DawgTalkers.net Forums DawgTalk Palus Politicus Democratic Debates Round 2

Talking heads hated all the attacks, trying to say Biden did well, showed up... What debate did they watch? Worried about attacks on Obamacare and Obama's admin. Who gives a damn? smh

They probably have their own agenda and Biden is their guy.

There is now way that I will vote for either one of the Grandpa’s. Move along... We do not need a 78 year old president.

Well part of it is to increase taxes on the 1% and corporations.. There is no way Amazon (and many others) should get away without paying federal taxes....

They, being the DNC. They did it last time. Although they said they changed things by getting rid of the "Super Delegates"? Yeah, right.

If the DNC are going to push Biden he will lose. He was attacked all night and had no response. Trump will unleash on him and he will come across very weak or people will feel sorry for him, but it most likely won't help him in the election.

If Dems want somebody who can take Trump's school yard bully style of debating and punch back equally as hard I think Sanders, Warren and Harris are the ones who have proven to be the toughest (Booker also had a good night last night and showed he could prob go toe to toe w/him as well). They all have their flaws, however. But, no candidate is perfect. All 3 (4) are better than what we have tho.

I should note that Pete came across very well too and deserves to be in the final tier of candidates. He is very calm and level headed. Not sure how that will help him in debates w/Trump if he did get the nomination. People may find it admirable and refreshing. Those who have issues with his private life...they are most likely voting for Trump anyway so they are not the voters he is focusing on winning over.

Sanders has got some bad advice, imo. The grumpy old man bit, while paralleling Trump's attitude, will not fly with many voters who already think he's off his rocker. Warren's got a shot because she will capture everyone on the far left, women voters, minorities. She seems to be very passionate about working together for a bright future without sounding like she's insane. I think a lot of people will scoff at her idea to "recapture" wealth, but it's an intriguing plan. Harris got lambasted last night by Gabbard... It wasn't pretty, it exposed some of the ugliness from her stint as AG in California, and she didn't respond well under pressure - at all.

After last night, I'm convinced Booker is a very viable candidate and could go toe to toe with Trump. Convinced enough to lay some money on his 55-1 odds in Vegas lol. The party better embrace somebody besides Biden soon. The excuse making after the debate last night was pathetic, he was all but destroyed on that stage. He looked fragile, old, minced words, and was stripped down to "why are you here besides the fact that you served under Obama?". Him crowning Booker as the next president was hilarious, not in a good way.

I gotta say this,, I came away totally unimpressed..... I'd still vote for any one of them over Trump,, But I might have to hold my nose!

2% of their wealth and 2% of their income are vastly different things... which is it?

Income.

Then there isn't anything remotely unconstitutional about that.. it's just raising taxes...

ALERT: I misspoke lol.

The way she presented it at the debate was basically. "We're gonna let you keep the first 50 million, but every dollar after that we're taking two cents."

Then, in interviews after the debate, people were questioning the constitutionality. I thought - holy crap, she wants to seize wealth.

After reading a number of confusing articles, it appears it is based on income, I have no idea why anyone would say it's unconstitutional.

However... there are a lot of "sticking points"...


Could you retroactively take something someone has already paid taxes on at the time they earned it? Seems like that could be problematic.

Then there are the workarounds... distribute your wealth among your family to fall under the threshold.

How about Warren Buffet? He pays himself $100,000 per year and just accumulates more and more net worth... His tax would be a whopping $3000 per year (the percentage is raised to 3% for billionaires, apparently).

It's confusing, and there are a lot of "what-ifs", but it is definitely a "tax" and based on income.

We don't deserve this person.

You meant he guy that admitted to sexual assault. nah, no thanks.

You mean the self-admitted "groping incident" from when he was 15?? Unprovoked, he recounted the incident in a college newspaper to show how it shifted his views on gender equality and sexual respect. Don't know how that would equate to "sexual assault", to each his own I guess.

Yes any dem should lie about it like Trump does...

Maybe ask Menendez about him. . . .

I have been saying in here for weeks that Harris needs to address the questions of her record. It is better that it comes out now and she discusses it sooner rather than later. Especially if she does manage to get the nomination. That way people have time to decide how they feel given the facts and how she answers. I disagree that she was lambasted and that she didn't respond well. I am not defending her, but the nature of the debates don't allow for thorough, detailed oriented answers. I also think the fringe candidates in both evenings of debates were trying to bring down the front runners so I wasn't surprised when it was finally brought up.

Biden, however, did get lambasted from both sides and he didn't respond well.

Maybe ask Menendez about him. . . . [/quote]

What do you know about Menendez and Booker, willit?

Funny thing. I think these Democratic candidates disliked Obama policies more than I did!!!

WOW...

Arrest Reports From Kamala Harris Years Disappear From California DOC Website




Scott Morefield
Reporter

August 02, 2019 10:25 PM ET

California’s Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation website has removed public access to several key incarceration reports as a part of a site redesign.

The move, first reported by the Washington Free Beacon, comes as its former attorney general, Kamala Harris, is drawing scrutiny from fellow Democratic 2020 presidential candidate Tulsi Gabbard and others for her arrest record while in the post.

From the report:

Twice a year, the CDCR releases information about the number of new individuals incarcerated in the California prison system as part of its “Offender Data Points” series. These reports provide important information on demographics, sentence length, offense type, and other figures relevant to criminal justice and incarceration.

Until recently, these reports were publicly available at the CDCR’s website. A search using archive.org’s Wayback Machine reveals that as of April 25, 2019—the most recent indexed date—ODP reports were available dating back to the spring of 2009. As of August 2019, the same web page now serves only a single ODP report, the one for Spring 2019. The pre-2019 reports have been removed.


Harris, who served as the state’s top cop from 2011 to 2017, was harshly criticized by Gabbard, who demanded she apologize to the “people who suffered under [her] reign as prosecutor” during Wednesday night’s Democratic debate.

“I want to bring the conversation back to the criminal justice system that is disproportionately, negatively affecting black and brown people today,” the Hawaiian congresswoman said Wednesday. “Senator Harris says she’s proud of her record as a prosecutor and that she’ll be a prosecutor president, but I’m deeply concerned about this record of Senator Harris’.” (RELATED: Tulsi Gabbard Is Not Finished With Kamala Harris)

CDCR assistant secretary for communications Jeffrey Callison told the Free Beacon the change had nothing to do with Harris’ campaign, but rather was mandated by California law regarding web accessibility standards.

“Making our website fully compliant was a significant and ongoing undertaking,” Callison told Free Beacon. “It required a redesign of the look and feel of the website, and a need to evaluate all of the thousands of documents and other files that were linked to our website.”

Callison told the outlet that older reports are “still available upon request” by emailing data.requests@cdcr.ca.gov, and other removals are only temporary.

However, Fox News host Tucker Carlson was skeptical of the state’s motives, accusing officials of “making that information very hard to find.”

“Until recently, anybody could read these reports online,” said Tucker. “That’s called transparency because it’s our government, right? Supposedly? Not anymore. The corrections department just redesigned the website and now, all reports prior to this year, immediately including those covering Kamala Harris’ six years as Attorney general have been removed. They are no longer publicly accessible.

Theoretically, you can still get those reports if you email the right person and they feel like responding. But the information is far harder to get. And of course, that’s the entire point. In California, they know that an ignorant public is much easier to control.”

https://dailycaller.com/2019/08/02/arres...-75lqm6AcMl08UE

She's always been shady.