Election 2020 The 2020 Candidates: Right, Left and Center!

[Captain.Heroin]

Yes, the employees and employers would still pay slightly higher taxes. At the same time, the employer would be free from an expense exponentially larger than his small increase in taxes. Huge net positive.

The business owner should be the one paying god damn taxes! How the left don't understand that is beyond me. PEOPLE should take 100% of their paycheck home to their god damn houses, families, local economies. Not to the state. I'm not a fucking slave of DPRK nor am I a slave of the IRS. Both are inherently evil. Both pimp out their citizens' hard work. Disgusting.

When Neopunk posts pics of landlords as leeches I laugh. Really loud. The real leech is the IRS and the Federal Reserve. When the FR and IRS are gone, America will be free again. And Trump's at least throwing loud language at the FR (the 4th good thing he's done among 4,000+ lies).

THE DEMOCRATS ARE UNWILLING AND UNABLE TO STAND UP TO BIG BANKS (except Warren apparently?) BIG BUSINESS AND THE STOCK MARKET; look at how willingly Obama, the closeted republican, would bail out big business. Disgusting. I know Tathra was probably disgusted by that (can I get an amen from someone?)

 

[Captain.Heroin]

Have you actually read any of the proposals Bernie has to address climate change? I fail to see how they're less effective than whatever half ass plan Hilliary had.

His other plans make his whole platform a non-starter for me. America can't afford to bankrupt itself for everything he wants to accomplish all at once.

 

[TheLoveBandit]

Honestly, MSNBC is almost as bad as Fox News.

I missed last night's debate. Miserable day at work, and night a home...went to bed early. It was that, or watch the season finale of Th eBachelorette.

Kamala Harris, the Chosen One, HRC 3.0, sassy corporate centrist. My guess is she will have another AMAZING PERFORMANCE

I think she has some hidden support - specifically from NBC who gave her what can be perceived as advantages in the first debate, and a lot of media push leading up to but more strongly right after the debate.

12 Comcast/NBC Execs Funded Harris Campaign Before Debate

Not only did NBC debate moderators give California Sen. Kamala Harris extra time during its June debate, it turns out twelve executives from NBC Universal and parent company Comcast gave her campaign cash too.

NBC was ready to crown Harris the victor after its two-night, Democratic debates June 26 and 27. In various programming the network heaped praise on the “breakout star,” calling her “brave” and “powerful.”

But NBC’s moderators broke their own debate rules by giving Harris more time than she was supposed to get, some of which she used to attack former Vice President Joe Biden and accuse him. The resulting exchange caused MSNBC host Chris Matthews to wonder if Biden could survive Harris’ “amazing night in history.”

Now, recently released Federal Election Commission data revealed Harris had another kind of help from NBC.

Money.

At least 12 NBCUniversal/Comcast executives donated to the Harris campaign in the months leading up to the debate. The FEC data included March and April 2019 donations, raising concerns about potential conflicts of interest.

Five news-related executives were of particular concern including three executives who provide oversight to NBC News and two others who are in charge of Comcast’s political advertising sales.
...
The Society of Professional Journalists Code of Ethics clearly states that journalists should “Avoid conflicts of interest, real or perceived. Disclose unavoidable conflicts.”

It also states that journalists should refuse credibility-harming “special treatment” and should “Avoid political and other outside activities that may compromise integrity or impartiality, or may damage credibility.”

NBC Universal had not responded to Media Research Center’s request for comment as of July 23, 2019.

NBC’s rules for the debate were that “candidates will have 60 seconds to answer questions and 30 seconds to respond to follow-ups. And there will be no opening statements, though candidates will have a chance to deliver closing remarks.”

In reality, there were multiple instances where moderators Chuck Todd and Rachel Maddow broke those rules.

...(article cites specific instances)...

Data released in July from the Federal Election Commission revealed that at least 12 executives from NBC Universal or its parent company, Comcast Corporation, donated to the Harris campaign between January and early June 2019.
...(article goes into specifics of those executives)...

 

[Captain.Heroin]

To be fair I think Pete and O'Rourke have the best chances and they aren't doing too well in the polls. The Dems have lost and I'm calling it now. Sorry guys. We're stuck on the Trump Train for 4 more beers.

 

[Captain.Heroin]

I missed last night's debate. Miserable day at work, and night a home...went to bed early. It was that, or watch the season finale of Th eBachelorette.




I think she has some hidden support - specifically from NBC who gave her what can be perceived as advantages in the first debate, and a lot of media push leading up to but more strongly right after the debate.

12 Comcast/NBC Execs Funded Harris Campaign Before Debate

Harris is actually well-spoken even if I don't agree w/ many of her stances on some issues, she seems to have her head on straight and if she ended up being president I could live w/ it. But, again, not Sanders' or Bidens' #'s in the polls. I don't think US is ready for a female president - the only reason why I think Hillary lost. The exorbitant "oh she should have gone to Michigan" is just stupid. Hindsight is always 20/20. Americans trust men more, it's sad but true. Is that "sexist"? Probably. The libertarians had a female vice presidential candidate in the 1970's. I'm all for a woman on the ticket. As long as it isn't Palin

p.s. if McCain and Palin couldn't beat Obama in his second term, no democrat could beat Trump the way they're talking now with everything as a loaded race issue.

I feel like if I order a White Russian at a bar I'll have the bartender screaming at me like this

The racial/ideological debates are what Russia wants. We need to unify against Russia. We need to stop the RF in their tracks. We need to ensure Putin is out of office. Rich, whatever, free, I don't care. Just no longer in power. The world NEEDS a better Russian gov't. One that doesn't destroy the ecology and native people of Russia.

Every time a Democrat politican talks about race issues and not Russia I keep thinking, this is it: total occupied gov't infiltration from Russia. Staring at our toes, not looking into geopolitics and the mess we've enabled by allow Russia to go wild on the world.

Trump is willing to stand up to China, but bows down to DPRK and Russia. WE CAN DO BETTER. WE NEED A DEMOCRAT WHO WILL STAND UP TO ALL THREE. They won't. They can't get my vote that way.

 

[TheLoveBandit]

Yes, the employees and employers would still pay slightly higher taxes. At the same time, the employer would be free from an expense exponentially larger than his small increase in taxes. Huge net positive.

I'd have to see the numbers to consider it. Until we establish what taxes are being paid by whom, we're just guessing right now. But while we're guessing, I'd put forth that nothing run by the gov't had proven less expensive than what's been run by public or private companies. There is a strong history of examples where the gov't takes over a function like the USPS which struggles to survive while FedEx and UPS keep running lean and strong. I am confident in believing gov't run health care would NOT be cheaper. Do you have ideas on how it could possibly be cheaper? Assuming, at best, costs stayed the same we'd end up needing the same money we need today for health care (plus gov't oversight)...and is that same amount magically coming from somewhere that isn't the employer or employee? How is it paid for?

 

[mal3volent]

I'd have to see the numbers to consider it. Until we establish what taxes are being paid by whom, we're just guessing right now. But while we're guessing, I'd put forth that nothing run by the gov't had proven less expensive than what's been run by public or private companies. There is a strong history of examples where the gov't takes over a function like the USPS which struggles to survive while FedEx and UPS keep running lean and strong. I am confident in believing gov't run health care would NOT be cheaper. Do you have ideas on how it could possibly be cheaper? Assuming, at best, costs stayed the same we'd end up needing the same money we need today for health care (plus gov't oversight)...and is that same amount magically coming from somewhere that isn't the employer or employee? How is it paid for?

Canada pays much less per capita for their healthcare than we do, and they have single payer. So there is evidence to show the cost could be less, as it eliminates a lot of paper work in hospitals and streamlines/uniforms the entire process. People receive more preventive care which saves SO much money in the long run.

----------
Bernie’s proposal would amend the tax code to create the American Health Security Trust Fund, which would be financed by various tax revenues, credits, and subsidies. It’s not set in stone, but the tax revenues in the draft include a new healthcare income tax, an employer payroll tax, a surcharge on high-income individuals, and a tax on securities transactions. So, basically, it’s not wishful thinking at all.

But, more importantly, single-payer healthcare controls costs and so would save us money in the long run. One study shows that Medicare For All would save $5.1 trillion over a ten-year period.

How much am I going to have to pay?
Most people will pay a lot less than they do now. There will be no deductibles or copays. The money and premiums you would have paid to an insurance company will instead be paid into the health security trust fund. This is what we do with Social Security, where all workers pay a portion of their wages and later use that money for retirement.
----------

 

[Chris42393]

Who wants to go pick dandelions with me?

 

[TheLoveBandit]

Harris is actually well-spoken even if I don't agree w/ many of her stances on some issues, she seems to have her head on straight and if she ended up being president I could live w/ it. But, again, not Sanders' or Bidens' #'s in the polls. I don't think US is ready for a female president - the only reason why I think Hillary lost.

I've not listened to her proposals, so I can't really judge. But at this point, I'm not having much of an issue if Kamala takes the lead, or even gets in office. I think you're missing the voice of America when it comes to Hillary - she didn't lose because she's female, she lost because she's Hillary. I beleive the public is ready for a female President, at least I know I am fine with it. And Obama broke the color barrier, so that shouldn't be an issue - nor should Kamala being black AND female be a double mark in her favor or against her in any way. We need a President based on merit, what can they achieve and does it align with what the voters want. Trump was an unknown, and at the time, a better choice than the known Hillary. After 4y of Trump, he is known...America will have to decide if they want more or if the Dems have a better option. One thing that does bug me is how the Dems keep putting the a bunch of white males up there (I'll throw Warren in the white part of that). Obama got a lot of support by being charismatic AND black. I don't think race matters that much anymore, but the Dems talk a lot like it does...and make half their pool of candidates white (and male).

The racial/ideological debates are what Russia wants. We need to unify against Russia.

I agree Russia wants us distracted and bickering amongst ourselves. It stymies any progress for the benefit of America, as does a split Congress or a President who isn't aligned with one or both parts of Congress. Gridlock keeps us neutered, allowing them to do as they want and not worry about us.

I also agree we need to be unified as a nation - not so much as a kumbaya hugfest, but aligned on priorities and driving towards them. Great leaps were made when we launched the space program to beat those evil Ruskies to the moon. Despite PC noise today about it being a white male world, the fact is it occurred WITH women in the industry, and WHILE blacks were gaining recognition as citizens with value. And not just social progress, but technology that kept us at the forefront of science. We, as Americans, had a common enemy no matter where you lived or what you did for a living, no matter race, religion, color, creed, ethnic origins, etc. Yes, racism existed (hence race riots), and there were gender inequalities, I'm not claiming it was a golden age and all was right. But I am claiming a common focus, especially an 'enemy', is able to get us to drop a lot of our petty differences and work together which is what I hear a lot of Americans asking for. But we don't have a common goal today - we're being driven to more diversity and in-fighting, rather than looking outside ourselves and agreeing THAT (whatever 'that' is) should take priority and be addressed. It could be ecology, or welfare, or whatever...but for now we are made dysfunctional by focusing on our diversity.

I just don't think we need to unify against Russia. They aren't that relevant (neither are we, IMO). But we can go further is we can get America to align on a priority and work together towards addressing it. Ignoring Russia (by not elevating them to 'enemy', I would still watch their global meddling), or at least leaving them as another smaller player on the global stage, would be a better means of dealing with them specifically. I see India and China as bigger threats for world dominance and influence, Russia and America are the aging actors. But I'd rather not make another 'enemy' be our focus. I'd rather it be something positive that unifies and drives us.

 

[alasdairm]

Canada pays much less per capita for their healthcare than we do, and they have single payer.

most countries with single-payer, socialized medicine do...

alasdair

 

[Captain.Heroin]

Who wants to go pick dandelions with me?

That might be construed as potentially racist, so I'm going to consult my PC liberal friends on that first.

most countries with single-payer, socialized medicine do...

alasdair

Do you really trust it would play out that way in the US?

My meds are free why fuck with it

If you don't like it MOVE TO A BETTER STATE, you're not totally helpless stop acting like it [obvs. not directed at alasdair he's baller status and totes cool and I know he's not hurting for health care IIRC; more directed at the poor liberals who think college/medicare for all is coming = it's not]

I know, I know, that was harsh of me, but I mean it.

 

[Captain.Heroin]

And Obama broke the color barrier

A rich entitled half-white guy broke the color barrier? Really? You'll have to explain that one to me. At best, he half-broke it.

That's like saying if we had a bisexual president that they are "gay" or "homosexual". Technically incorrect.

Especially because he bailed out big businesses like a Republican. I think he was as dirty a politician as could be despite doing a few decent things for the nation and I'll always think of him as a bad president. Not nearly as bad as Trump but still.

If anyone broke the color barrier, it was Jefferson

I agree Russia wants us distracted and bickering amongst ourselves.

THANK YOU OMG YOU GET IT

TLB is so smart and wise, even if I don't agree w/ some of the positions he takes, omg, thank god, SOMEONE GETS IT

 

[Chris42393]

most countries with single-payer, socialized medicine do...

alasdair

Then you have the wait times, which I PERSONALLY wouldn't want. The United States is CONSIDERABLY less. Depending on your medical condition. Waiting... CAN kill you. My friend is from Canada and says its HORRIBLE.

 

[Captain.Heroin]

Then you have the wait times, which I PERSONALLY wouldn't want. The United States is CONSIDERABLY less. Depending on your medical condition. Waiting... CAN kill you. My friend is from Canada and says its HORRIBLE.

View attachment 13418

LOL

when I had a personal injury and was in SEVERE actue pain I waited 4 hours in the ER waiting room and seriously considered attacking someone just to get in there quicker. I'm not kidding.

Our wait times are AWFUL and this was NOT in California. Here it's also a shitshow. But way more people.

Oh you're quoting specialty. Wait times for ER is insane. Sorry bro. I'm going to disagree with you on the ER times but not the speciality times (that you are right about)

 

[Captain.Heroin]

I just don't think we need to unify against Russia.

We definitely do. The world needs to unify against DPRK, China, and Russia just as much as we have on DPRK. I can't understand anyone thinking any differently if you cared about social rights of human beings across the planet.

I love it when Americans see Hitler and the Third Reich as SO EVIL, but modern day things taking place is like "oh it's just Asians who cares" SERIOUSLY? This is why America REALLY IS RACIST in some ways. We undervalue the lives of non-white people abroad. It's disgusting and shameful.

If North Korea was really in Europe it would have ended A LONG time ago. Asia is fucked and it's going to stay fucked for a long time if we don't do something about it. Hillary was willing to stand up to Putin as her re-initializing diplomatic efforts failed. I don't know why a democrat can't also be a war hawk and win my vote (and consequentially my heart).

THE DEMS VOTE TO KEEP THE MILITARY FUNDED SO EASILY WHY !!!!!!!!!! Why fund and not use? STOP WASTING MY GOD DAMN TAX MONEY IF WE AREN'T GOING TO WAR FFS

 

[Chris42393]

LOL

when I had a personal injury and was in SEVERE actue pain I waited 4 hours in the ER waiting room and seriously considered attacking someone just to get in there quicker. I'm not kidding.

Our wait times are AWFUL and this was NOT in California. Here it's also a shitshow. But way more people.

Oh you're quoting specialty. Wait times for ER is insane. Sorry bro. I'm going to disagree with you on the ER times but not the speciality times (that you are right about)

Wait times for ER are roughly the same everywhere. It depends on how busy they are, how many doctors they have, how critical you are etc. etc. In ERs, people are triaged from "most critical" to "least critical". Unfortunately, by ER standards, non-traumatic acute pain falls in the "green" category of least critical (not talking about cardiac chest pain, ABD pain secondary from a poss. GI bleed, etc). Which is probably why you waited. This is how it is all over the world.

ER wait times are completely different than seeing a doctor in a medical office. Ie. seeing a neurologist for a follow-up appointment (just a random example), which should take weeks to months. In socialized medicine.

 

[Captain.Heroin]

Wait times for ER are roughly the same everywhere. It depends on how busy they are, how many doctors they have, how critical you are etc. etc. In ERs, people are triaged from "most critical" to "least critical". Unfortunately, by ER standards, non-traumatic acute pain falls in the "green" category of least critical (not talking about cardiac chest pain, ABD pain secondary from a poss. GI bleed, etc). Which is probably why you waited. This is how it is all over the world.

ER wait times are completely different than seeing a doctor in a medical office. Ie. seeing a neurologist for a follow-up appointment (just a random example), which should take weeks to months. In socialized medicine.

I was in severe pain and I saw people there just trying to cop pills go in first. You are wrong to think ER is triaged. First-come first-serve is what I've encountered in many parts of the US.

The only "triage" in ER is mentally acting out people and heart attack potentials go to the top of the line.

When I was there ONE other person was in real pain and I talked to them and I'm like "Wtf these junkies are making us wait wtf" and they understood it. THey were there w/ fake coughs/colds/headaches trying to cop vicodin or whatever. me and one other person were REALLY IN PAIN and should have been pushed to the top. Fuck ER's.

 

[Chris42393]

I was in severe pain and I saw people there just trying to cop pills go in first. You are wrong to think ER is triaged. First-come first-serve is what I've encountered in many parts of the US.

The only "triage" in ER is mentally acting out people and heart attack potentials go to the top of the line.

When I was there ONE other person was in real pain and I talked to them and I'm like "Wtf these junkies are making us wait wtf" and they understood it. THey were there w/ fake coughs/colds/headaches trying to cop vicodin or whatever. me and one other person were REALLY IN PAIN and should have been pushed to the top. Fuck ER's.

Brother, im not wrong at all. Ive worked in the medical field all my life ... IN ERs and Pre-Hospital (Fire/Rescue) all over the United States. That's how it is EVERYWHERE lol Maybe you're thinking of an Urgent Care? My entire family is in the medical field as well. That's how it is at their hospitals as well.

 

[Captain.Heroin]

I must be living in a different America.

The ER i went to did not triage efficiently whatsoever. What I described was accurate. They let sniffles or pill seekers go first. It was not triaged whatsoever when I was there.

Why do you think all hospitals are the same? I think it is going to vary wildly from hospital to hospital and perhaps state to state. I think things are just better where you live.

 

[TheLoveBandit]

Elsewhere, a request for a summary of the debate got the following response...