Author Topic: Friedman Article - Dems: Just Nominate a Decent, Sane Person  (Read 4383 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Re: Friedman Article - Dems: Just Nominate a Decent, Sane Person
« Reply #60 on: July 19, 2019, 10:11:00 PM »

Offline pp34isthe1

  • Jayson Tatum
  • Posts: 396
  • Tommy Points: 39
As much as I like Biden, can't we get a strong moderate candidate that is not so far past the retirement age? He is 76 now.  He would be 78 when he was elected.


He would be 82 at the end of his term.


That scares me when talking about the job that ages people more then any other job out there. 


Yes, he seems sharp today, but at that age, it can go really fast. 


(Trump and Bernie are in the same boat in terms of age)


Trump does seem that he hasn't lost his curveball (as crooked as it is), while Biden does appear to be losing it.  That's my opinion, but I hope he can start to show differently as I think MANY Americans are open to Joe in ways they aren't open to many of the other Dems.

Can Joe can handle Donald in a debate without fumbling?  I'm not sure.  And he's got to stop saying "Man" so frequently, and he has to be able to finish complete, logical sentences.   The other gigantic factor (probably more important than ever in American history) if he survives the primaries and gets nominated, will be his choice for VP.   Could be seriously considered the POTUS in waiting.

Biden has to drop all formalities and normal debate courtesy when going against trump. Raising hands and waiting turns won’t get him out of the primaries, let alone a win against trump.
But Biden is the only one who has the pull to win over the middle as of right now.

IMO he has to pick Harris as VP to pick up his slack in debates, maybe she can help prepare him. Honestly a Harris/Biden ticket would be best but Joe isn’t going for VP again.


Re: Friedman Article - Dems: Just Nominate a Decent, Sane Person
« Reply #61 on: July 19, 2019, 10:41:07 PM »

Offline KGs Knee

  • Ed Macauley
  • ***********
  • Posts: 11515
  • Tommy Points: 1349
What do you guys think of Andrew Yang?

I didn't find him to be particularly impressive in the first Democratic debate, but I checked out his recent interview with Des Moines Register and he seems to really excel with in-depth long answers as opposed to rushed, debate sound bites.

Here is his recent interview with Des Moines Iowa in which he talks about his UBI platform, automation's role on American job losses, and healthcare. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=697sxx6mCuM

UBI alone will make him unelectable. Ditto for any candidate championing free college. Programs like that require huge tax increases, which most people will not support. You'll never win the middle with policy ideas like that.  Middle America ain't having it.

Free public college tuition would cost less per year than last year's military budget increases we passed with almost no debate. So it wouldn't take any more of a tax increase than that did.

It's a lot easier to sell someone on paying for their perceived defense than someone else's education.

All I can say is good luck if you think that's a position that can win the general election.  I'm pretty confident it's a losing bet.

Re: Friedman Article - Dems: Just Nominate a Decent, Sane Person
« Reply #62 on: July 20, 2019, 12:16:40 AM »

Online fairweatherfan

  • Bill Sharman
  • *******************
  • Posts: 19848
  • Tommy Points: 2212
  • Be the posts you wish to see in the world.
What do you guys think of Andrew Yang?

I didn't find him to be particularly impressive in the first Democratic debate, but I checked out his recent interview with Des Moines Register and he seems to really excel with in-depth long answers as opposed to rushed, debate sound bites.

Here is his recent interview with Des Moines Iowa in which he talks about his UBI platform, automation's role on American job losses, and healthcare. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=697sxx6mCuM

UBI alone will make him unelectable. Ditto for any candidate championing free college. Programs like that require huge tax increases, which most people will not support. You'll never win the middle with policy ideas like that.  Middle America ain't having it.

Free public college tuition would cost less per year than last year's military budget increases we passed with almost no debate. So it wouldn't take any more of a tax increase than that did.

It's a lot easier to sell someone on paying for their perceived defense than someone else's education.

All I can say is good luck if you think that's a position that can win the general election.  I'm pretty confident it's a losing bet.

Well, I disagree about the number of people who think "defense contractors for the best-funded military in human history absolutely need another $70 billion a year or I'm gonna die", but my point is simply that we can pay for it with even lower tax increases than that took. Or hey, with the same money.

Re: Friedman Article - Dems: Just Nominate a Decent, Sane Person
« Reply #63 on: July 20, 2019, 01:09:00 AM »

Online jambr380

  • Satch Sanders
  • *********
  • Posts: 9243
  • Tommy Points: 1111
  • Sometimes there's no sane reason for optimism.
Free community college? Sure. But anything beyond that is an enter at your own risk scenario.

I get what fwf is saying here and I totally agree (like, how much more do we really need to put into the military?), but giving that money to people who can’t afford the student loans they already knew they were going to have to pay is not exactly my first priority.

Re: Friedman Article - Dems: Just Nominate a Decent, Sane Person
« Reply #64 on: July 21, 2019, 09:48:13 AM »

Online Neurotic Guy

  • Cedric Maxwell
  • **************
  • Posts: 14681
  • Tommy Points: 1593
Steve Bullock.

Need to take a good, long look at this guy. Have seen him interviewed a couple of times and he impresses as an easy, folksy, confident guy with reasonable takes on complicated issues. Seems like a guy you could believe could work with people from both parties.

Really looking forward to seeing if he can break out a little bit at the next debate. 

Bullock-Klobuchar or Bullock-Harris may provide an interesting ticket. I think Klobuchar is a comfortable selection for the critical states - Michigan, Pennsylvania, Ohio...   I think Bullock might be s guy who could be appealing to moderate Texans and Floridians. 

Bullock might be decent and sane!

Re: Friedman Article - Dems: Just Nominate a Decent, Sane Person
« Reply #65 on: July 21, 2019, 10:16:26 AM »

Offline Celtics4ever

  • Kevin Garnett
  • *****************
  • Posts: 17660
  • Tommy Points: 1167
Quote
I think Klobuchar is a comfortable selection for the critical states - Michigan, Pennsylvania, Ohio

She is from Minnesota which is a lot different than Michigan, Pennsylvania and Ohio.  She also is at 2 percent support in Iowa, one would think she would be doing better given that is next door to her home state.  Time will tell, though.

I do think Bullock could appeal in the Midwest and I live there.


Quote
Free public college tuition

This would be wasted on many who are not college material.   It is a waste of their time, and our money.   There would have to be minimum standards for me to ever support free college for everyone like a GPA minimum or maintaining a GPA for keep the free college or satisfactory academic progress.   I know people who did not work and took seven years to get their bachelor degree, do you think they ought to get free college.

Quote
military budget increases we passed with almost no debate.

We have to get the hypersonic missles and need to dominate this field, this is a critical thing unless you want to lose being a first rate world power. I am sure every one in Congress was briefed on this need and it ended the need for debate.

https://www.navytimes.com/news/your-navy/2019/05/01/op-ed-us-must-win-the-race-to-develop-hypersonic-missiles/

Re: Friedman Article - Dems: Just Nominate a Decent, Sane Person
« Reply #66 on: July 21, 2019, 11:35:55 AM »

Offline KGs Knee

  • Ed Macauley
  • ***********
  • Posts: 11515
  • Tommy Points: 1349
What do you guys think of Andrew Yang?

I didn't find him to be particularly impressive in the first Democratic debate, but I checked out his recent interview with Des Moines Register and he seems to really excel with in-depth long answers as opposed to rushed, debate sound bites.

Here is his recent interview with Des Moines Iowa in which he talks about his UBI platform, automation's role on American job losses, and healthcare. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=697sxx6mCuM

UBI alone will make him unelectable. Ditto for any candidate championing free college. Programs like that require huge tax increases, which most people will not support. You'll never win the middle with policy ideas like that.  Middle America ain't having it.

Free public college tuition would cost less per year than last year's military budget increases we passed with almost no debate. So it wouldn't take any more of a tax increase than that did.

It's a lot easier to sell someone on paying for their perceived defense than someone else's education.

All I can say is good luck if you think that's a position that can win the general election.  I'm pretty confident it's a losing bet.

Well, I disagree about the number of people who think "defense contractors for the best-funded military in human history absolutely need another $70 billion a year or I'm gonna die", but my point is simply that we can pay for it with even lower tax increases than that took. Or hey, with the same money.

Personally, I'd like to see the military budget drastically slashed and the money put directly into infrastructure (direct alternative to Trump's impossible plan).  That is an idea I think middle America will get behind.  That means less of their young going overseas and more good, blue-collar jobs for them.

Re: Friedman Article - Dems: Just Nominate a Decent, Sane Person
« Reply #67 on: July 21, 2019, 12:01:12 PM »

Offline bellerephon

  • Al Horford
  • Posts: 552
  • Tommy Points: 42
What do you guys think of Andrew Yang?

I didn't find him to be particularly impressive in the first Democratic debate, but I checked out his recent interview with Des Moines Register and he seems to really excel with in-depth long answers as opposed to rushed, debate sound bites.

Here is his recent interview with Des Moines Iowa in which he talks about his UBI platform, automation's role on American job losses, and healthcare. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=697sxx6mCuM

UBI alone will make him unelectable. Ditto for any candidate championing free college. Programs like that require huge tax increases, which most people will not support. You'll never win the middle with policy ideas like that.  Middle America ain't having it.

Free public college tuition would cost less per year than last year's military budget increases we passed with almost no debate. So it wouldn't take any more of a tax increase than that did.

It's a lot easier to sell someone on paying for their perceived defense than someone else's education.

All I can say is good luck if you think that's a position that can win the general election.  I'm pretty confident it's a losing bet.

Well, I disagree about the number of people who think "defense contractors for the best-funded military in human history absolutely need another $70 billion a year or I'm gonna die", but my point is simply that we can pay for it with even lower tax increases than that took. Or hey, with the same money.

Personally, I'd like to see the military budget drastically slashed and the money put directly into infrastructure (direct alternative to Trump's impossible plan).  That is an idea I think middle America will get behind.  That means less of their young going overseas and more good, blue-collar jobs for them.
I understand how people feel about the size of the military budget, but slashing has real consequences that need to be acknowledged. If the US military is smaller and less capable, that leaves opportunities for other powers to step in. China and Russia are already seeking to expand their influence, shrinking our military, even a little, essentially concedes greater power and influence to those countries. The US navy plays a major role in keeping shipping lanes open and fighting piracy, which is a real threat. A smaller navy makes that more difficult as well. Those are just a couple of issues, when we talk about shrinking the military budget, we need to decide where we are willing to step back and accept the consequences.

Re: Friedman Article - Dems: Just Nominate a Decent, Sane Person
« Reply #68 on: July 21, 2019, 01:46:38 PM »

Online nickagneta

  • Global Moderator
  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 37543
  • Tommy Points: 6115
What do you guys think of Andrew Yang?

I didn't find him to be particularly impressive in the first Democratic debate, but I checked out his recent interview with Des Moines Register and he seems to really excel with in-depth long answers as opposed to rushed, debate sound bites.

Here is his recent interview with Des Moines Iowa in which he talks about his UBI platform, automation's role on American job losses, and healthcare. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=697sxx6mCuM

UBI alone will make him unelectable. Ditto for any candidate championing free college. Programs like that require huge tax increases, which most people will not support. You'll never win the middle with policy ideas like that.  Middle America ain't having it.

Free public college tuition would cost less per year than last year's military budget increases we passed with almost no debate. So it wouldn't take any more of a tax increase than that did.

It's a lot easier to sell someone on paying for their perceived defense than someone else's education.

All I can say is good luck if you think that's a position that can win the general election.  I'm pretty confident it's a losing bet.

Well, I disagree about the number of people who think "defense contractors for the best-funded military in human history absolutely need another $70 billion a year or I'm gonna die", but my point is simply that we can pay for it with even lower tax increases than that took. Or hey, with the same money.

Personally, I'd like to see the military budget drastically slashed and the money put directly into infrastructure (direct alternative to Trump's impossible plan).  That is an idea I think middle America will get behind.  That means less of their young going overseas and more good, blue-collar jobs for them.
Absolutely there myself, my friend. This country could more than protect itself to everyone's satisfaction with a military budget $150-200 billion less than it is every year. You take that money, invest in infrastructure, create a ton of jobs in the construction industry, even creating a ton of union jobs and rebuilding America's blue collar middle class. That payroll then gets taxed and there is more a lot more money being poured into the economy by the middle class.

America's defense won't suffer. America warfare contractor's might not be as massively profitable, but they will be okay. America's infrastructure, which is in sore need for repair, gets fixed and modernized, and a lot of blue collar people who have slipped out of the middle class and into the lower class can now work their way back into the middle class.


Re: Friedman Article - Dems: Just Nominate a Decent, Sane Person
« Reply #69 on: July 21, 2019, 01:48:09 PM »

Offline slamtheking

  • Robert Parish
  • *********************
  • Posts: 21128
  • Tommy Points: 9131
What do you guys think of Andrew Yang?

I didn't find him to be particularly impressive in the first Democratic debate, but I checked out his recent interview with Des Moines Register and he seems to really excel with in-depth long answers as opposed to rushed, debate sound bites.

Here is his recent interview with Des Moines Iowa in which he talks about his UBI platform, automation's role on American job losses, and healthcare. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=697sxx6mCuM

UBI alone will make him unelectable. Ditto for any candidate championing free college. Programs like that require huge tax increases, which most people will not support. You'll never win the middle with policy ideas like that.  Middle America ain't having it.

Free public college tuition would cost less per year than last year's military budget increases we passed with almost no debate. So it wouldn't take any more of a tax increase than that did.

It's a lot easier to sell someone on paying for their perceived defense than someone else's education.

All I can say is good luck if you think that's a position that can win the general election.  I'm pretty confident it's a losing bet.

Well, I disagree about the number of people who think "defense contractors for the best-funded military in human history absolutely need another $70 billion a year or I'm gonna die", but my point is simply that we can pay for it with even lower tax increases than that took. Or hey, with the same money.

Personally, I'd like to see the military budget drastically slashed and the money put directly into infrastructure (direct alternative to Trump's impossible plan).  That is an idea I think middle America will get behind.  That means less of their young going overseas and more good, blue-collar jobs for them.
I understand how people feel about the size of the military budget, but slashing has real consequences that need to be acknowledged. If the US military is smaller and less capable, that leaves opportunities for other powers to step in. China and Russia are already seeking to expand their influence, shrinking our military, even a little, essentially concedes greater power and influence to those countries. The US navy plays a major role in keeping shipping lanes open and fighting piracy, which is a real threat. A smaller navy makes that more difficult as well. Those are just a couple of issues, when we talk about shrinking the military budget, we need to decide where we are willing to step back and accept the consequences.
personally, when I hear people talking about cutting military spending it's regarding cutting the volumes of pork in that budget, not cutting the legs out from under the military.   I think the budget could be not only held in line at current spending but actually reduced by eliminating special pet projects authorized by congress people trying to bring spending/jobs to their states which is totally unnecessary for the military to function.   I'd really like to see an increase in pay for those in the military and a cleaning up of the VA medical system such that no veteran has to deal with bills or poor service related to injuries received while serving.

Re: Friedman Article - Dems: Just Nominate a Decent, Sane Person
« Reply #70 on: July 21, 2019, 03:17:39 PM »

Online Neurotic Guy

  • Cedric Maxwell
  • **************
  • Posts: 14681
  • Tommy Points: 1593
Celts4Ever -

Yes I know Klobuchar is from Minnesota which isn’t MI, OH, or PA — but my perception is that she’s someone (like Bullock) who can relate to the “blue collar working person” - I think she comes across smart, sane, reasonable.  She doesn’t balance the proposed ticket by throwing a bone to the far Left.  I think she’d be perceived, by virtue of her pragmatic style, as acceptable to centrists which IMO is THE target.

I think being from a Midwest located state she avoids some of the anti-coastal bias that Harris might bring (and Dems will win California regardless). 

But you are from the Midwest and I’ll defer to your better knowledge of the Midwest voter.

Re: Friedman Article - Dems: Just Nominate a Decent, Sane Person
« Reply #71 on: July 21, 2019, 04:18:47 PM »

Offline Celtics4ever

  • Kevin Garnett
  • *****************
  • Posts: 17660
  • Tommy Points: 1167
I really think if Bullock can win in Montana he could win in Ohio.

Quote
Absolutely there myself, my friend. This country could more than protect itself to everyone's satisfaction with a military budget $150-200 billion less than it is every year.

Should have certain priorities though.  We should look to anticipate future war trends aka unmanned vehicles, hypersonic missles, Cyber warfare, and space weaponry,etc.

Re: Friedman Article - Dems: Just Nominate a Decent, Sane Person
« Reply #72 on: July 21, 2019, 05:27:51 PM »

Online nickagneta

  • Global Moderator
  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 37543
  • Tommy Points: 6115
I really think if Bullock can win in Montana he could win in Ohio.

Quote
Absolutely there myself, my friend. This country could more than protect itself to everyone's satisfaction with a military budget $150-200 billion less than it is every year.

Should have certain priorities though.  We should look to anticipate future war trends aka unmanned vehicles, hypersonic missles, Cyber warfare, and space weaponry,etc.
Yes, I think we can still stay on the cutting edge of warfare technology, protect our land, shores, seas, air and space to a best in the world level for say $550 billion a year, if we, like you say, prioritize certain things and cut all the waste, pork and outright fraud that exists in the current military budget.

Quite frankly, I find it appalling that this country spends over $700 billion a year on the military and our good and brave veterans aren't getting the absolute best of care and don't have certain things like 100% paid for medical coverage and insurance for life, free college tuition at any state college for a 4 year degree or equivalent in trade school training and other better perks for having served honorably. And military pay should get at least a 50% increase. For $550-700 billion a year, giving the men and women fair pay given their risk to life, should be a top priority.

I do think all those things can happen and be able to spend only $550 billion a year.

Some people might paint this stance as leftist hate for the military. What it actually is is a fiscally conservative idea of trimming the fat, waste and fraud and taking care of the good people who serve(d) this country with honor. I find it to be a pro military stance.

 

Hello! Guest

Welcome to the CelticsStrong Forums.

Community

Signup to win FREE tickets

* indicates required