DawgTalkers.net Forums DawgTalk Palus Politicus Son of Democratic Candidates

Heard a guest on a recent podcast who had a great idea: let the DNC run the debates like they used to. "X"- out ALL the networks. Stream it live and simulcast it on C-Span. Smaller debate pools. No audience. Independent moderators. 5 minutes per answer/per candidate.

This would eliminate/reduce most of the grandstanding.

And my personal contribution: a hard cut-off on open mics when candidates use up their 5 minutes.

These 'debates' put on by cable channels and networks have one overriding purpose: to generate revenue. They will turn the most serious, important nationwide event into "Survivor" or "Dancing with the Stars" just to jack up ratings and market share. I hate it.

I'd love it if the news went back to being a loss leader for their parent networks. They reported the news without the need to cultivate and maintain a loyal following. But back then, there were only 3 networks and this little thing called PBS.

Damn.
How sad we've become.

Hey Clem......I would like to clarify something. Your post on the locked thread got me to thinking and I offered up an opinion for discussion purposes. OCD arrived and the typical insults began to flow.

Here is what I want to clarify. I was not talking about just the Democratic candidates. I was talking about all of the candidates no matter who they are affiliated with.

I was not clear about that and I can see how my thoughts might have been misinterpreted since it was a Democratic Candidates thread.

I was just thinking back to the previous election and how so very many of us said something like: Of all the people in the United States, these are two choices [Trump/Hillary.]

This might be too deep for this board and perhaps even for you, but I was trying to suggest that due to all the labeling and attempts at trying to degrade those who aren't just like others on one side, that today's politicians are forced into very small boxes. They parrot what their supporters want to hear and dare not irritate them.

The focus is not on "you should vote for me because I can/will/have accomplished..." Rather it's on "you should vote for me because my opponent is [insert negative labels."]

Nope. I got what you were saying.
My response was generally to you and the board but specifically to GM, who was speaking directly about the Donk candidates.

And your opinion is not far from mine. In 2016, I found the entirety of the GOP candidate pool to be unimpressive in much the same fashion as this year's crop of Dems. The one difference between then and now: there is no con man/buffoon running a scam disguised as a presidential campaign in this slate of hopefuls.

Recently, Scaramucci reaffirmed the words of several insiders who are on the record as saying that IQ45 planned on losing the election, in a bid to make millions post-election with his newfound raised profile. These motives were something I surmised weeks/months before election day, as I've known how he 's operated for decades.

Although there is no Trump running among the Dems, every presidential race risks similar hijacking if the candidates are not serious, sober and dedicated. Any one of those uninspiring folks would have done less damage to the image of the White House than this current mistake, but he's the one who got enough passionate voters to tip the EC scale. If a couple of Dems don't step up and start exciting D's and I's, his 4 will turn into 8.

We're done as the world's #1 superpower if that happens.


.02

I think we are just in a new political economic era. Old things are under more scrutiny and new ideas need to be proven to work. Polarization is a side effect of this being exploited by both sides for the last 10 years or more. Trump just ramped it up to exhausting.

I don't think any of the old 'good life' stuff is coming back, like well paid mills and factories from which you can work 30 years earning a great living and retire comfortably... they are gone or are going extinct. The gig economy sucks. The wealth disparity is worse than ever. There are really two economies; one for the well to do and one for the working class. Religion is less prevalent and evil crap like mass shootings are up.

Our leaders spend so much time talking about going backwards that we never move forward, yet the economy and much of the rest of the world has.

And yet candidates like E Warren and B Sanders are ridiculed as 'whackos' by the very class of voters who have been hurt the most by lobbyists, Wall Streeters and deep-pocket fat cats dangling politicians from their strings.

This exploitation is exactly what was happening in the first 2.5 decades of the 20th c. It took the Great Depression, 2 World Wars and bloodshed on the picket lines to bring about the prosperity of USA 1950-1990. They started in the '70's, and by the '90's, we watched them do it right in front of our faces.

It's Obama's fault we're in this mess. If he hadn't bailed out all those East Coast Elites and the Detroit Auto Industry, we could have had a true crash. It wouldn't have forestalled the pitchforks and pyres that are inevitable. We are fast approaching the 'let them eat cake' tipping point. When that day comes, with any luck I'll be:

dead
insulated with my nest egg on an island somewhere
too addled by dementia to be effected by it.


P.S. we're still in a position to be at the front in the 21st... but only if we get this 50's-loving, knuckle-dragging throwback out of office.


.02

I can't help but think of the outrage if a white man made this comment about a black man.

So much for the discussion I envisioned. LOL

Michelle Obama would make a good centrist candidate.

if the election was held today, its Warren for me, straight up.

she inspires me.

How would you describe him?

Honestly.... what adjectives would you use to describe the person I'm discussing? Have you stepped next door to read the environmental policy roll-backs that are now happening under his watch and with his enthusiastic consent? Straight out of 1950. Public rhetoric regarding civil causes/responses to criticism by PsOC: George Wallace, 1962. Personal lifestyle in his private sector days: Hugh Hefner/Playboy prototype, set: 1950-1960. Dude even posed in asilk bathrobe like Hef in a cheesy 1970's photo shoot. So yes- I reserve the right to describe him referencing neanderthal as an adjective. He's a fossil and as Bill Maher says: "The last of the old 50's white dudes."

Is that not the very definition of "throwback?"

WTF Vers?

Don't expect me to sugar-coat my opinions of that man to conform to some sanitized standard of discourse proscribed by you.

Something you should know: I do not respond well to being scolded.

Only two people have ever shared that privilege, and they earned it by raising me. You did not. I'll thank you to extend to me the same courtesy I've afforded you when you've stepped over my personal lines.

"What lines?" you might ask.
Exactly my point. I have never treated you as you just did me. Never.

So here is where we stand at present, you and I:

Everybody gets one with me.
You just used yours tonight.


p.s. Interesting that you jumped to race first. But maybe that's the level you operate on. Maybe not. Or worse, perhaps that's the level at which you think I operate. Doubly insulting. I have no proof of either possibility, so I'm letting all of this slide tonight.

Like I said everybody gets one.

I'd say the same, at present.

I'm not inspired as much as impressed with her acumen, preparedness and professionalism. She's bringing thought-out platforms that speak to the Big Issues while most of her fellow contestants are still trying to find their voices. I'll risk the policies of hers that take me out of my comfort zone in deference to the laundry list of practical attributes she brings as a politician.

She's that girl in 4th grade who got to work on the semester-long assignment the day it was dropped. She's the girl you wanted to captain the debate team because she could line up all the facts, line up the talking points... and line up the batting order. She's the girl you wanted in your study group because she could keep the entire group on-task when all we freshmen wanted to do was smoke dope and toss the Frisbee.

In short: She's that smart, sane, competent woman who has run the company from just under the glass ceiling, while the frat boys take liquid lunches at the club and jack the corporate jet to the Seychelles for 'professional team-building retreats.'

She has probably already devised short lists of cabinet candidates and devised a 100 day plan. In short: she's The Anti-Trump©.

I could do it.
And the debates would be- a nationwide revelation.


Hope 3 or 4 more step up. I want to see vigorous competition. Natural Selection.

Gonna be interesting, to say the least.

I thought the "knuckle-dragging" comment was out-of-bounds and that is why I brought up the race comment. I have seen that comment before and it was an insult towards black folks. I don't like terms like that. That doesn't make me a racist.

I'm also not a fan of threats. I like you and I'm okay w/us disagreeing about things. I have friends and even family members where we strongly disagree about political and religious ideas. I am not sure if I should keep my mouth shut when I see something inappropriate just so you like me?

This is where I am at as well - 100%. She is impressive, smart, prepared. Wish she didn't have the Pocahontas thing hanging over her - but I think she's more than capable of turning attacks from Trump around.

I am a little concerned because I think we need more of a moderate in the WH to heal and bring people together. But I'd also refer the best candidate rather than the candidate the might be moderate but inferior. As much as I like Biden, and he's centrist by comparison - his constant verbal slip ups make him an absolute no for me.

If this was the purpose, I think a fair question would be, why would he run again then?

Because if he wins, the statue(right word?) of limitation is up and he won’t get prosecuted.

Remember, he can’t be indicted for obstruction due to the legal opinion. But everyone, even Fox News, is aware that if he doesn’t win in 2020, he can get charged.

It *might* apply to any state charges as well, but I’m not sure.

So basically he’s running for self preservation. Besides, he doesn’t make nearly the amount of money if he loses 2020 than he would’ve in 2016.

Statute

American politics have become meaningless.....The candidates are simply self-promoters who are continually in search of any ammunition to submarine the efforts of their opponents....

Because of this dynamic, candidates take a big risk detailing any policy that they feel would help the American people....because any information they divulge will become potential ammunition to their adversaries. Adversaries who can gain more ground attacking the idea's of an opponent, than proposing any original idea's of their own...

So, instead of, What I can do for you.....it becomes, What they are going to do to you...

The constant ridicule, accusations, and misrepresentations leads to a field of candidates whose actual policies become muddled within the opponents derision, ambiguous values only understood as those represented by their party, and therefore, a complete domination by democratic or republican candidates...

Disagree all you want. Just keep the snark inside your mouth.

Can you recycle this one for the "Bride of Democratic Candidates" thread when it opens.

Do you know what show this is from?
Do you recognize the actor who went on to do a major US show that ran for 8 seasons?
I Love both shows and the actor btw

No. What is it from?

Count me in for the Clem plan. I'm down with all of that but with a couple caveats.. one, we have to resolve the issue of debate participation, it's impossible to have a reasonable debate with 7-10 people on the stage, many of whom are getting less than 5% support.. they are there to grandstand, make the big splash, something to become relevant in the race.. not sure how to fix that.

As far as the DNC running the DNC debates, my only concern with that is, are they really going to ask tough questions? Not that the networks really do, but aren't they going to set everything up for success? And, as we learned from Hillary, the DNC is not above picking favorites.. but I guess that is going to be a concern regardless of who runs it.

Here's a thought. Once the Ds and Rs have picked their final candidate, let the Ds run a debate and the Rs run a debate. Let the RNC ask the D candidate questions.. let the DNC ask the R candidate questions... just kicking around ideas..

I like the format you suggested. And I like having non bias moderators along with the C-Span idea. Five minute responses would give every candidate ample time to lay out their plans. So in theory, it seems to be sound. But who would actually watch that? I mean people like you, myself and maybe Vers would. I think some of the people who post on this board might.

But the people as a whole? I'm not convinced that is a format the general public wants. It seems today's society, overall, is more interested in canned responses, feel good catch phrases and gotchya moments. IMO they care more about hearing the things they want to hear and are far less interested in substance.

And let's look at the candidates. Not as far as specifics or policies, but as it pertains to tactics. While Biden isn't my favorite candidate, let's look at what we saw in one debate. And I'll use Kamala Harris as an example. Rather than use the time she was given to make a case for her policies, she dug back 37 years to attack Biden on the busing issue. Now I'm not sure of your exact age, but we came from the same time period.

37 years ago I was 23. My thoughts and political beliefs have evolved over time. Things that were accepted then, are not accepted now. I'm pretty sure a lot of these "woke vegans" of the current time would have been eating at McDonald's three times a week back then. People change, ideas change and people evolve over time. At least some of us do. So I guess my question is, even if given ample time to address the questions with five minute responses, are you any more sure they wouldn't spend some of that time attacking their opponents rather than making their own case? I'm not.

Many people these days seem to wish to blame those asking questions for the responses people give to those questions. I'm not of that ilk. In today's political climate it seems as though politicians feel tearing down their opponents have a greater meaning to voters than making their own case as to their worthiness for the office.

I think we are both after the same thing. To be an informed voter. And I agree with you that the current debate format does not allow for that. I'm just not as optimistic as you are that the actual candidates will allow for that either. Nor am I convinced that most Americans have the patience to listen to it. The time of the 30 second sound bite seems to reign supreme.

Hugh Laurie .... Who was Dr House.

The Gif is from Black Adder ...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hOSYiT2iG08

IN the clip you also have the actors of Haggred (Harry Potter movies) and Mr Bean.

Okay, tough guy.

I like HL too, I was going to guess him but couldn't tell. When I found it all I could think was this guy looks like a white old school teacher with a stick up his ass clutching his pearls...

Nothing to do with tough.

It has everything to do with how I choose to spend my time and attention at this address. All of us voluntarily interact with each other on these boards. If you insist on mistaking my last nerve for a trampoline, I'll simply choose to cease our interactions, and avoid the aggravation.

You have a personal penchant for pugnacity that is amply represented on these boards. I've seen you beef it out with any number of folks over the years, and have managed to never have been part of that. It has only recently appeared up in our interactions, and both times it has been initiated by you. We've enjoyed a fine relationship for more than 10 years, but it truly is a choice we both make. If I determine that you aren't worth the effort, I'll simply stop making the effort. This is not written as a threat... it's simply a statement of how I intend to proceed from here.

Here's what I wish you would do: ignore remarks of mine (and others) that you don't like, and wait for a convo that sparks good talk between us once again. It's the courtesy I've always extended to you, when you've made comments that don't meet my standards. One thing you must admit: I've never preached to you about your posting style or taken shots of any sort at you. In all the years we've posted together. To date, you've dinged me twice within a short 6-week period.

I've reached that age where I've given myself permission to cut people off who don't make my life better by their presence. I've been cleaning out my Rolodex quite a bit, the last few years. I sleep better, enjoy my days more, and carry around less emotional baggage than I did when I was younger. Please don't be the next to get placed on the curb. I enjoy you... but if I have to start paying with emotional upheaval, the cost will quickly become too high for the value you bring.

I'd normally reserve a message like this for a PM, but you insisted on making it public several posts ago.

I've always liked and respected you. I'd like to continue that. Please help me by respecting the one boundary I've asked of you.

Thanks in advance.

If she could only write a decent speech.

I know of an immigrant who could show her how it's done.

Those immigrants: bringing drugs, guns... rapists... some are even thieves.

Send her back.

Can’t.. Epstein visa is for life.

Hickenlooper to end presidential bid, considering U.S. Senate run in Colorado

WASHINGTON — Former Colorado Gov. John Hickenlooper is expected on Thursday to end a presidential campaign that never got off the ground and instead announce that he is seriously considering a run against Republican Sen. Cory Gardner, according to two people familiar with his plans.

A quirky businessman-turned-politician who failed to stand out in the crowded Democratic presidential primary field, Hickenlooper would be an immediate front-runner in another crowded field of Democratic Senate hopefuls eager to challenge Gardner, one of the most vulnerable GOP incumbents seeking reelection next year in a state where President Trump is deeply unpopular.

For months as Hickenlooper struggled to gain traction and raise money as a presidential candidate, he batted away questions about why he was running for president instead of challenging Gardner, saying at one point that he is “not cut out to be” a U.S. senator and repeatedly insisting that his skill set as an executive was a poor fit for a more deliberative role in Congress.

That line would no doubt be used against him should he run, although he is still considered an obvious front-runner in one of next year’s most competitive and important Senate contests.

Although more than a dozen candidates are already running, none are as familiar to Colorado voters or as battle-tested in statewide races as the former two-term governor and Denver mayor.

That’s the main reason Senate Minority Leader Charles E. Schumer (D-N.Y.) and the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee, desperate to flip three seats next November to gain back control of the Senate, have continued to court Hickenlooper, despite his public protestations that the job of being in the U.S. Senate “didn’t speak to” him.

As a presidential candidate, Hickenlooper only seemed to generate headlines when he misspoke: The former small-business owner refused to concede to MSNBC host Joe Scarborough that he was a “capitalist,” then flipped his messaging around and explicitly ran against socialism. The only memorable moment from his only nationally televised town hall involved him acknowledging having accidentally taken his mother to see the infamous pornographic film “Deep Throat.”

In July, he fired his campaign manager and communications director in an effort to revive his campaign, celebrating a poll that showed him at 2% as a major breakthrough.

But with the Democratic National Committee’s debate qualifying criteria of 130,000 individual donors preventing him — and several others — from appearing in next month’s debate, Hickenlooper began to look at the Senate race as an appealing off-ramp.

In Denver, a political consultant tied to Hickenlooper caused a stir when he bought several web domains that could be utilized for a Senate bid. And as the former governor considered his options while continuing to campaign for president in Iowa, a poll that showed him easily winning Colorado’s Democratic Senate primary and defeating Gardner by 12 percentage points was leaked to the news media.

Despite the fondness for Hickenlooper back home, many of the Democrats already seeking the Senate nomination appear unlikely to step aside to clear the field for him if he declares his candidacy , and some may bristle at efforts by politicians in Washington to influence the race.

In the wide primary field, two candidates have already demonstrated an ability to raise money: former state Sen. Mike Johnston, a former educator from Denver, and Dan Baer, who was an Obama administration staffer.

John Walsh, who served as U.S. attorney in Denver during the Obama administration, is also running, as are Andrew Romanoff, a former statehouse speaker who has struggled to find a second act in politics since leaving the Legislature a decade ago, and Alice Madden, who served as House majority leader with Romanoff and also left public office in 2009.

https://www.latimes.com/politics/story/2...-for-senate-run

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2020/us/elections/democratic-polls.html

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/latest_polls/democratic_nomination_polls/

You must have searched pretty hard to find a poll that said what you wanted it to.

Oh no, now we are Hickenlooperless.

I have to question this given that virtually every other poll has Biden ahead by double digits

No not at all, popped in my newsfeed. And I know polls are all over the place right now, especially on Bernie and Liz.

Actually the polls are rather consistent in who is leading and the margin is much larger than the one you posted in every other poll I could find.

Please drop my "pugnacious" self from your "Rolodex."

You made a racist comment about a white man being a knuckle dragger. I said that imagine if a white dude had said that about a black man?

Somehow, you thought that was a huge personal attack. I have called out similar comments when whites made them and you didn't seem to mind, but now it's an attack?

Sorry Clem, I'm not digging this. I am not a hypocrite. If it's wrong for one side to make such statements, it's also wrong for the other side to reciprocate.

I was hoping that you would say you didn't mean it that way or that you misspoke. Instead, you put the spotlight on me and used a word like "pugnacious." I have a different definition of my disputes on here. I try to be righteous and do the right thing no matter the consequences. I'll gladly take the grief if it's for a righteous cause and will not be swayed by negative attacks on my character.

Thus, I will leave you w/this.............racial stereotypes are not cool. We may disagree w/others and there may be some divide, but none of us are apes. We are human beings. We may be flawed, but we don't need to be compared to apes. This is the first time I have had to so say this in response to a black man, but I've made it plenty of times when it was made by white men. So yeah, please remove me from your Rolodex.

Vers, Trump is 100% a knuckle dragger and you damn well know it. I'm 100% white, you wanna try and call me racist against whites? You are looking the fool lately, not sure what's going on with you in your personal life, but a number of us can see the change.

Perhaps it's the victimhood you've been trying so hard to display. It's the same argument all over the right these days, too bad it's more about ignorance than anything else. This ignorance is what we are watching morph into a large scale white supremacy movement and fascist nationalism in the good ole US of A.

Or maybe it's you're inner treehugger wanting to make everything alright by coming together, holding hands, and singing kumbaya just so you can feel a since of normalcy again. I mean with the genie out of the bottle with all the hate these days, I can see how a guy like you can't acknowledge that it's getting worse by the day and not try to find some position that allows you to still be comfortable. I hardly think that you calling Clem a racist for saying something completely true about Trump is the line you've identified that is worthy of ending your friendship over... You have too much respect for Clem and the volumes of practical wisdom and understanding he has laid down on this board over the years to act like that.

If something more personal is going on with you we would understand that, but short of anything like that you don't seem to be acting like yourself lately. I agree with Swish, you are moving further and further toward the right and acting like a Trump supporter.