![[IMG]](https://i0.wp.com/i1349.photobucket.com/albums/p741/RodKeller/seccheck/November/_573_zpsaad1bb9d.jpg)
Yep. We’re winning the War on Poverty. We’re killing those poors.
You know, most of my colleagues are older liberal women. And they like Joe Biden. And I don’t get it. Just a couple days ago from NYT,
“She faced a committee that didn’t fully understand what the hell this was all about. To this day, I regret I couldn’t give her the kind of hearing she deserved,” he said, at an event in New York City honoring students who helped fight sexual violence on college campuses. “I wish I could have done something.”
You wish you could have done something? You fucking liar. I could accept I’m sorry. I could accept that first sentence. That hearing was the first major political event of my life, and I didn’t really get it, being like 5 or 6. But I went back and watched it after Kavanaugh. Joe Biden gave them the blueprints for the Blasey Ford firing squad.
There’s being lied to. And then there’s what Joe Biden is doing.
Elizabeth Warren, if she doesn’t some how get …well, I don’t want to jinx her, she does seem like a nice person; as human as a politician can be these days, I expect.
What I like and respect most about her is she goes out and PHYSICALLY talks to the governed of this country! I hate that she’s starting so early, but I s’pose she has to to build up enough momentum. And she isn’t HRC, whom I didn’t trust on general principles, not on her emails or what have you. That much ambition in any gender is suspect. EW’s ambition doesn’t come off as so…pushy. Yes, I found HRC to be pushy, not assertive. There’s a difference, sometimes not much, but it’s there.
And we can’t-can’t-CAN’T overemphasize the need to get a good VPOTUS! And Mr. Warren will need to be vetted, too.
SIGH
And, as usual, this is just me.
Unfortunately, I think she’s pushing another “anti-trafficking” bill (s2080) that may mainly hurt sex workers. I don’t know the details.
I’m on the Elizabeth Warren train. She gets that we need banking reform and to stick it to the ultra-rich, and that is what we need.
You think, but do you know for sure? It doesn’t really sound like it. In any case, there is no one living - and probably never has been and never will be - who can do good that is ALL-inclusive. And how many sex-workers are doing it voluntarily vs. those who’re pressed into it? And when it comes to human trafficking, how much of it is actually for sex workers vs. other laborers?
Here’s details on that, btw (as far as I can tell, there’s no animations of any sort on this page, but what affects you is probably not entirely detectable by me): https://projects.propublica.org/represent/bills/115/s2080
I will vote for her regardless. She’s the best all around candidate we have thus far, IMO.
Apparently there’s some discussion on Twitter, but I can’t read Twitter. I know a lot of banks refuse to let sex workers set up accounts because of existing federal pressure such as Operation Choke Point. Which only enables more abuse of sex workers.
Seems like a very poorly named operation for something that targets sex workers
I don’t get this. The Buttigieg thing is way more impressive, because he speaks seven languages fluently in addition to English, and because he appears to have learned Norwegian on his own. So, in this case, the criticism isn’t valid.
People* are interested in Beto and Buttigieg because they’re fresh new faces. They don’t have any baggage weighing them down because they haven’t really done anything yet. They’re flavors of the month that people can get excited about, but this will all pass in time because they’re both empty suits. This excitement and media attention is all for nothing and will pass in a few weeks.
*not me, but people, apparently
The author of this seems like a shill for Gillibrand. Not my favorite candidate, but still better than Beto and Buttigieg. Way worse than Warren. It seems to me that whoever wrote this was throwing allegations of sexism around just because their preferred candidate isn’t more exciting, a better candidate, or both. There is a lot of legitimate media sexism, but it isn’t this.
I’d argue it is, because:
- Mandarin is more important in international politics. All the languages Buttigieg speaks are for countries where loads of people know English anyhow, and for which meeting Americans who know the main language is no big deal. But an American politician knowing Mandarin – that’s a big deal geopolitically.
And it’s not getting reported except as a mic trick.
And the reporter is totally right that it’s exactly the sort of thing women politicians don’t get reported for. Does AOC speak Spanish? She’s got a Spanish-sounding name, but I don’t even know.
Stupid question, but can any of you recommend sites comparing the candidates’ positions on different issues? I don’t expect someone who will crush the fossil fuel lobby and open the borders in the 1st 100 days, but I’d like to know who comes closest.
Thank you, is there some way to stop the flashing and navigate the site?
Like that front page flashes the images.
https://www.isidewith.com/elections/ doesn’t load properly and occasionally flashes the whole page.
https://www.isidewith.com/poll/734977926 doesn’t load properly, resizes the graph while loading, jumps up and down, and includes postion:fixed or position:sticky elements on either side.
Didn’t help me at all. I answered every question they had. Apparently I’m a Socialist, Green, or Democrat, align most closely with voters in western Massachusetts and upstate New York, and can pretty much vote for any Democrat.
It’s nice that they can loosely identify my party affiliation after I did all the heavy lifting and then some, but how does this help me? I’m a registered Independent, so I have no party affiliation. The really useless part of all of this is that it doesn’t help me decide between any of the candidates. I am apparently in at least 85% agreement with Gillibrand, Yang, O’Rourke, Buttigieg, Booker, Sanders, Warren, Gabbard, and a couple others whom I’m blanking on, but in reality, I think:
- one of them is my preferred candidate
- two of them are people I’d be okay voting for but aren’t my top choice,
- three more shouldn’t be running because they’re only confusing the field and not really offering anything different or original
- another two are complete ciphers to me, and I wouldn’t even vote for them if I had the opportunity (big if there)
- the rest don’t even pass my recall test
My big problem with this site is that I can’t really compare and contrast candidates the way I’d like to. As much as I’d like a cheat sheet, I think the only way I can find out what I need to know is through in depth research