DUMP TRUMP (previously 2020 candidates)

LOST said:
 If you are talking about White people under 30 you have a point. But if Trump is not frightening to Black or brown people under 30 they have not been paying attention.

 If a person is black or brown, I'm guessing they see Trump as a symptom of much deeper issue in this country.

Smedley said:
 I'm meh on Biden but his offer is status quo on the overall strong economy of the past 10 years, without the malignant narcissism of the current WH, and without a sharp turn to progressivism that many voters (including me) do not want. 
To be honest I'm not sure he can bring it given his warts and his age and the fact that he's not Obama, but that is what he represents.   

 this is a good illustration of my point.  If anyone thinks the overall economic metrics are an indication of anything of importance to the typical 25 year old, they are deluding themselves.

Why is that. Doesn't a strong overall economy set the stage for this?

https://www.cnbc.com/2019/04/18/new-college-grad-job-outlook-more-offers-higher-salaries.html

mrincredible said:
ml1, thanks for your comments.  
Where do you get your perspective on the under-30 crowd?  I don't know you in real life, so I have no idea how old you are.
I'll counter with this: given what's going on with reproductive rights at the state level, are you sure that women under 30 don't have something to fear from another 4-year Trump presidency, including an even greater likelihood he'll get to replace at least Ruth Bader Ginsberg?
I understand what your saying about economic reality, but women's rights are deeply threatened by his continued presence in the Oval Office.
I'm sticking with my argument that "just getting rid of Trump" is a deeply motivating goal. Not the only one by any means.  But I'm open to further convincing.

half of people under 30 voted in '16, so some of them were motivated.  But the half who did not weren't seeing a compelling reason to favor Democrats over Republicans.

A big part of my job over the past 5-6 years has involved trying to understand the motivations and attitudes of young families.  They are optimistic about their futures, but they are also well aware of how precarious their circumstances are.  They became adults around the time of the '08 crash, or in the years thereafter.  Starting out under those kinds of economic circumstances means uncertainty for many years afterward.  I don't get the sense that older people get that this is a generation that won't do as well as their parents economically, and they know that many of the people in government today are the ones that dealt them this hand in the first place.

Smedley said:
Why is that. Doesn't a strong overall economy set the stage for this?
https://www.cnbc.com/2019/04/18/new-college-grad-job-outlook-more-offers-higher-salaries.html

from that article:

But students leaving school are not free from financial burdens. Recent college graduates must also weigh massive student loan balances as they make their way in the real world.  
Over the last decade, college loan balances in the U.S. have jumped to a record $1.5 trillion, according to the Federal Reserve. The average outstanding balance is about $30,000, according to the most recent data from the Institute for College Access & Success.

That also doesn't address the high cost of housing in the markets where a lot of those new jobs will be located.  

Older people who think young people today have it made because unemployment is low are out of touch with the economic realities of starting out.  And the likes of Joe Biden are not addressing those issues -- the level of student debt, the high cost of health care even after the ACA, the high cost of housing, etc.

ml1 said:
half of people under 30 voted in '16, so some of them were motivated.  But the half who did not weren't seeing a compelling reason to favor Democrats over Republicans.
A big part of my job over the past 5-6 years has involved trying to understand the motivations and attitudes of young families.  They are optimistic about their futures, but they are also well aware of how precarious their circumstances are.  They became adults around the time of the '08 crash, or in the years thereafter.  Starting out under those kinds of economic circumstances means uncertainty for many years afterward.  I don't get the sense that older people get that this is a generation that won't do as well as their parents economically, and they know that many of the people in government today are the ones that dealt them this hand in the first place.

 Well put ml1.  Except I do get the sense that the older generation does realize the younger generation won't have the economic opportunities to do as well or better. 

Here's a chart I found which looks pretty reputable based on the source: http://www.electproject.org/home/voter-turnout/demographics

Yup. The 18-29 demographic consistently concedes power to the older age brackets.  Nice bump in 2008 but then back down to the low 40s since then.  Slightly higher in 2016 than 2012.

ml1 said:

Smedley said:
Why is that. Doesn't a strong overall economy set the stage for this?
https://www.cnbc.com/2019/04/18/new-college-grad-job-outlook-more-offers-higher-salaries.html

from that article:

But students leaving school are not free from financial burdens. Recent college graduates must also weigh massive student loan balances as they make their way in the real world.  
Over the last decade, college loan balances in the U.S. have jumped to a record $1.5 trillion, according to the Federal Reserve. The average outstanding balance is about $30,000, according to the most recent data from the Institute for College Access & Success.

That also doesn't address the high cost of housing in the markets where a lot of those new jobs will be located.  
Older people who think young people today have it made because unemployment is low are out of touch with the economic realities of starting out.  And the likes of Joe Biden are not addressing those issues -- the level of student debt, the high cost of health care even after the ACA, the high cost of housing, etc.

 Yeah I guess. But starting out in the world as a young adult shouldn't be easy, in my opinion. It wasn't for me -- I remember in the early 90s having no job, a couple thousand bucks in the bank, on-and-off health coverage, and living with Mom. It sucked, but at the same time I wouldn't trade the experience of building a halfway reasonable career for anything.

I didn't want any government handouts then, and I dont think there should be any now.

Smedley said:
I remember in the early 90s having no job, a couple thousand bucks in the bank, on-and-off health coverage, and living with Mom. 

 You had a couple thousand bucks in the bank?

Some people had it made.

Smedley said:
 Yeah I guess. But starting out in the world as a young adult shouldn't be easy, in my opinion. It wasn't for me -- I remember in the early 90s having no job, a couple thousand bucks in the bank, on-and-off health coverage, and living with Mom. It sucked, but at the same time I wouldn't trade the experience of building a halfway reasonable career for anything.


I didn't want any government handouts then, and I dont think there should be any now.

 nobody is looking for a handout.  It's not too much to expect that health care shouldn't include a few thousand in deductibles every year.  It shouldn't be too much to expect that a year at Rutgers shouldn't put someone in debt for years.

If you think young people want it easy, and want a handout, then perhaps you really are out of touch.  I came of age a decade before you, and it wasn't easy by a long shot.  Unemployment was over 10% the year I graduated.  A lot of people my age took years to find real jobs, and lost earning power that we never regained.  But even we had it easier then than young people today.  I got out of grad school with only about $3K in debt.  We bought our first house in Maplewood for $177K.  Those are not realistic prospects for most young people now.  

And only Sanders and Warren are even attempting to address those realities.  So can we blame young people if they don't come out to vote for someone like Biden, who is one of the architects of a discredited neoliberalism that is the cause of the struggles of the next generation?

and if they don't come out to vote, the Democrats might still be beat Trump.  But it will be a lot closer than it has to be.

jamie said:

Klinker said:
 I think I made myself clear above. It’s not about how any one person felt about being touched, its about touching people without their permission. 

I’m not quite sure why this is so hard for you to grasp. Even Biden claimed to understand it before continuing on his merry way. 

It's such faux outrage - the Republicans and Anti-Biden crowd love it.  

 it's not "faux-outrage". The guy is a bit of a creep when it comes to sexual stuff. It's not just the weird touching. We've already had two instance of him recently getting creepy on sexual issues with young girls. He should really just GTFO. He is a clueless embarrassment.

Klinker said:
I’ve votes in every election I have been eligible for but Biden is a bridge too far. The man creeps me out. 

 So Trump is your choice then?

conandrob240 said:

Klinker said:
I’ve votes in every election I have been eligible for but Biden is a bridge too far. The man creeps me out. 

 So Trump is your choice then?

 No, but Biden can’t win. If we get to the point where he is the nominee, we have already lost. 

Fortunately, their are a plethora of fine candidates, any one of which could trounce the Dumpster and restore America’s honor. 

lord_pabulum said:

dave said:
 Why not list military service?  Who gives a fig about sports?

Chill out. It's just a list dave. 

 OK, then who gives a sausage about sports?

Klinker said:

conandrob240 said:

Klinker said:
I’ve votes in every election I have been eligible for but Biden is a bridge too far. The man creeps me out. 

 So Trump is your choice then?

 No, but Biden can’t win. If we get to the point where he is the nominee, we have already lost. 


Fortunately, their are a plethora of fine candidates, any one of which could trounce the Dumpster and restore America’s honor. 

Here we go again. A large part of why Trump was elected was because of a refusal to vote for Hillary. The writing is on the wall for me. Trump will be our president again because of dumb **** like this. 

I agree that Biden cannot ( none of the candidates in the field can) beat Trump right now. The field is too wide and all it’s going to do is divide a party that needs to be united. I don’t like many of the 24. I hate 2 or 3 of them but I will vote for whoever runs against Trump. That’s the only possible way Trump can go- if every Democrat commits right now to vote Democratic.

I would vote in the general for any of the candidates other than Biden. Even Hickenlooper. 

That said, I am not quite sure what all the concern is about. The right wing of the party has made it abundantly clear over the last few years that they believe they can win elections without the help of progressives. If they are right and Biden is the nominee, you guys should be in like Flynn. 

Klinker said:
I would vote in the general for any of the candidates other than Biden. Even Hickenlooper. 

 You don’t get to say “except for”. If you do, you are voting to support Trump. Please wrap your mind around that. You have 17 months

conandrob240 said:

Klinker said:
I would vote in the general for any of the candidates other than Biden. Even Hickenlooper. 

 You don’t get to say “except for”. If you do, you are voting to support Trump. Please wrap your mind around that. You have 17 months

 Nominating an unelectable halfwit fossil is voting for Trump.  That’s why I am doing my part in the hope that doesn’t happen. 

Hopefully, the question won’t come up. I look forward to voting for a viable nominee in the general. 

“unelectable halfwit fossil”

Many democrats will feel this way if it doesn’t wind up being their choice. We need to rise above this. Really, you don’t get that?

conandrob240 said:
“unelectable halfwit fossil”
Many democrats will feel this way if it doesn’t wind up being their choice. We need to rise above this. Really, you don’t get that?

 We need to rise up to embrace a man who lied about his involvement in the Civil Rights movement, a man who has committed plagiarism repeatedly, both as a student and a politician, a man who can’t keep his hands to himself, a man who thinks of little girls sexuality as a commodity to be regulated by her male siblings, a man who thinks a girls intelligence is proportional to her beauty?

If you would call that “rising” you must be starting from a very low position. 

As for choices, I am not even close to making my choice yet. There are many tremendous candidates, any one of which would make an excellent President with a single exception. 

Whoever gets the nomination, will get it by the votes of the delegates who we select in the primaries. 

At that point, if some of us say “I’m not voting for him/her, and he/she will lose anyway”, that’s the self-fulfilling prophecy. 

That happened the last time, and it didn’t end well. 

Can we at least agree that watching Chris Matthews tonight trying to find out what appeals to still undecided voters in Ohio, is a waste of time?

Enough with the voter shaming. How many freaking pages is this going to go on?  Let Klinker vote for who he wants. I'm disappointed he won't vote for Bernie again, but seriously voting is a personal choice we should respect. The candidates should work to get people excited enough to vote for them. 

I watched Biden today at the Poor People's Campaign Presidential Forum and he was practically incoherent, just doddering. So, I doubt the guy is going to make it to the end and hopefully I"m right because I can't see him beating Trump.  That would be one hell of a nail biter. 

Here is the VERY LONG video, although Biden is the first to go on.  I'm sure you will all want to check out his performance because no one ever seems to agree with my assessments Bernie was next to last and he killed it!!!!  Even if you don't like Bernie you can see he does a good Bernie here. BTW.  There were nine candidates in total attending. I can't believe they all did not show up, but maybe they had good excuses. I've watched most of it, but I was nodding just from watching so much, so I have to go back. There were a few other cringy performances, and some people that did better than expected. Here is the description:

Watch live coverage of the Poor People’s Campaign Presidential Forum where 2020 candidates will be questioned directly from the nation’s poor. Hosted at Trinity University in Washington, candidates including former Vice President Joe Biden, Sen. Kamala Harris, Sen. Bernie Sanders, Sen. Elizabeth Warren, and others, will discuss solutions for systematic racism and poverty in the U.S. MSNBC’s Joy Reid moderates.

nan said:
Even if you don't like Bernie you can see he does a good Bernie here. BTW.

I don’t like mayonnaise, so the more mayonnaise-y the mayonnaise is, the more I won’t like it. But if it’s a lousy mayonnaise, there’s a chance.

DaveSchmidt said:
I don’t like mayonnaise, so the more mayonnaise-y the mayonnaise is, the more I won’t like it. But if it’s a lousy mayonnaise, there’s a chance.

 Taste is the wrong analogy.  I can't stand Kamala Harris, but she has done some good interviews and answered questions well enough to make Progressives worried.  You have to be able to see things somewhat objectively.  I guess you can't.  

DaveSchmidt said:

nan said:
Even if you don't like Bernie you can see he does a good Bernie here. BTW.

I don’t like mayonnaise, so the more mayonnaise-y the mayonnaise is, the more I won’t like it. But if it’s a lousy mayonnaise, there’s a chance.

 Can we at least all agree that no candidate does Bernie like Bernie does Bernie?

Ah, but if I have to see things objectively, nan, I just might miss an opportunity to see one humorously.