Author Topic: 2020 Presidential election  (Read 72902 times)

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 53629
    • View Profile


DougMacG

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 13927
    • View Profile

DougMacG

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 13927
    • View Profile
2020 Presidential election, Ten Reasons it may be Two Terms
« Reply #53 on: January 03, 2019, 08:24:19 AM »
ccp:  Trump will lose in '20.

Maybe.

Some other factors besides Trump's personal defects will come into play:

1.  It's the economy - again.  The most recent one term Presidents had struggling economies.  Trump doubled the growth rate.  Unemployment is at 50 year lows.  Three million went off of 'so-called' food stamps in the very short time since the Leftists left the White House.  Record low Hispanic unemployment, record low black teenager unemployment, record low female unemployment, etc.  Even the hated Fed admits the improvement, restoring interest rates.

2.  North Korea tamed, if not denuked.  No Crimeas under Trump, Russia likely to wait out Trump on their next expansionism.  Mad Dog is gone but US military is feared again under Trump.  

3.  China has been called out on trade tactics and technology theft for the first.time.ever.  This is not done but Trump is already getting real concessions - by standing up for America.

4.  NAFTA re-opened and repaired.  NO ONE else would have done that.

5.  NATO strengthened using the only negotiating strategy that works - right out of art of the deal - willingness to walk away.

6.  American troops coming home from foreign wars.  People like that in some areas of the electoral college.  This is different than surrender under Obama because adversaries know we will be back on a moments notice if needed.

7.  America is number one in oil production again, essentially energy independent, no longer literally held hostage by Mullahs and dictators.  This happened because of capitalism plain and simple, accelerated by deregulation.  Gas prices are not going back to $4-5 under Trump.

8. Judge by the Left's crisis criteria, climate change.  America's emissions under Trump hit their targets and outperformed all the Paris signatories - without martial law or coercion.  Who knew?

9.  Improvements on refugee inflows and border security.

10.  The biggest, perhaps only reason Trump may win in '20 is the reason he won in '16, weak opponents.  Forget about strength in numbers on the Dem candidate list and look at any one of them who may emerge after all the fighting is done.  What has he or she done or will do about the above?  Make us stronger?  No.  Make us safer?  no.  Make us more prosperous?  No.  Keep us energy independent?  No.  Secure our border?  No.  Unite us?  No.  Inspire us?  No.  Scold us on our excesses?  Yes  Turn us into a failed state?  Yes.
« Last Edit: January 03, 2019, 08:29:55 AM by DougMacG »

ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 11948
    • View Profile
Re: 2020 Presidential election
« Reply #54 on: January 03, 2019, 09:42:55 AM »
agree with most of what you say but not everything:

"North Korea tamed, if not denuked.  No Crimeas under Trump"

Well we read N Korea is still proceeding with their nukes

No Crimea but a soviet air base on one of Venezuela's island

" Improvements on refugee inflows and border security."

I posted recently that illegals entries are actually up under Trump.
   nothing about those who overstay visas etc

I will surprised if there is not  a third party candidate - I can see Boomer doing that if he does not get a Dem nod .

DougMacG

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 13927
    • View Profile
Re: 2020 Presidential election
« Reply #55 on: January 04, 2019, 06:41:41 AM »
You are right ccp on the border and NK at halftime.  I'm predicting he will have some bragging rights on those scores in 2020.  Otherwise he will just run with the rest of the 300 accomplishments, versus what, Cory, Kamala, Julian? 

It reminds me, I have political gambling debts to settle with you.  Note to self, don't bet against ccp.

DougMacG

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 13927
    • View Profile
Re: 2020 Presidential election, I fear Amy
« Reply #56 on: January 16, 2019, 08:43:38 AM »
https://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2019/01/is-gillibrand-the-democrats-best-faux-moderate-woman.php

As the 2018 election drew near, she had outraised her Republican opponent by $7.4 million to $200,000.

Klobuchar:  Her lifetime American Conservative Union rating is 4.71, almost identical to Chuck Schumer’s 4.70.

Midwestern like Tim Pawlenty without all the charisma. 

http://www.startribune.com/sen-amy-klobuchar-drops-more-hints-disavows-fake-campaign-logo/504400492/

Hillary 2.0 in many ways without the marriage to Bill, Whitewater, email scandal etc.  She has walked through life without much scrutiny.  Rose to attention with a locally famous family name; her father was a well known newspaper columnist.
 Lousy prosecutor with good people on staff, she got through her Hennepin County Attorney job without major screwups or scandal.  Ran for Senate as a local Hillary clone in 2006 with the changeover of congress to the Pelosi Reid Dems and the end of a 53 month Bush Cheney expansion as investors saw what was coming and head for the doors.  She has mostly avoided strong rhetoric on divisive issues but is a lock-step far Left Dem by all of our standards.

I fear Hillary but hate to pull for the louder flame throwers.  Senators generally think they should be President, have faced all the issues but never run anything.  Obama was elected but most of the Senators fizzle in the Presidential contests.

https://www.minnpost.com/eric-black-ink/2018/10/another-upgrade-klobuchar-seen-as-6th-most-likely-2020-dem-nominee/

As you can see in the photo, the crowds aren't going to see Amy:


G M

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19251
    • View Profile
Re: 2020 Presidential election, I fear Amy
« Reply #57 on: January 16, 2019, 01:56:33 PM »
She does show a definite midwestern sense of style.  :wink:


https://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2019/01/is-gillibrand-the-democrats-best-faux-moderate-woman.php

As the 2018 election drew near, she had outraised her Republican opponent by $7.4 million to $200,000.

Klobuchar:  Her lifetime American Conservative Union rating is 4.71, almost identical to Chuck Schumer’s 4.70.

Midwestern like Tim Pawlenty without all the charisma. 

http://www.startribune.com/sen-amy-klobuchar-drops-more-hints-disavows-fake-campaign-logo/504400492/

Hillary 2.0 in many ways without the marriage to Bill, Whitewater, email scandal etc.  She has walked through life without much scrutiny.  Rose to attention with a locally famous family name; her father was a well known newspaper columnist.
 Lousy prosecutor with good people on staff, she got through her Hennepin County Attorney job without major screwups or scandal.  Ran for Senate as a local Hillary clone in 2006 with the changeover of congress to the Pelosi Reid Dems and the end of a 53 month Bush Cheney expansion as investors saw what was coming and head for the doors.  She has mostly avoided strong rhetoric on divisive issues but is a lock-step far Left Dem by all of our standards.

I fear Hillary but hate to pull for the louder flame throwers.  Senators generally think they should be President, have faced all the issues but never run anything.  Obama was elected but most of the Senators fizzle in the Presidential contests.

https://www.minnpost.com/eric-black-ink/2018/10/another-upgrade-klobuchar-seen-as-6th-most-likely-2020-dem-nominee/

As you can see in the photo, the crowds aren't going to see Amy:



DougMacG

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 13927
    • View Profile
Re: 2020 Presidential election, I fear Amy
« Reply #58 on: January 16, 2019, 06:03:08 PM »
"She does show a definite midwestern sense of style.  :wink:   "

Diplomatically expressed.  She won't win this on looks alone.

G M

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19251
    • View Profile
Re: 2020 Presidential election, I fear Amy
« Reply #59 on: January 16, 2019, 07:55:39 PM »
"She does show a definite midwestern sense of style.  :wink:   "

Diplomatically expressed.  She won't win this on looks alone.


I have worked a couple of EP details where Hollywood types mingle with theater owners. From across the room, I can tell who is from Tinseltown and who owns a chain of theaters in middle America.

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 53629
    • View Profile
POTH/Lara Bazelon on Kamala Harris's record as CA's AG
« Reply #60 on: January 17, 2019, 08:25:39 AM »


Kamala Harris Was Not a ‘Progressive Prosecutor’

The senator was often on the wrong side of history when she served as California’s attorney general.

By Lara Bazelon

Ms. Bazelon is a law professor and the former director of the Loyola Law School Project for the Innocent in Los Angeles.

    Jan. 17, 2019

Before she was a senator, Kamala Harris was an attorney general and district attorney who acted in ways that could hardly be described as "progressive," Lara Bazelon writes.CreditDamon Winter/The New York Times


Before she was a senator, Kamala Harris was an attorney general and district attorney who acted in ways that could hardly be described as "progressive," Lara Bazelon writes.CreditCreditDamon Winter/The New York Times
=======================================

SAN FRANCISCO — With the growing recognition that prosecutors hold the keys to a fairer criminal justice system, the term “progressive prosecutor” has almost become trendy. This is how Senator Kamala Harris of California, a likely presidential candidate and a former prosecutor, describes herself.

But she’s not.

Time after time, when progressives urged her to embrace criminal justice reforms as a district attorney and then the state’s attorney general, Ms. Harris opposed them or stayed silent. Most troubling, Ms. Harris fought tooth and nail to uphold wrongful convictions that had been secured through official misconduct that included evidence tampering, false testimony and the suppression of crucial information by prosecutors.

Consider her record as San Francisco’s district attorney from 2004 to 2011. Ms. Harris was criticized in 2010 for withholding information about a police laboratory technician who had been accused of “intentionally sabotaging” her work and stealing drugs from the lab. After a memo surfaced showing that Ms. Harris’s deputies knew about the technician’s wrongdoing and recent conviction, but failed to alert defense lawyers, a judge condemned Ms. Harris’s indifference to the systemic violation of the defendants’ constitutional rights.

Ms. Harris contested the ruling by arguing that the judge, whose husband was a defense attorney and had spoken publicly about the importance of disclosing evidence, had a conflict of interest. Ms. Harris lost. More than 600 cases handled by the corrupt technician were dismissed.


Ms. Harris also championed state legislation under which parents whose children were found to be habitually truant in elementary school could be prosecuted, despite concerns that it would disproportionately affect low-income people of color.

Ms. Harris was similarly regressive as the state’s attorney general. When a federal judge in Orange County ruled that the death penalty was unconstitutional in 2014, Ms. Harris appealed. In a public statement, she made the bizarre argument that the decision “undermines important protections that our courts provide to defendants.” (The approximately 740 men and women awaiting execution in California might disagree).

In 2014, she declined to take a position on Proposition 47, a ballot initiative approved by voters, that reduced certain low-level felonies to misdemeanors. She laughed that year when a reporter asked if she would support the legalization of marijuana for recreational use. Ms. Harris finally reversed course in 2018, long after public opinion had shifted on the topic.

In 2015, she opposed a bill requiring her office to investigate shootings involving officers. And she refused to support statewide standards regulating the use of body-worn cameras by police officers. For this, she incurred criticism from an array of left-leaning reformers, including Democratic state senators, the A.C.L.U. and San Francisco’s elected public defender. The activist Phelicia Jones, who had supported Ms. Harris for years, asked, “How many more people need to die before she steps in?”

Worst of all, though, is Ms. Harris’s record in wrongful conviction cases. Consider George Gage, an electrician with no criminal record who was charged in 1999 with sexually abusing his stepdaughter, who reported the allegations years later. The case largely hinged on the stepdaughter’s testimony and Mr. Gage was convicted.


Afterward, the judge discovered that the prosecutor had unlawfully held back potentially exculpatory evidence, including medical reports indicating that the stepdaughter had been repeatedly untruthful with law enforcement. Her mother even described her as “a pathological liar” who “lives her lies.”

In 2015, when the case reached the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit in San Francisco, Ms. Harris’s prosecutors defended the conviction. They pointed out that Mr. Gage, while forced to act as his own lawyer, had not properly raised the legal issue in the lower court, as the law required.

The appellate judges acknowledged this impediment and sent the case to mediation, a clear signal for Ms. Harris to dismiss the case. When she refused to budge, the court upheld the conviction on that technicality. Mr. Gage is still in prison serving a 70-year sentence.

That case is not an outlier. Ms. Harris also fought to keep Daniel Larsen in prison on a 28-year-to-life sentence for possession of a concealed weapon even though his trial lawyer was incompetent and there was compelling evidence of his innocence. Relying on a technicality again, Ms. Harris argued that Mr. Larsen failed to raise his legal arguments in a timely fashion. (This time, she lost.)

She also defended Johnny Baca’s conviction for murder even though judges found a prosecutor presented false testimony at the trial. She relented only after a video of the oral argument received national attention and embarrassed her office.

And then there’s Kevin Cooper, the death row inmate whose trial was infected by racism and corruption. He sought advanced DNA testing to prove his innocence, but Ms. Harris opposed it. (After The New York Times’s exposé of the case went viral, she reversed her position.)

All this is a shame because the state’s top prosecutor has the power and the imperative to seek justice. In cases of tainted convictions, that means conceding error and overturning them. Rather than fulfilling that obligation, Ms. Harris turned legal technicalities into weapons so she could cement injustices.
Get our weekly newsletter and never miss an Op-Doc


In “The Truths We Hold,” Ms. Harris’s recently published memoir, she writes: “America has a deep and dark history of people using the power of the prosecutor as an instrument of injustice.”

She adds, “I know this history well — of innocent men framed, of charges brought against people without sufficient evidence, of prosecutors hiding information that would exonerate defendants, of the disproportionate application of the law.”

All too often, she was on the wrong side of that history.

It is true that politicians must make concessions to get the support of key interest groups. The fierce, collective opposition of law enforcement and local district attorney associations can be hard to overcome at the ballot box. But in her career, Ms. Harris did not barter or trade to get the support of more conservative law-and-order types; she gave it all away.

Of course, the full picture is more complicated. During her tenure as district attorney, Ms. Harris refused to seek the death penalty in a case involving the murder of a police officer. And she started a successful program that offered first-time nonviolent offenders a chance to have their charges dismissed if they completed a rigorous vocational training. As attorney general, she mandated implicit bias training and was awarded for her work in correcting a backlog in the testing of rape kits.

But if Kamala Harris wants people who care about dismantling mass incarceration and correcting miscarriages of justice to vote for her, she needs to radically break with her past.

A good first step would be to apologize to the wrongfully convicted people she has fought to keep in prison and to do what she can to make sure they get justice. She should start with George Gage.

DougMacG

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 13927
    • View Profile
Re: POTH/Lara Bazelon on Kamala Harris's record as CA's AG
« Reply #61 on: January 17, 2019, 09:03:49 AM »
Good article, let these carry their own baggage.

"In “The Truths We Hold,” Ms. Harris’s recently published memoir"

Oh good God, she has a memoir?  Of what?

Nate Silver has her well positioned in a crowded field relative to the competition:
https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/why-kamala-and-beto-have-more-upside-than-joe-and-bernie/
https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/how-17-long-shot-presidential-contenders-could-build-a-winning-coalition/

With sarcasm, she shares that common experience women across the heartland can relate to, she no marriage or children through all her childbearing years, got her start in politics sleeping with Willie Brown, 30 years her senior.  http://articles.latimes.com/1994-11-29/news/mn-2787_1_brown-associates
 At 54 she has now been married for 4 years.

ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 11948
    • View Profile
Coffee man for President
« Reply #62 on: January 18, 2019, 08:59:34 PM »
Howard Schultz running as "independent"

I can hear it now. 
Another "entitlement coming:

Government department to oversee program to to provide  "free" coffee for all.
(Illegals included. )     :wink:


DougMacG

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 13927
    • View Profile
2020 Presidential, NYTimes Kamala Harris Was Not a ‘Progressive Prosecutor'
« Reply #63 on: January 22, 2019, 07:52:19 AM »
If we intend to chronicle the flaws of the candidates this cycle we're 'going to need a bigger blog'.
Opinion
Kamala Harris Was Not a ‘Progressive Prosecutor’
The senator was often on the wrong side of history when she served as California’s attorney general.

By Lara Bazelon
Ms. Bazelon is a law professor and the former director of the Loyola Law School Project for the Innocent in Los Angeles.

Jan. 17, 2019

Before she was a senator, Kamala Harris was an attorney general and district attorney who acted in ways that could hardly be described as "progressive," Lara Bazelon writes.

Before she was a senator, Kamala Harris was an attorney general and district attorney who acted in ways that could hardly be described as "progressive," Lara Bazelon writes.

SAN FRANCISCO — With the growing recognition that prosecutors hold the keys to a fairer criminal justice system, the term “progressive prosecutor” has almost become trendy. This is how Senator Kamala Harris of California, a likely presidential candidate and a former prosecutor, describes herself.

But she’s not.

Time after time, when progressives urged her to embrace criminal justice reforms as a district attorney and then the state’s attorney general, Ms. Harris opposed them or stayed silent. Most troubling, Ms. Harris fought tooth and nail to uphold wrongful convictions that had been secured through official misconduct that included evidence tampering, false testimony and the suppression of crucial information by prosecutors.

Consider her record as San Francisco’s district attorney from 2004 to 2011. Ms. Harris was criticized in 2010 for withholding information about a police laboratory technician who had been accused of “intentionally sabotaging” her work and stealing drugs from the lab. After a memo surfaced showing that Ms. Harris’s deputies knew about the technician’s wrongdoing and recent conviction, but failed to alert defense lawyers, a judge condemned Ms. Harris’s indifference to the systemic violation of the defendants’ constitutional rights.

Ms. Harris contested the ruling by arguing that the judge, whose husband was a defense attorney and had spoken publicly about the importance of disclosing evidence, had a conflict of interest. Ms. Harris lost. More than 600 cases handled by the corrupt technician were dismissed.

Ms. Harris also championed state legislation under which parents whose children were found to be habitually truant in elementary school could be prosecuted, despite concerns that it would disproportionately affect low-income people of color.

Ms. Harris was similarly regressive as the state’s attorney general. When a federal judge in Orange County ruled that the death penalty was unconstitutional in 2014, Ms. Harris appealed. In a public statement, she made the bizarre argument that the decision “undermines important protections that our courts provide to defendants.” (The approximately 740 men and women awaiting execution in California might disagree).

In 2014, she declined to take a position on Proposition 47, a ballot initiative approved by voters, that reduced certain low-level felonies to misdemeanors. She laughed that year when a reporter asked if she would support the legalization of marijuana for recreational use. Ms. Harris finally reversed course in 2018, long after public opinion had shifted on the topic.

In 2015, she opposed a bill requiring her office to investigate shootings involving officers. And she refused to support statewide standards regulating the use of body-worn cameras by police officers. For this, she incurred criticism from an array of left-leaning reformers, including Democratic state senators, the A.C.L.U. and San Francisco’s elected public defender. The activist Phelicia Jones, who had supported Ms. Harris for years, asked, “How many more people need to die before she steps in?”

Worst of all, though, is Ms. Harris’s record in wrongful conviction cases. Consider George Gage, an electrician with no criminal record who was charged in 1999 with sexually abusing his stepdaughter, who reported the allegations years later. The case largely hinged on the stepdaughter’s testimony and Mr. Gage was convicted.

Afterward, the judge discovered that the prosecutor had unlawfully held back potentially exculpatory evidence, including medical reports indicating that the stepdaughter had been repeatedly untruthful with law enforcement. Her mother even described her as “a pathological liar” who “lives her lies.”

In 2015, when the case reached the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit in San Francisco, Ms. Harris’s prosecutors defended the conviction. They pointed out that Mr. Gage, while forced to act as his own lawyer, had not properly raised the legal issue in the lower court, as the law required.

The appellate judges acknowledged this impediment and sent the case to mediation, a clear signal for Ms. Harris to dismiss the case. When she refused to budge, the court upheld the conviction on that technicality. Mr. Gage is still in prison serving a 70-year sentence.

That case is not an outlier. Ms. Harris also fought to keep Daniel Larsen in prison on a 28-year-to-life sentence for possession of a concealed weapon even though his trial lawyer was incompetent and there was compelling evidence of his innocence. Relying on a technicality again, Ms. Harris argued that Mr. Larsen failed to raise his legal arguments in a timely fashion. (This time, she lost.)

She also defended Johnny Baca’s conviction for murder even though judges found a prosecutor presented false testimony at the trial. She relented only after a video of the oral argument received national attention and embarrassed her office.

And then there’s Kevin Cooper, the death row inmate whose trial was infected by racism and corruption. He sought advanced DNA testing to prove his innocence, but Ms. Harris opposed it. (After The New York Times’s exposé of the case went viral, she reversed her position.)

All this is a shame because the state’s top prosecutor has the power and the imperative to seek justice. In cases of tainted convictions, that means conceding error and overturning them. Rather than fulfilling that obligation, Ms. Harris turned legal technicalities into weapons so she could cement injustices.

In “The Truths We Hold,” Ms. Harris’s recently published memoir, she writes: “America has a deep and dark history of people using the power of the prosecutor as an instrument of injustice.”

She adds, “I know this history well — of innocent men framed, of charges brought against people without sufficient evidence, of prosecutors hiding information that would exonerate defendants, of the disproportionate application of the law.”

All too often, she was on the wrong side of that history.

It is true that politicians must make concessions to get the support of key interest groups. The fierce, collective opposition of law enforcement and local district attorney associations can be hard to overcome at the ballot box. But in her career, Ms. Harris did not barter or trade to get the support of more conservative law-and-order types; she gave it all away.

Of course, the full picture is more complicated. During her tenure as district attorney, Ms. Harris refused to seek the death penalty in a case involving the murder of a police officer. And she started a successful program that offered first-time nonviolent offenders a chance to have their charges dismissed if they completed a rigorous vocational training. As attorney general, she mandated implicit bias training and was awarded for her work in correcting a backlog in the testing of rape kits.

But if Kamala Harris wants people who care about dismantling mass incarceration and correcting miscarriages of justice to vote for her, she needs to radically break with her past.

A good first step would be to apologize to the wrongfully convicted people she has fought to keep in prison and to do what she can to make sure they get justice. She should start with George Gage.

DougMacG

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 13927
    • View Profile
Re: 2020 Presidential election, Gillibrand embarrassed by her previous stances
« Reply #64 on: January 25, 2019, 07:16:19 AM »
Gillibrand is likely to face additional questions over her record, having begun her political career as a centrist Democrat only to evolve over the years into a liberal firebrand.

While representing New York’s rural 20th congressional district, Gillibrand opposed “amnesty” for undocumented immigrants and a proposal to issue them driver’s licenses. But as a senator, she backed comprehensive immigration reform and threw her support behind abolishing the Immigration and Customs Enforcement (Ice) agency.

Gillibrand also once enjoyed an “A” rating from the National Rifle Association, stemming from her opposition to stricter gun laws in the earlier stages of her career. The NRA downgraded her rating to an “F” in 2010, after she embraced several gun control measures. Gillibrand has said she is “embarrassed” by her previous stances on guns.

“If you looked up ‘political opportunism’ in the dictionary, Kirsten Gillibrand’s photo would be next to it,”
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2019/jan/17/kirsten-gillibrand-formidable-2020-presidential-candidate
« Last Edit: January 25, 2019, 07:18:08 AM by DougMacG »

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 53629
    • View Profile

ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 11948
    • View Profile
Re: 2020 Presidential election
« Reply #66 on: January 28, 2019, 05:23:14 AM »
Anyone notice the themes from the LEFT

They are twisting it around ala Bill Clinton spin

About they are for sovereignty democracy etc

We need to be ready for them turning it around on us .

Take the female version of Obama , Harris:

"We are here because the American Dream and our American democracy are under attack"

oh really !  obama did more to strip our dream our sovereignty from us . How is make America great stripping away the dream
how is getting jobs for all and standing up to foes and "friends" who take advantage of us doing that

another hollywood hypocrite Patricia  Arguette using another one of the endless self congratulatory award shows to thank Muuuuuler  for  saving our "sovereignty "

If this is not twisting the truth backwards   -  more like the Dem Party doing it with open borders

We better have answers ready for this .  Our message must stick it to them.
For once lets shove back in their faces.

ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 11948
    • View Profile
Re: 2020 Presidential election
« Reply #67 on: January 28, 2019, 05:14:52 PM »
This guy maybe Schultz's campaign manager
??


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steve_Schmidt


https://www.nationalreview.com/2019/01/billionaire-presidential-candidates-2020-howard-schultz-bloomberg-trump/

Pretty funny to see the Jewish liberal billionaires duking it out.
Boomer already pissed.    :lol:

DougMacG

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 13927
    • View Profile
2020 Presidential election, I fear Amy, George Will on Amy Klobuchar
« Reply #68 on: January 31, 2019, 05:11:30 AM »
There are some useful observations here and some flaws to his thinking:

http://m.startribune.com/george-will-amy-klobuchar-could-be-the-democrats-best-bet-in-2020/505107432/

ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 11948
    • View Profile
HUff compost already going after Howard Schultz
« Reply #69 on: January 31, 2019, 07:54:41 AM »
Let's see based on company profile SBUX employs 291,000 employees in US alone .

Gee wonder if we can find any that will be very unhappy with Howard running?

I guess huffpost can:

https://www.yahoo.com/news/starbucks-telling-employees-howard-schultz-205457390.html

I say: go Howard go !   :))


G M

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19251
    • View Profile

ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 11948
    • View Profile
Re: 2020 Presidential election
« Reply #72 on: February 10, 2019, 11:43:42 AM »
One of my patients who worked in Newark called Cory Booker a "nothing but a showboater" -

years ago .

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 53629
    • View Profile
WSJ: The Case for Amy Kloobuchar
« Reply #73 on: February 10, 2019, 06:32:00 PM »
The Case for Amy Klobuchar
A Minnesota pragmatist could help Democrats beat Trump in 2020.
44 Comments
By The Editorial Board
Feb. 10, 2019 5:08 p.m. ET
Senate Judiciary Committee member Sen. Amy Klobuchar in Washington, Feb. 7.
Senate Judiciary Committee member Sen. Amy Klobuchar in Washington, Feb. 7. Photo: J. Scott Applewhite/Associated Press

Amy Klobuchar is running for President, and perhaps she can be the Democrats’ consensus candidate. “We are tired—of the shutdowns and the showdowns, of the gridlock and the grandstanding,” the Minnesota Senator said Sunday, standing amid falling snow in a Minneapolis park. “Our nation must be governed not from chaos but from opportunity.” Though Ms. Klobuchar won’t be the first choice of the socialist left, she is running as a candidate who is liberal enough while also a sharp contrast in temperament to President Trump.

At 58, she’s a generation younger than Joe Biden, her potential middle-of-the-road competitor. With 12 years in the Senate, she has more experience than Julián Castro or Beto O’Rourke. She’s a Midwesterner, and Democrats need to win back Wisconsin, Michigan and Ohio.
Potomac Watch Podcast
Virginia's Political Crisis
Virginia's political crisis, and Acting Attorney General Matt Whitaker testifies at the House Judiciary Committee's oversight hearing.

As a woman, she ticks the identity-politics box. Yet she doesn’t carry the baggage of Elizabeth Warren (who impersonated a Native American), Kamala Harris (whose zeal as a prosecutor is passé), or Kirsten Gillibrand (whose politics have “evolved” faster than the flu virus).

Unlike most 2020 contenders, Ms. Klobuchar hasn’t parroted lefty slogans. Asked last year about abolishing Immigration and Customs Enforcement, she said it would be better to focus on changing its policies, adding: “We are always going to need immigration enforcement.” She advocates letting people buy into Medicare, rather than forcing it on everybody, while still saying universal health-care is the goal.

Ms. Klobuchar once called her approach “pretty pragmatic.” In 2007 she passed a bill tightening safety standards for pool drains, after a few young children were hurt or killed by the suction. In 2011 she stood up for the nutritional value of tomato paste, when the Agriculture Department was debating if school-lunch pizza should continue to count as a vegetable serving.
Newsletter Sign-up

More recently, she has focused on lowering prescription drug prices and boosting privacy online. Critics of her record in the Senate say she plays small ball. Ms. Klobuchar responds that she simply knows how to get things done. Minnesotans clearly take her side. During her re-election last year, she won 60% of the vote, including every congressional district.

But when Democrats outside Minnesota are asked about Amy Klobuchar, they reply: Amy who? In a national survey last month, 49% said they’d never heard of her. Another 21% didn’t know enough to have an opinion. Even in neighboring Iowa, Ms. Klobuchar was the first 2020 choice for only 3% of Democrats, according to a December poll. She was tied with—gulp—Michael Bloomberg.

She is also getting criticism, albeit anonymously, as a tough boss who mistreated her staff. She has had some of the highest staff turnover on Capitol Hill, but the stories would have more credibility if the critics lent their names. Perhaps the Senator is simply less tolerant of millennial demands. The stories are notable mainly because they contrast with Ms. Klobuchar’s Minnesota Nice public persona.

Another question is how far Ms. Klobuchar will go to raise her profile. Last week she quietly co-sponsored the Senate resolution on a Green New Deal. Running on a pledge to eliminate fossil fuels in 10 years? Mr. Trump can only hope. If Ms. Klobuchar, already a solid liberal, feels the need to zag further left, she could lose the strongest argument for her candidacy: She may be the Democrat best able to beat Mr. Trump.

DougMacG

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 13927
    • View Profile
Re: WSJ: The Case for Amy Klobuchar?
« Reply #74 on: February 11, 2019, 06:22:34 AM »
The Case for Amy Klobuchar?

   - The WSJ article cited has some truths and some flaws in it.  When she was elected, she was an exact policy clone of Hillary Clinton with local name recognition, without all the baggage, running nearly unopposed in a solidly, old style blue state.  She has continuing, unexplained popularity that has continued to clear the field for her.

   - She is a woman, box checked, and they got her age and years of Senate experience right.  She wasn't a prosecutor, she ran a department that prosecuted.  She accomplished WHAT in the Senate by the way?  She entered the Senate in 2006, stopped the Bush expansion and tanked the economy.  She supported every policy that brought on the crash and she supported every wrong-headed policy of Obama, who was the furthest left of all her fellow Senators.  She stood up to him on nothing to set herself apart, not the healthcare takeover, not cars for cash, not Solyndra boondoggle, QE, trillion dollar deficits, not the Iran disaster.  When did she cross over or stand up to him?  Never.  Just a perfect partisan.  A follower, not a leader.  Chuck Schumer and Dick Durbin without all the charisma.

"Yet she doesn’t carry the baggage of Elizabeth Warren (who impersonated a Native American), Kamala Harris (whose zeal as a prosecutor is passé), or Kirsten Gillibrand (whose politics have “evolved” faster than the flu virus)."

   - True, she doesn't have Hillary's or Warren's baggage and she doesn't talk like AOC.  She does however carry all the baggage of the Democratic Party of the last 12 years into the general election if nominated.  12 years without making America competitive.  Will she run on bringing back collapse or stagnation?  Empowering Iran or empowering North Korea?  Selling out to China or to Russia?  Her opponent doubled the growth rate and made us safer.  How does she answer that?

"Unlike most 2020 contenders, Ms. Klobuchar hasn’t parroted lefty slogans. Asked last year about abolishing Immigration and Customs Enforcement, she said it would be better to focus on changing its policies, adding: “We are always going to need immigration enforcement.”

   - That counts as pragmatism in the Dem party today, admitting that nations have borders?  If so, it could sink her in the primaries.  Those blue collar workers that care about borders are now called Trump voters.

Ms. Klobuchar once called her approach “pretty pragmatic.” In 2007 she passed a bill tightening safety standards for pool drains, after a few young children were hurt or killed by the suction. In 2011 she stood up for the nutritional value of tomato paste, when the Agriculture Department was debating if school-lunch pizza should continue to count as a vegetable serving.

   - Yes, she can be the pool drain President.  I stand corrected on no accomplishments.  One girl was horribly drowned in the Minneapolis Golf Club pool and she closed all old pools in the nation, forced upgrades and saved likely zero lives while supporting the abortion of millions.  No mention of where she stands on nine month plus one day terminations?

"More recently, she has focused on lowering prescription drug prices and boosting privacy online. [I like that.]  Critics of her record in the Senate say she plays small ball. Ms. Klobuchar responds that she simply knows how to get things done. Minnesotans clearly take her side. During her re-election last year, she won 60% of the vote, including every congressional district."

   - She wins with name recognition here and has always had more than ten to one money advantage.  That doesn't carry as far as Iowa or Wisconsin, she won't win either Dakota, and it won't help her in New Hampshire, Ohio, Michigan, Pennsylvania.  Her famous dad of the Minneapolis Tribune was unknown and un-noteworthy outside the state.

"She is also getting criticism, albeit anonymously, as a tough boss who mistreated her staff. She has had some of the highest staff turnover on Capitol Hill, but the stories would have more credibility if the critics lent their names. Perhaps the Senator is simply less tolerant of millennial demands. The stories are notable mainly because they contrast with Ms. Klobuchar’s Minnesota Nice public persona."

   - Excuse me but there is a big difference between being a tough boss and mistreating your staff.  Her true character is revealed behind the scenes.  The stories are notable because she is a bitch when the cameras are off, unnecessarily.  I knew that from a family member, a Democrat, who worked for her in her previous job. Not exactly his words but to that effect.  Interesting to know that she is not authentic; her public and private persona are different.  That is not likely to change at 58 and could be be revealed in the course of a long campaign if she is competitive.  Amy Klobuchar has never been in a close competitive race, never faced a serious attack and never beat a real challenge from the left or the right.  She should fit right in, in a field of beginners.

"Another question is how far Ms. Klobuchar will go to raise her profile. Last week she quietly co-sponsored the Senate resolution on a Green New Deal. Running on a pledge to eliminate fossil fuels in 10 years? Mr. Trump can only hope. If Ms. Klobuchar, already a solid liberal, feels the need to zag further left, she could lose the strongest argument for her candidacy.

   - This is right.  If she runs to the Left in the primaries, she removes the only reason to vote for her, that she is a reasonable centrist, an old style Democrat, a unicorn in 2019.  There aren't any JFK Democrats or Humphrey Democrats left - so she copies the others to set herself apart?

Unmentioned is how well popular two term Minnesota Governor Tim Pawlenty did in Iowa, California, New York, Michigan.  She won in local, one newspaper town that has been playing her last name in large print without controversy everyday for 60 years.

If the Dem contest is a race to the Left, Amy does not either win it or set herself up as a contrast by endorsing the socialist green mantra.  Her only hope is to be the last one standing after a long series of others implode over the course of the campaign. 

Excite the Left or win the middle.  Choose one.
-----------------------
Amy's first statewide race:

Minnesota Democratic–Farmer–Labor Party primary results[1]
Party   Candidate   Votes 2006   %
DFL   Amy Klobuchar   294,671   92.51
DFL   Darryl Stanton     23,872      7.49

Population of MN is roughly 6 million, roughly 95% of whom did not come out to vote for her that beautiful September day.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2006_United_States_Senate_election_in_Minnesota

Money raised in Klobuchar's most recent reelction, 2018:
Amy Klobuchar (D) $10,681,536
Jim Newberger (R)   $257,989

A 42:1 advantage.  Good luck getting that matchup with Trump.
« Last Edit: February 11, 2019, 07:31:51 AM by DougMacG »

ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 11948
    • View Profile
Re: 2020 Presidential election
« Reply #75 on: February 11, 2019, 06:54:20 AM »
"- Excuse me but there is a big difference between being a tough boss and mistreating your staff.  Her true character is revealed behind the scenes.  The stories are notable because she is a bitch when the cameras are off, unnecessarily.  I knew that from a family member, a Democrat, who worked for her in her previous job. Interesting to know that she is not authentic.  Her public and private persona are different.  That is not likely to change at 58 and could be be revealed in the course of a long campaign if she is competitive."

you know someone who worked for her?
unlike Donald she is hiding her real persona.

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 53629
    • View Profile
Re: 2020 Presidential election
« Reply #76 on: February 11, 2019, 08:44:09 AM »
I confess so far I am unimpressed with this purported issue.  Trump has a substantial record of fukking with people who contract to do work for him, but we voted for him anyway. 

DougMacG

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 13927
    • View Profile
Re: 2020 Presidential election
« Reply #77 on: February 11, 2019, 10:53:41 AM »
I confess so far I am unimpressed with this purported issue.  Trump has a substantial record of fukking with people who contract to do work for him, but we voted for him anyway.

You are likely right.  Her personal ambition might be a strength now that she is running for the highest office in the land.  On the other side of it, she would be running in the general election as the non-Trump. *   Saying they both treat underlings badly doesn't cut it. It undercuts her already unimpressive image.  More importantly though, the flaws in Donald Trump, out in the open, partly helped him to accomplish large things.  The flaws in Amy have stayed secret while she so far has been no more than a placeholder for the Democratic Party.  When they needed 47 or 60 voters, she was there.  Pool drain safety and tomato paste nutrition are what a sympathetic article came up with for accomplishments.  Otherwise, every vote she took with Schumer, Durbin and Obama arguably moved the country backwards on most measurable fronts. 

It might be easier for Trump to run against a Dem Senator with a long voting record of failure than to run against an idealistic blank slate of promise like what Obama pulled off. 
----------------------------
 * Nate silver:  My thinking was that Klobuchar’s mild-mannered Minnesota-niceness and long career as a public servant — and the fact that she’s a woman — would look to Democratic voters like the antidote to Trump’s bombast and braggadocio.
https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/amy-klobuchar-2020-democratic-nomination-kickoff/
« Last Edit: February 11, 2019, 11:26:11 AM by DougMacG »

DougMacG

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 13927
    • View Profile
Re: 2020 Presidential election, Klobuchar
« Reply #78 on: February 11, 2019, 11:24:34 AM »
In a blizzard and in a multi-week, below zero stretch she addresses climate change at her kick-off.  No irony.  "We believe in science."  Lucky for her the ideologues don't call it global warming anymore.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JMb59UaMLPA

ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 11948
    • View Profile
Re: 2020 Presidential election
« Reply #79 on: February 11, 2019, 12:38:32 PM »
" I confess so far I am unimpressed with this purported issue.  Trump has a substantial record of fukking with people who contract to do work for him, but we voted for him anyway"

Agree as I alluded to my previous post 6:54 am) but Doug makes a good point too:  At least it is becoming clear that Klobuchar will not be able to claim some sort of *moral high ground* against Trump.


G M

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19251
    • View Profile
Re: 2020 Presidential election
« Reply #80 on: February 11, 2019, 12:57:04 PM »
" I confess so far I am unimpressed with this purported issue.  Trump has a substantial record of fukking with people who contract to do work for him, but we voted for him anyway"

Agree as I alluded to my previous post 6:54 am) but Doug makes a good point too:  At least it is becoming clear that Klobuchar will not be able to claim some sort of *moral high ground* against Trump.

Dollar Palace-Hillary



DougMacG

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 13927
    • View Profile
Re: 2020 Presidential election, Dems officially off the deep end
« Reply #81 on: February 12, 2019, 06:54:35 AM »
"the Green New Deal has been embraced by every Democrat in the race including Klobuchar and Senate colleagues Kamala Harris, Elizabeth Warren, Cory Booker, and Kirsten Gillibrand."

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/klobuchar-dismisses-moderate-label-people-should-see-me-as-a-progressive
----------------------------------

Wow.  Running on taking away all private automobiles, grounding and recycling the metal on all airplanes, shutting down all nuclear plants, confiscating all natural gas furnaces, ending air conditioning as we know it and making us all vegans against our will. 

Walter Mondale was too far left in all 50 states but he had an answer for this in "1984":
"Where's the Beef?"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pjw8m7GmIa4
--------------------------------------

As AOC and all these candidates talk about getting the majorities that will pass Green New Coercive Deal, they will not stop at banning airplanes, cars, heat and beef, they will ban guns too.  Obviously, gun owners will resist, but at least one candidate says they will have the nuclear weapons, so what they are really proposing is coercive victory through nuclear civil war.  Put THAT on the ballot in 2020.

« Last Edit: February 12, 2019, 08:52:51 AM by DougMacG »


ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 11948
    • View Profile
Senator Tom Cotton
« Reply #83 on: February 13, 2019, 06:13:26 AM »
on the Left and their co conspirators in the media  covering for the Dem prez candidates:

https://townhall.com/tipsheet/leahbarkoukis/2019/02/13/cotton-media-have-been-complicit-in-the-stalinlike-coverup-of-radical-parts-of-green-new-deal-n2541406

As Pat Buchanan points out Trump may have hit on a winning formula:
https://buchanan.org/blog/has-trump-found-the-formula-for-2020-135970

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 53629
    • View Profile


ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 11948
    • View Profile
NR Trump should be speaking to minorities specifically
« Reply #86 on: February 21, 2019, 06:46:52 AM »
https://www.nationalreview.com/2019/02/republican-party-minority-voters-2020-campaign-strategy/

Is Trump such a coward he only gives speeches to bastions of support?
Is he afraid if he goes to minority community he will be heckled?

I don't know why he just continues to refuse to do this. I suspect it would help more then hurt .
I wonder if he is AFRAID of the potential for a  less than loving crowd.   :wink:




DougMacG

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 13927
    • View Profile
Re: NR Trump should be speaking to minorities specifically
« Reply #87 on: February 21, 2019, 08:22:12 AM »
https://www.nationalreview.com/2019/02/republican-party-minority-voters-2020-campaign-strategy/

Is Trump such a coward he only gives speeches to bastions of support?
Is he afraid if he goes to minority community he will be heckled?

I don't know why he just continues to refuse to do this. I suspect it would help more then hurt .
I wonder if he is AFRAID of the potential for a  less than loving crowd.   :wink:

I think he tried to do that with his Venezuela speech in Miami.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=19&v=IBYs1NWOp1Q

The article suggests he bring his economic record with blacks to Philadelphia and I think he will.  I don't think its cowardice but just optics.  His rallies have been a political masterpiece of making him look and sound popular. I'm sure he will stay with the large venue look and having protesters hauled out is bad optics. A so-called black neighborhood is not going to come out with the same level of excitement to show public support for Trump even as he has the possibility to double his support there.  Just getting more blacks and Hispanics and Asian Americans into the picture and into the arena would be a breakthrough.  There is no doubt that the words of his speeches will be touting the inclusiveness of his economic accomplishments with minorities at every stop.  Whites also don't want to be part of a white-centric movement.  Whites were proud to elect the first black President and whites at least on the right are proud of the Trump economic record with minorities.

DougMacG

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 13927
    • View Profile
2020 Presidential election: Dems should but won't pick John Hickenlooper,
« Reply #88 on: February 21, 2019, 10:04:19 AM »
Besides Warren, I also predict failure for John Hickenlooper who is probably the best of the Democrats, a far better 'moderate' than Amy.  He is scheduled to be in a Sioux City (IA) coffee shop for one hour this Saturday.  Don't expect it to look like a Trump rally.

These small stops tell you how expensive it is to wage a national campaign, flying  around for such a brief stop not likely to excite anyone:  "Moderate Problem Solver Coming to Town!"

If no one comes, it's over?

My relatives in Sioux City are Republicans, as are most moderates in the heartland these days.

http://kscj.com/2019/02/20/hickenlooper-to-test-political-waters-in-sioux-city/

https://www.denverpost.com/2019/01/31/john-hickenlooper-moderate-presidential-candidate/
---------------------------------------------
Distant relative Bourke B. Hickenlooper (common name?) was a Republican Lt. Gov, Governor in the 1940s, then served 4 terms in the US Senate through the 1960s, died in 1971.  Not likely to bring the former Colorado Democratic governor too many votes.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bourke_B._Hickenlooper

ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 11948
    • View Profile
Forget about the Black vote for repubs
« Reply #89 on: February 22, 2019, 05:16:19 AM »
As know it is about "reparations" all along

Try competing with promises of  cold hard cash :

https://theweek.com/speedreads/825066/elizabeth-warren-backs-reparations-black-americans

DougMacG

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 13927
    • View Profile
Clumsy Kamala, 3 strikes
« Reply #90 on: February 22, 2019, 08:53:50 PM »

DougMacG

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 13927
    • View Profile
« Last Edit: February 23, 2019, 01:05:28 AM by DougMacG »

G M

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19251
    • View Profile

DougMacG

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 13927
    • View Profile
Re: 2020 Presidential election, NYT: Klobuchar is a (bitch)
« Reply #93 on: February 23, 2019, 01:14:32 AM »
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/02/22/us/politics/amy-klobuchar-staff.html

There is a story where she made her staff shave her legs.

Eeewww!!  Yuch!  I'd prefer waterboarding.  Just like the NYT to do a hit ipiece on a Dem and leave out the worst details.
« Last Edit: February 23, 2019, 06:09:08 AM by DougMacG »

G M

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19251
    • View Profile

DougMacG

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 13927
    • View Profile
Sen. Amy 'Bad Boss' Klobuchar
« Reply #95 on: February 23, 2019, 06:21:18 AM »
The story is out there now, guaranteed as accurate as Russian collusion, the FISA applications and the Steele dossier.

Speaking of honest media, will SNL cover this?

G M

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19251
    • View Profile
Re: Sen. Amy 'Bad Boss' Klobuchar
« Reply #96 on: February 23, 2019, 09:07:29 AM »
The story is out there now, guaranteed as accurate as Russian collusion, the FISA applications and the Steele dossier.

Speaking of honest media, will SNL cover this?

Only if Dollar Palace Hillary were a republican.

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 53629
    • View Profile
Re: 2020 Presidential election
« Reply #97 on: February 25, 2019, 08:14:20 PM »
Killibrand on FOX Special Report tonight.  What a nothing she is.


ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 11948
    • View Profile
Cohen ain't goin to change a thing
« Reply #99 on: February 27, 2019, 01:20:12 PM »
cohen - so what
as Rush said, NOTHING we don't already know
let the Dems masturbate

Dons polls will not budge!
same as (almost no matter) whatever Meowler comes out with.