-page campaign paper, which mentions not once how he intends to pay for them. Don’t forget the billions more he has allocated to green energy, as well as his $1.5 trillion health-care public option, “Medicare for All Who Want It.”

So far Mayor Pete’s agenda totals $5.7 trillion, as his campaign told the Indianapolis Star last week. Mr. Buttigieg plans to pay for it, the Star reports, “largely through a capital gains tax on the top 1% of all earners and through eliminating President Donald Trump’s tax cuts.” Details to come later, apparently.

   - Repeal Trump's economic growth and wage growth.  First denuy it, then repeal it.

Mayor Pete’s policy wish list is shorter and cheaper than Elizabeth Warren’s, but it still includes gigantic tax increases to finance a huge expansion of the welfare and entitlement state. Call it Warren lite.

    - Less than Warren is not "Lite".

ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 9806
    • View Profile
anti trumper
« Reply #336 on: November 12, 2019, 05:05:44 AM »
of course explains the pros outweigh the cons on Boomer for both Repubs and Dems:

https://www.nationalreview.com/2019/11/michael-bloomberg-presidential-campaign-upsides-for-left-and-right/

as expected

for those who would love government to work again like it did prior to Trump, Boomer fits the bill

DougMacG

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 11586
    • View Profile
Huff Post: Bloomberg, Billionaire Mayor Governed NYC as if he were King
« Reply #337 on: November 12, 2019, 07:08:40 AM »
Williamson is right on one point.  Democrats will pick someone worse than Bloomberg. 

He doesn't say what Bloomberg did that makes him say "Bloomberg boasts an excellent record in office as mayor of New York City".  This article from the further left tells more:

https://www.huffpost.com/entry/mayor-bloombergs-legacy-t_b_4525526

He balanced a budget that has to be balanced by "initiat[ing] the largest city tax increase in modern history."

Record homelessness [and taxes that the rich can't wait to escape].  He could do the for the whole nation.

Stop and frisk:  Police stopping blacks and Latinos for no crime.  This rose 600% under Bloomberg.  "...largest use of preventive detention of political protesters in more than 230 years on United States history." 

"Many of those arrested were caught in large orange nets that police indiscriminately tossed over sidewalk “holding pens” for protesters. For the imaginary crime of illegally protesting or blocking traffic or defying nonexistent police orders to disperse, more than 1,800 people were handcuffed and bussed to an abandoned, filthy city-owned pier on the West Side highway. They were denied phone calls, medications, food, or even a mat to sit on the oil and chemical covered ground.  Many were held in this condition for more than 24 hours, despite court orders to release them.

The city paid out millions to settle, but Mayor Bloomberg commended the police department’s performance.
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/12/24/nyregion/new-york-is-said-to-settle-suits-over-arrests-at-2004-gop-convention.html

As for the treatment of the peaceful protesters, the mayor remarked, “It’s not supposed to be Club Med.”

"a billionaire mayor who governed  New York City as though he were its king"
No first amendment, no second amendment, no fourth, fifth, 9th or 10th, but let me guess, the trains ran on time.

That's what suburban voters want?
-----------------------
If Amy Klobuchar, Michael Bennet, Steve Bullock and John Delaney lack charisma, it’s not because Michael Bloomberg has been hoarding it.
https://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2019/11/11/the_futility_of_bloomberg_2020_141704.html
« Last Edit: November 12, 2019, 07:46:26 AM by DougMacG »

G M

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 17084
    • View Profile

ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 9806
    • View Profile
so many people urging her to run
« Reply #339 on: November 12, 2019, 04:14:06 PM »
here we go as expected; step by step :

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/hillary-clinton-says-many-many-many-people-are-urging-her-to-run-for-president-in-2020/2019/11/12/ec690f66-059d-11ea-ac12-3325d49eacaa_story.html

she refuses to see even more people are DREADING  her entering the race - even many Democrats!


G M

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 17084
    • View Profile
Re: so many people urging her to run
« Reply #340 on: November 12, 2019, 05:03:54 PM »