Page 57 of 74 FirstFirst ... 747555657585967 ... LastLast
Results 561 to 570 of 733

Thread: 2020 Presidential Candidates

  1. #561
    Senior Member catherine's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Vermont
    Posts
    9,431
    I'm back on the Bernie bandwagon. I don't care how old he is, or the fact that he's white, and male--(read: putting aside identity politics)--He still has integrity and consistency of message, and he seems to me to be the least likely to sell out.

    I just read that Kamala Harris's husband hosted a huge fundraiser that was sponsored in part by Epstein's law firm--while she was denouncing him. I know purity in politics is some kind of unachievable holy grail, but I do think Bernie is closest to it.
    "Do any human beings ever realize life while they live it--every, every minute?" Emily Webb, Our Town
    www.silententry.wordpress.com

  2. #562
    Senior Member jp1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    San Francisco
    Posts
    4,590
    Quote Originally Posted by catherine View Post
    I'm back on the Bernie bandwagon. I don't care how old he is, or the fact that he's white, and male--(read: putting aside identity politics)--He still has integrity and consistency of message, and he seems to me to be the least likely to sell out.

    I just read that Kamala Harris's husband hosted a huge fundraiser that was sponsored in part by Epstein's law firm--while she was denouncing him. I know purity in politics is some kind of unachievable holy grail, but I do think Bernie is closest to it.
    It's a law firm with over 1000 partners. Are we really going to hold all of them accountable for the actions of a few? (This is assuming, of course, that the six lawyers who hosted the fundraiser were not involved in the Epstein case.)

  3. #563
    Senior Member catherine's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Vermont
    Posts
    9,431
    Quote Originally Posted by jp1 View Post
    It's a law firm with over 1000 partners. Are we really going to hold all of them accountable for the actions of a few? (This is assuming, of course, that the six lawyers who hosted the fundraiser were not involved in the Epstein case.)
    I know what you are saying, and that makes a lot of sense. But reading about the fundraiser, with Epstein's partners involved, it made me realize that I think I want a true populist. Of course the other 999 lawyers in that firm are not necessarily pedophiles and sexual deviants, nor do they support Epstein. But yesterday, DH and I cried our way through the movie Philadelphia for the umpteenth time, and that joke at the end about a hundred lawyers at the bottom of the ocean makes me realize that a corporate law firm is as powerful as any Monsanto or Nestle, and they will do whatever they can to protect their corporate interests. If somehow Epstein had some value to them, they would defend him to the death for the sake of the company. And that's not necessarily for the good of the people overall.

    That's why that fundraiser made me think twice about Kamala Harris and others who rely on corporate interests.
    "Do any human beings ever realize life while they live it--every, every minute?" Emily Webb, Our Town
    www.silententry.wordpress.com

  4. #564
    Senior Member jp1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    San Francisco
    Posts
    4,590
    Playing devil's advocate here because from everything I've heard Epstein sounds like a truly awful person, and if the accusations are true he, and probably a lot of other people, ought to be rotting in jail for the rest of their lives. That said, I still think he, and everyone else accused of any crime, deserves to have good representation in court. Otherwise our criminal justice system can't be just.

    Your point about taking money from big powerful lawyers is certainly valid. And is one of many reasons that I really like Warren. And also one of the reasons I'd prefer a more robust system of public financing of elections with more restrictions on how campaigns can be financed. But until we have that in place the reality is that the system is rigged to favor candidates that can pull in the big bucks.

  5. #565
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    4,958
    Didn’t see much of note emanating from last night’s debate. Williamson will need to burn a lot of sage to drive those dark psychic forces out of the country. Could be good news for the sage industry. Bernie returned to his irritable get-off-my-lawn style. Someone named Bullock cautioned against “wish list economics”, but nobody listens to cranks like that except a few fringy paleo conservatives like me.

    The Moderation seemed aimed at producing sound bites suitable for rebroadcast.

  6. #566
    Senior Member catherine's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Vermont
    Posts
    9,431
    Well, I still love Bernie. I know people call him an angry old crank but he has such refreshing authenticity, idealism and zeal. It almost feels like he may have formed a "Progressive Survivor" pact with Warren--if you really want to increase your chances that a Progressive agenda succeeds, you don't split votes, and I'm wondering if Bernie is paving the way for an eventual endorsement of Warren.

    My favorite quote was Warren's: “I don’t understand why anybody goes to all the trouble of running for president of the United States just to talk about what we really can’t do and shouldn’t fight for.”

    I have a soft spot in my heart for Williamson (I have TWO copies of her book "Return to Love")--obviously she will never be President but it was still fun to hear her point out things that people need to hear.
    "Do any human beings ever realize life while they live it--every, every minute?" Emily Webb, Our Town
    www.silententry.wordpress.com

  7. #567
    Senior Member Rogar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Colorado
    Posts
    2,817
    I missed the debate, but it seems like a lot of the differences are focusing on the progressive medicare for all vs. the moderate enhancement of Obamacare or offering more medicare options. Polls are saying there is a strong preference for the latter among democrats if given the choice of the two. For me it's not so much who exactly I like, but who might beat Trump and who might actually be able to get things through a divided congress. Personal favorite is Warren, but the practical choice is probably Biden for those reasons. There's a lot left to shake out. I actually really like our Colorado candidate, Bennet but he's sort of getting into the cold day in hell chances.

  8. #568
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    7,201
    I'm wondering if Bernie is paving the way for an eventual endorsement of Warren.
    could be, although in most polls Bernie tends to be ahead of her so at this point it would be an odd thing to do, could change. He supposedly wanted Warren to run in 2016, but she declined, and so he ran.
    If you want something to get done, ask a busy person. If you want them to have a nervous breakdown that is.

  9. #569
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    4,958
    Quote Originally Posted by catherine View Post
    My favorite quote was Warren's: “I don’t understand why anybody goes to all the trouble of running for president of the United States just to talk about what we really can’t do and shouldn’t fight for.”
    I found that to be one of the more wrong-headed statements of the evening. She basically invites people to believe there are no constraints on the powers of the office so that they will believe any promise made to be possible. That’s not idealistic. That’s cynical.

    Me, I like limits on power. The more the better. Whatever happened to politics as the art of the possible?

  10. #570
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    7,201
    currently our politics are the art of the possible in which nothing is possible. Some people like Warren might like something as opposed to nothing to become possible.

    there are far fewer constraints on the powers of the office than believed, I mean some candidates are giving good thought to what they can accomplish via executive order, regulation, etc. alone and what takes congress. But the reality is that Trump takes it on himself to cut food stamps alone and does it, Trump is making policy all the time, despite the fact congress is divided, he rules (and extremely badly it goes without saying).
    If you want something to get done, ask a busy person. If you want them to have a nervous breakdown that is.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •