2019-2020 US Election Megathread II: Tim Ryan's Empire

[36 Cameras]

The same reason they don’t get to choose whether or not they can go to school.

And that is?

Let me rephrase: why shouldn’t parents be allowed to decide where their children go to school?

[Kowani]

And that is?

Let me rephrase: why shouldn’t parents be allowed to decide where their children go to school?

It’s not like black parents were protesting the bussing. That would be white racists

[36 Cameras]

Let me rephrase: why shouldn’t parents be allowed to decide where their children go to school?

It’s not like black parents were protesting the bussing. That would be white racists

Some black parents were afraid that their children would be worse off if they were forcibly bussed to white schools.

[Shrillland]

It kinda was…

Debatable. Berkeley decided as a whole community to support bussing while in Delaware it was causing mass community conflict. In a twisted way, Harris had a social privilege that Biden did not

That was happening in this area too, actually. My mother was bussed to a school in a predominantly black neighbourhood back in the 70s, and she was beaten up by the other students almost every day just because she was white.

[Tmutarakhan]

Birtherism is back! The very moment a black candidate takes of, people feel a need to discredit them, using whatever stick they can think of.

We need to start circulating the 100% true fact that Trump was born in Jamaica.
That's the Jamaica in Queens, but we don't have to explain that part.

[Tarsonis]

Let me rephrase: why shouldn’t parents be allowed to decide where their children go to school?

It’s not like black parents were protesting the bussing. That would be white racists

I’m not sure that’s accurate.

[South Odreria]

Morning consult poll (the kindest to Biden) shows him dropping six points - after the first debate.

Meanwhile, I think Buttigieg did better than Harris. Her attack on Biden came off as cynical to me. Either way, the success of those two will probably mean they steal supporters from Warren.

It's state by state polling that really matters as the nomination will be decided thusly. Buttigieg definitely did himself some real good under great pressure. Agree with assessment of Harris.

State by state is even rougher for Biden. Sanders outperforms in Iowa, and the most recent (pre-debate) poll has him leading in New Hampshire. Biden's buffer state is South Carolina but Harris will play hard for it.

[Zurkerx]

Biden should have said that then

He should have, but he was caught flatfooted

Maybe the next debate he could clarify that? Unless he's a sinking ship that we'll be hearing SOS.

[Sidesh0w B0b]

He should have, but he was caught flatfooted

Maybe the next debate he could clarify that? Unless he's a sinking ship that we'll be hearing SOS.

Senator Harris began by praising him for not being a racist and then hit him over the head with the school busing issue from 48 years ago. It's called a planned ambush. Back in the day, the idea was wildly unpopular in both white and black communities. It was an idea that was not one size fits all. Two years after the ruling the OPEC oil embargo struck and some schools were even closed and services curtailed. The matter is NOT relevant to defeating Donald Trump in 2020. It is only relevant to Senator Harris' ambitions for winning the Dem nomination and she scored some points, perhaps temporarily. Now she also has a target on her back in the next debate.

As for the main objective, defeating Donald Trump? No gain on that front and in fact likely a set back. Harris doesn't guarantee her home state of California's EC votes. Any Dem will win the state. I don't see Harris with her own baggage winning enough of the states in the rust belt (racked by the opioid crisis and loss of jobs) back from Trump. Unlikely to win NC or FL either, and the rest of the south she can forget about. However, she could win the popular vote thanks again to a big win in California. She'd likely win the same states HRC won with maybe Michigan but come up short in WI and PA.

[Sidesh0w B0b]

It’s not like black parents were protesting the bussing. That would be white racists

Some black parents were afraid that their children would be worse off if they were forcibly bussed to white schools.

Yeah, the issue cut across the racial divide pretty evenly. A lot of people still don't want their kids making long bus rides. Shit happens on buses too. Kamala Harris can sell a few overpriced T-shirts that are unlikely to become collector items.

[Tarsonis]

Maybe the next debate he could clarify that? Unless he's a sinking ship that we'll be hearing SOS.

Senator Harris began by praising him for not being a racist and then hit him over the head with the school busing issue from 48 years ago. It's called a planned ambush. Back in the day, the idea was wildly unpopular in both white and black communities. It was an idea that was not one size fits all. Two years after the ruling the OPEC oil embargo struck and some schools were even closed and services curtailed. The matter is NOT relevant to defeating Donald Trump in 2020. It is only relevant to Senator Harris' ambitions for winning the Dem nomination and she scored some points, perhaps temporarily. Now she also has a target on her back in the next debate.

As for the main objective, defeating Donald Trump? No gain on that front and in fact likely a set back. Harris doesn't guarantee her home state of California's EC votes. Any Dem will win the state. I don't see Harris with her own baggage winning enough of the states in the rust belt (racked by the opioid crisis and loss of jobs) back from Trump. Unlikely to win NC or FL either, and the rest of the south she can forget about. However, she could win the popular vote thanks again to a big win in California. She'd likely win the same states HRC won with maybe Michigan but come up short in WI and PA.

None of the Dems will bring it up, but in the GE she’s gonna get beat round the head with the Willie Brown issue

[Sidesh0w B0b]

Senator Harris began by praising him for not being a racist and then hit him over the head with the school busing issue from 48 years ago. It's called a planned ambush. Back in the day, the idea was wildly unpopular in both white and black communities. It was an idea that was not one size fits all. Two years after the ruling the OPEC oil embargo struck and some schools were even closed and services curtailed. The matter is NOT relevant to defeating Donald Trump in 2020. It is only relevant to Senator Harris' ambitions for winning the Dem nomination and she scored some points, perhaps temporarily. Now she also has a target on her back in the next debate.

As for the main objective, defeating Donald Trump? No gain on that front and in fact likely a set back. Harris doesn't guarantee her home state of California's EC votes. Any Dem will win the state. I don't see Harris with her own baggage winning enough of the states in the rust belt (racked by the opioid crisis and loss of jobs) back from Trump. Unlikely to win NC or FL either, and the rest of the south she can forget about. However, she could win the popular vote thanks again to a big win in California. She'd likely win the same states HRC won with maybe Michigan but come up short in WI and PA.

None of the Dems will bring it up, but in the GE she’s gonna get beat round the head with the Willie Brown issue

No doubt ...but I doubt she gets that far. She's only authored three bills in congress which passed into law. She comes across as arrogant more often than not, which wasn't part of Obama's recipe for the nomination. Also arrogance is bigly a Trump trait. This election the Dems need max contrast on the Donald's negative personality but a similar appeal to rust state voters. Biden was born for this role. Then maybe Bernie, both of them represent the Dems best shots. Warren still on the margin of error IMO.

[Hediacrana]

Birtherism is back! The very moment a black candidate takes of, people feel a need to discredit them, using whatever stick they can think of.

We need to start circulating the 100% true fact that Trump was born in Jamaica.
That's the Jamaica in Queens, but we don't have to explain that part.

Now that I think of it, has anyone actually ever seen his birth certificate? No? Highly suspicious indeed.

[Sybil and the Sybillettes]

We need to start circulating the 100% true fact that Trump was born in Jamaica.
That's the Jamaica in Queens, but we don't have to explain that part.

Now that I think of it, has anyone actually ever seen his birth certificate? No? Highly suspicious indeed.

It is being audited by the IRS.

[Thuzbekistan]

So I didn't want to watch the first debates because lord almighty, I knew it would be a train wreck. But how on Earth did Biden flounder so hard? Boomers need to get out of politics at this point. Him and Bernie both. When the field narrows, I'll bother watching the debates.

[Hediacrana]

So I didn't want to watch the first debates because lord almighty, I knew it would be a train wreck. But how on Earth did Biden flounder so hard? Boomers need to get out of politics at this point. Him and Bernie both. When the field narrows, I'll bother watching the debates.

It was quite astounding; after the spat with Booker right before the debates he (or at least his staff) should have seen coming that someone else would challenge him on his remarks (which were strategically quite dumb to begin with).

[Thuzbekistan]

So I didn't want to watch the first debates because lord almighty, I knew it would be a train wreck. But how on Earth did Biden flounder so hard? Boomers need to get out of politics at this point. Him and Bernie both. When the field narrows, I'll bother watching the debates.

It was quite astounding; after the spat with Booker right before the debates he (or at least his staff) should have seen coming that someone else would challenge him on his remarks (which were strategically quite dumb to begin with).

I mean, I understand where the man is coming from in justifying his working relationship with segregationists. It was a different time. On any major issue, I would hope that both sides could work together to reach a conclusion. However, it was a different time. The man doesn't need a political career anymore. I'm glad Booker and Harris gave him what he deserved. And I hope it will be the end of the road for him.

He should have run in 2016. He could have beaten Trump, I think.

[Sidesh0w B0b]

It was quite astounding; after the spat with Booker right before the debates he (or at least his staff) should have seen coming that someone else would challenge him on his remarks (which were strategically quite dumb to begin with).

I mean, I understand where the man is coming from in justifying his working relationship with segregationists. It was a different time. On any major issue, I would hope that both sides could work together to reach a conclusion. However, it was a different time. The man doesn't need a political career anymore. I'm glad Booker and Harris gave him what he deserved. And I hope it will be the end of the road for him.

He should have run in 2016. He could have beaten Trump, I think.

Yes, his job as a 29 year old senator in 1975 was to listen, speak his mind and help create legislation that moved the ball forward. He did that. His job was not constantly posturing, thinking of raising money for reelection and devising ways of manipulating public opinion with lies, fake drama and misrepresentation. Times were different then to be sure, but no matter how times change people still have the same potential flaws. Joe's small flaws have been over exaggerated while Trump's are extraordinary.

What the man has earned over the years is respect for his ethics and accomplishments from his peers and those across the aisle, and he usually gets it too. Booker and Harris showed themselves as typical political opportunists. Building a mountain out of a molehill for political gain and using the media to amplify it. No doubt that is part and parcel of politics. Their problem is they won't earn any respect for how they've seized on next to nothing to criticize Biden.

Joe hasn't enriched himself using his position over the years as have most politicians. I'm sure he's had plenty of offers to go off lobbying for special interests. But that's not who he is. That what makes him worthy of running for the highest office if he wants and if he feels up to it. Especially against the likes of Trump, who is also in his 70s. As for 2016, Biden didn't feel up to it. Everybody knows why, and yes, he probably would have won.

Most knowledgeable people that wish to support Joe will likely do so. He's not pulling out. He's the front runner by a lot and for good reason. He has the best resume for defeating Trump in a fifty state race, effectively. Booker and Harris do not. The name of the 2020 game is end the Trump presidency. Not lose to him with a candidate with a narrow appeal.

[Telconi]

I mean, I understand where the man is coming from in justifying his working relationship with segregationists. It was a different time. On any major issue, I would hope that both sides could work together to reach a conclusion. However, it was a different time. The man doesn't need a political career anymore. I'm glad Booker and Harris gave him what he deserved. And I hope it will be the end of the road for him.

He should have run in 2016. He could have beaten Trump, I think.

Yes, his job as a 29 year old senator in 1975 was to listen, speak his mind and help create legislation that moved the ball forward. He did that. His job was not constantly posturing, thinking of raising money for reelection and devising ways of manipulating public opinion with lies, fake drama and misrepresentation. Times were different then to be sure, but no matter how times change people still have the same potential flaws. Joe's small flaws have been over exaggerated while Trump's are extraordinary.

What the man has earned over the years is respect for his ethics and accomplishments from his peers and those across the aisle, and he usually gets it too. Booker and Harris showed themselves as typical political opportunists. Building a mountain out of a molehill for political gain and using the media to amplify it. No doubt that is part and parcel of politics. Their problem is they won't earn any respect for how they've seized on next to nothing to criticize Biden.

Joe hasn't enriched himself using his position over the years as have most politicians. I'm sure he's had plenty of offers to go off lobbying for special interests. But that's not who he is. That what makes him worthy of running for the highest office if he wants and if he feels up to it. Especially against the likes of Trump, who is also in his 70s. As for 2016, Biden didn't feel up to it. Everybody knows why, and yes, he probably would have won.

Most knowledgeable people that wish to support Joe will likely do so. He's not pulling out. He's the front runner by a lot and for good reason. He has the best resume for defeating Trump in a fifty state race, effectively. Booker and Harris do not. The name of the 2020 game is end the Trump presidency. Not lose to him with a candidate with a narrow appeal.

Well I guess I better hope the not-so-knowledgable turn out in force.

[Sidesh0w B0b]

Yes, his job as a 29 year old senator in 1975 was to listen, speak his mind and help create legislation that moved the ball forward. He did that. His job was not constantly posturing, thinking of raising money for reelection and devising ways of manipulating public opinion with lies, fake drama and misrepresentation. Times were different then to be sure, but no matter how times change people still have the same potential flaws. Joe's small flaws have been over exaggerated while Trump's are extraordinary.

What the man has earned over the years is respect for his ethics and accomplishments from his peers and those across the aisle, and he usually gets it too. Booker and Harris showed themselves as typical political opportunists. Building a mountain out of a molehill for political gain and using the media to amplify it. No doubt that is part and parcel of politics. Their problem is they won't earn any respect for how they've seized on next to nothing to criticize Biden.

Joe hasn't enriched himself using his position over the years as have most politicians. I'm sure he's had plenty of offers to go off lobbying for special interests. But that's not who he is. That what makes him worthy of running for the highest office if he wants and if he feels up to it. Especially against the likes of Trump, who is also in his 70s. As for 2016, Biden didn't feel up to it. Everybody knows why, and yes, he probably would have won.

Most knowledgeable people that wish to support Joe will likely do so. He's not pulling out. He's the front runner by a lot and for good reason. He has the best resume for defeating Trump in a fifty state race, effectively. Booker and Harris do not. The name of the 2020 game is end the Trump presidency. Not lose to him with a candidate with a narrow appeal.

Well I guess I better hope the not-so-knowledgable turn out in force.

I guess there's always been people hoping against hope.

[Thuzbekistan]

I mean, I understand where the man is coming from in justifying his working relationship with segregationists. It was a different time. On any major issue, I would hope that both sides could work together to reach a conclusion. However, it was a different time. The man doesn't need a political career anymore. I'm glad Booker and Harris gave him what he deserved. And I hope it will be the end of the road for him.

He should have run in 2016. He could have beaten Trump, I think.

Yes, his job as a 29 year old senator in 1975 was to listen, speak his mind and help create legislation that moved the ball forward. He did that. His job was not constantly posturing, thinking of raising money for reelection and devising ways of manipulating public opinion with lies, fake drama and misrepresentation. Times were different then to be sure, but no matter how times change people still have the same potential flaws. Joe's small flaws have been over exaggerated while Trump's are extraordinary.

What the man has earned over the years is respect for his ethics and accomplishments from his peers and those across the aisle, and he usually gets it too. Booker and Harris showed themselves as typical political opportunists. Building a mountain out of a molehill for political gain and using the media to amplify it. No doubt that is part and parcel of politics. Their problem is they won't earn any respect for how they've seized on next to nothing to criticize Biden.

Joe hasn't enriched himself using his position over the years as have most politicians. I'm sure he's had plenty of offers to go off lobbying for special interests. But that's not who he is. That what makes him worthy of running for the highest office if he wants and if he feels up to it. Especially against the likes of Trump, who is also in his 70s. As for 2016, Biden didn't feel up to it. Everybody knows why, and yes, he probably would have won.

Most knowledgeable people that wish to support Joe will likely do so. He's not pulling out. He's the front runner by a lot and for good reason. He has the best resume for defeating Trump in a fifty state race, effectively. Booker and Harris do not. The name of the 2020 game is end the Trump presidency. Not lose to him with a candidate with a narrow appeal.

These candidates are not to be compared to trump. If we are ever to move past this trump era of infantile behavior, we need to be selecting candidates that are worthy on their own rather than compared to literally the worst example in our political system.

[Telconi]

Well I guess I better hope the not-so-knowledgable turn out in force.

I guess there's always been people hoping against hope.

Of course there has, people want different things, and hope is universal.

[Tarsonis]

I mean, I understand where the man is coming from in justifying his working relationship with segregationists. It was a different time. On any major issue, I would hope that both sides could work together to reach a conclusion. However, it was a different time. The man doesn't need a political career anymore. I'm glad Booker and Harris gave him what he deserved. And I hope it will be the end of the road for him.

He should have run in 2016. He could have beaten Trump, I think.

Yes, his job as a 29 year old senator in 1975 was to listen, speak his mind and help create legislation that moved the ball forward. He did that. His job was not constantly posturing, thinking of raising money for reelection and devising ways of manipulating public opinion with lies, fake drama and misrepresentation. Times were different then to be sure, but no matter how times change people still have the same potential flaws. Joe's small flaws have been over exaggerated while Trump's are extraordinary.

What the man has earned over the years is respect for his ethics and accomplishments from his peers and those across the aisle, and he usually gets it too. Booker and Harris showed themselves as typical political opportunists. Building a mountain out of a molehill for political gain and using the media to amplify it. No doubt that is part and parcel of politics. Their problem is they won't earn any respect for how they've seized on next to nothing to criticize Biden.

Joe hasn't enriched himself using his position over the years as have most politicians. I'm sure he's had plenty of offers to go off lobbying for special interests. But that's not who he is. That what makes him worthy of running for the highest office if he wants and if he feels up to it. Especially against the likes of Trump, who is also in his 70s. As for 2016, Biden didn't feel up to it. Everybody knows why, and yes, he probably would have won.

Most knowledgeable people that wish to support Joe will likely do so. He's not pulling out. He's the front runner by a lot and for good reason. He has the best resume for defeating Trump in a fifty state race, effectively. Booker and Harris do not. The name of the 2020 game is end the Trump presidency. Not lose to him with a candidate with a narrow appeal.

Guess I better vote in Mass’s primary then

[Cannot think of a name]

The money metric for the debate is coming in, though gets official on Sunday when quarterly fundraising is reported.

California Sen. Kamala Harris' presidential campaign announced Saturday that it raised $2 million in 24 hours following her breakout moment in Thursday's 2020 Democratic debate.

The donations came from more than 63,000 people -- over half of those, 58%, were first time donors, according to the campaign.
The average contribution was $30, the campaign said.

The campaign said it was its single best fundraising day since Harris launched her bid in January.
...
The campaign said it also quadrupled its share of donations from the first four voting states: Iowa, New Hampshire, Nevada and South Carolina.
...
The spike in donations comes just ahead of Sunday's fundraising deadline for the second quarter -- a key test for the crowded field of the two dozen candidates vying for their party's nomination.

Julián Castro's breakout performance in Wednesday night's debate helped drive nearly three times the number of donations than the former mayor of San Antonio, Texas, had previously collected on his best fundraising day, his campaign announced this week.

New Jersey Sen. Cory Booker's campaign said it saw a surge in online fundraising fueled largely by first-time donors after the debate.
The campaign for Washington Gov. Jay Inslee also touted a jump in fundraising post-debate, saying that it saw its best day since he announced his climate-focused 2020 bid.

Other candidates are using the final push to the fundraising deadline to inundate their supporters with emails and texts, asking for contributions.

Another Texan in the race, former Rep. Beto O'Rourke, sent an email Saturday, imploring his supporters to help him reach a $600,000 goal before Sunday's end-of-quarter deadline.

The Harris campaign said Saturday that fundraising has continued to be strong -- at higher levels than before Thursday's debate.

[Sidesh0w B0b]

Yes, his job as a 29 year old senator in 1975 was to listen, speak his mind and help create legislation that moved the ball forward. He did that. His job was not constantly posturing, thinking of raising money for reelection and devising ways of manipulating public opinion with lies, fake drama and misrepresentation. Times were different then to be sure, but no matter how times change people still have the same potential flaws. Joe's small flaws have been over exaggerated while Trump's are extraordinary.

What the man has earned over the years is respect for his ethics and accomplishments from his peers and those across the aisle, and he usually gets it too. Booker and Harris showed themselves as typical political opportunists. Building a mountain out of a molehill for political gain and using the media to amplify it. No doubt that is part and parcel of politics. Their problem is they won't earn any respect for how they've seized on next to nothing to criticize Biden.

Joe hasn't enriched himself using his position over the years as have most politicians. I'm sure he's had plenty of offers to go off lobbying for special interests. But that's not who he is. That what makes him worthy of running for the highest office if he wants and if he feels up to it. Especially against the likes of Trump, who is also in his 70s. As for 2016, Biden didn't feel up to it. Everybody knows why, and yes, he probably would have won.

Most knowledgeable people that wish to support Joe will likely do so. He's not pulling out. He's the front runner by a lot and for good reason. He has the best resume for defeating Trump in a fifty state race, effectively. Booker and Harris do not. The name of the 2020 game is end the Trump presidency. Not lose to him with a candidate with a narrow appeal.

These candidates are not to be compared to trump. If we are ever to move past this trump era of infantile behavior, we need to be selecting candidates that are worthy on their own rather than compared to literally the worst example in our political system.

They aren't comparable to Biden, which was the point I was making. Booker and Harris have none of Biden's upside for winning a 50 state election.

Everybody knows Trump is in a league all his own.