|
Post by mom on Aug 1, 2019 1:41:41 GMT
Booker is really going after Biden. Biden can sound strong on some things and then not so much on the next answer. And he’s so polite that he stops talking when his time is up and that makes him look not so strong. Im not impressed with Biden tonight. Booker is right - Biden is riding on Obama's record when its convenient.
|
|
lizacreates
Pearl Clutcher
Posts: 3,856
Aug 29, 2015 2:39:19 GMT
|
Post by lizacreates on Aug 1, 2019 1:43:17 GMT
I'm glad police brutality has been brought up. I like Julian's proposal for a police reform plan.
(Bill de Blasio is rightfully getting heat for the death of Eric Garner. Why hasn’t Pantaleo been fired?)
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Apr 30, 2024 10:32:47 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 1, 2019 1:43:42 GMT
Joe Scarborough...
”Democratic candidates, please read slowly:
Hit Trump. Not Obama.
Not that hard, folks.”
|
|
lizacreates
Pearl Clutcher
Posts: 3,856
Aug 29, 2015 2:39:19 GMT
|
Post by lizacreates on Aug 1, 2019 1:58:46 GMT
I'm really impressed with Kamala tonight. I'm almost looking forward to her going (like I said before) mano a mano with Trump on the debate stage. Cory Booker is also performing extremely well. So is Julian. Frankly, I like almost all their ideas so I have no real quarrel with most of their plans.
|
|
|
Post by mom on Aug 1, 2019 2:01:04 GMT
I'm really impressed with Kamala tonight. I'm almost looking forward to her going (like I said before) mano a mano with Trump on the debate stage. Cory Booker is also performing extremely well. So is Julian. Frankly, I like almost all their ideas so I have no real quarrel with most of their plans. Booker has impressed me tonight. And Biden has moved (further) down my list.
|
|
|
Post by mom on Aug 1, 2019 2:16:57 GMT
I think Inslee, de Blasio, Gabbard, Gillibrand, Yang and possibly Castro will out after tonight. I just don't think they've brought it 'enough' tonight to save themselves. Im on the fence about Bennett.
edited: My DH disagrees. He thinks Castro is one of the top performers tonight and will stay for another round.
|
|
lizacreates
Pearl Clutcher
Posts: 3,856
Aug 29, 2015 2:39:19 GMT
|
Post by lizacreates on Aug 1, 2019 2:20:28 GMT
I'm really impressed with Kamala tonight. I'm almost looking forward to her going (like I said before) mano a mano with Trump on the debate stage. Cory Booker is also performing extremely well. So is Julian. Frankly, I like almost all their ideas so I have no real quarrel with most of their plans. Booker has impressed me tonight. And Biden has moved (further) down my list. I’m okay with Biden. I think he’s being pragmatic on a lot of issues, but full disclosure, I’m a centre-left Democrat so I’m predisposed to his very moderate proposals. The reason I support Warren, who is very progressive, is because I find her plans bold and well-thought-out. They’re ambitious and aspirational, and she’s a very principled person. She forces me to think of what could be possible.
|
|
lizacreates
Pearl Clutcher
Posts: 3,856
Aug 29, 2015 2:39:19 GMT
|
Post by lizacreates on Aug 1, 2019 2:35:34 GMT
I think Inslee, de Blasio, Gabbard, Gillibrand, Yang and possibly Castro will out after tonight. I just don't think they've brought it 'enough' tonight to save themselves. Im on the fence about Bennett. edited: My DH disagrees. He thinks Castro is one of the top performers tonight and will stay for another round. Yang already qualified for the third debate. So did Biden, Sanders, Warren, Harris, Booker, Buttigieg, O'Rourke. According to the rules, as long as the candidate can get 130,000 unique donors and receive the support of at least 2 percent of respondents in four qualifying polls, they qualify. Yang was able to raise the money. I don't know yet about the others on your list.
|
|
|
Post by mom on Aug 1, 2019 2:37:43 GMT
I think Inslee, de Blasio, Gabbard, Gillibrand, Yang and possibly Castro will out after tonight. I just don't think they've brought it 'enough' tonight to save themselves. Im on the fence about Bennett. edited: My DH disagrees. He thinks Castro is one of the top performers tonight and will stay for another round. Yang already qualified for the third debate. So did Biden, Sanders, Warren, Harris, Booker, Buttigieg, O'Rourke. According to the rules, as long as the candidate can get 130,000 unique donors and receive the support of at least 2 percent of respondents in four qualifying polls, they qualify. Yang was able to raise the money. I don't know yet about the others on your list. Oh I didn't realize that. I was thinking he was on the chopping block today.
|
|
|
Post by ntsf on Aug 1, 2019 3:56:54 GMT
I'm supporting booker right now so was glad how well he did .. he kept bringing it back to trump... overall though, there was more humor, and even with attacks, people seemed to be attacking the ideas and actions and not the person.. I thought all of them got some good points in.. biden did not impress.. or de blasio.. but that's just me.
|
|
cycworker
Pearl Clutcher
Posts: 4,375
Jun 26, 2014 0:42:38 GMT
|
Post by cycworker on Aug 1, 2019 7:20:44 GMT
EAs usual, I am tending to agree with lizacreates overall. I think I may pull a little further left, though in not 'free tuition with no conditions' left. I do see a place for radicals like Sanders to push ideas forward. That's how you keep moving the centre. My concern is bots doing stuff to keep folks like Gabbard & Williamson around. A guy like Yang at least legitimately has some knowledge & ideas that could influence eventual policies. I over Booker tonight. Kamala was not, for me, quite her usual fabulous self. But Kamala at 75% is still better than most of them at 100%. I am so ready to see the field start to drop.
|
|
PrettyInPeank
Pearl Clutcher
Posts: 4,691
Jun 25, 2014 21:31:58 GMT
|
Post by PrettyInPeank on Aug 1, 2019 7:46:17 GMT
I think Warren was impressive and "won," and I can easily envision her as our first woman president.
|
|
|
Post by Katiepotatie on Aug 1, 2019 8:52:38 GMT
Warren was on fire. As was Bernie. They align with my beliefs/concerns the most. But...I tend to think we need to be more moderate. Then I hear Pete say, (paraphrasing), “Socialism...lets just own it!” Maybe we need a strong stance that’s not so wishy washy.
Marianne...while I’m sure she’s a goner, I actually liked her comments tonight, although she mostly told us what not do do /what we’re doing wrong instead of her plan of action. Buh’bye.
Delaney...felt he kept putting down the others regarding healthcare and saying he’s the only one who could help with divisiveness. Don’t care for him.
Harris...She blew me away last time. This time she found herself on the defense, but she held her own. I’d LOVE to see her up against the Cheeto.
Biden...too much talk about Barack. He doesn’t thrill me, but perhaps he can get the independents and moderates.
Booker...I liked him and want to see more from him. I remember him from the Supreme Court hearing and think he’s someone to watch for.
Tulsi Gabbard...she stood out tonight as an up and comer. I’m going to keep my eye on her!
|
|
|
Post by jeremysgirl on Aug 1, 2019 11:13:12 GMT
Second night, I'm most impressed with Booker and Gabbard. I want Biden and Bernie out of this so bad. And I hate to say it but de Blasio turned me off so bad.
|
|
blue tulip
Pearl Clutcher
Posts: 2,983
Jun 25, 2014 20:53:57 GMT
|
Post by blue tulip on Aug 1, 2019 12:52:35 GMT
Kyle Griffin... ”Andrew Yang: "If you go to a factory here in Michigan, you will not find wall-to-wall immigrants, you will find wall-to-wall robots and machines. Immigrants are being scapegoated for issues they have nothing to do with in our economy." #DemDebate” Score one for Yang. as someone who works in a MI factory, this is SO TRUE. we are automating more and more lines every day- there used to be 30 people on a line, and now there can be as few as 2.
|
|
|
Post by revirdsuba99 on Aug 1, 2019 13:25:48 GMT
there used to be 30 people on a line, and now there can be as few as 2. Speaking of Robots!! (CNN)Have you ever noticed the popularity of white robots? You see them in films like Will Smith's "I, Robot" and Eve from "Wall-E." Real-life examples include Honda's Asimo, UBTECH's Walker, Boston Dynamics' Atlas, and even NASA's Valkyrie robot. All made of shiny white material. And some real-life humanoid robots are modeled after white celebrities, such as Audrey Hepburn and Scarlett Johansson. The reason for these shades of technological white may be racism, according to new research. "Robots And Racism," a study conducted by the Human Interface Technology Laboratory in New Zealand (HIT Lab NZ) and published by the country's University of Canterbury, suggests people perceive physically human-like robots to have a race and therefore apply racial stereotypes to white and black robots. These colors have been found to trigger social cues that determine how humans react to and behave toward other people and also, apparently, robots. ** The researchers think this is an issue that needs to be addressed. "If robots are supposed to function as teachers, friends, or carers, for instance, then it will be a serious problem if all of these roles are only ever occupied by robots that are racialized as White," according to the study. ** Robot designers come from all corners of the world, Bartneck pointed out, yet they still idealize white robots. ** In a second study, the HIT Lab NZ team added lighter brown robots, finding that as they increased the racial diversity, participants' racial bias toward the robots disappeared altogether. This "potentially means that diversification of robots might lead to a reduction in racial bias towards them," according to that study. "This leads me to believe that we have everything to win by offering racial options and nothing to lose," Bartneck told CNN.** www.cnn.com/2019/08/01/tech/robot-racism-scn-trnd/index.html A LOT to think about with Robots!!!
|
|
lizacreates
Pearl Clutcher
Posts: 3,856
Aug 29, 2015 2:39:19 GMT
|
Post by lizacreates on Aug 1, 2019 14:01:15 GMT
EAs usual, I am tending to agree with lizacreates overall. I think I may pull a little further left, though in not 'free tuition with no conditions' left. I do see a place for radicals like Sanders to push ideas forward. That's how you keep moving the centre. My concern is bots doing stuff to keep folks like Gabbard & Williamson around. A guy like Yang at least legitimately has some knowledge & ideas that could influence eventual policies. I over Booker tonight. Kamala was not, for me, quite her usual fabulous self. But Kamala at 75% is still better than most of them at 100%. I am so ready to see the field start to drop. By the third debate in Sept, I think we’ll be seeing more clarity from the candidates because the field will narrow considerably. They have only 27 days to meet the party’s requirements before then and so far, only eight have done so. Having 20 people is very unwieldy, and we know a number of them are vanity candidates. I can easily see maybe about 12 candidates dropping. There wouldn’t be a point in them running if they can’t get the donors and are still at the bottom of the polls. Some of the frontrunners might even evolve and finesse or even adjust their stances on certain issues as time goes by. The focus will become sharper. After all, we have eight more debates to go and about year from the convention.
|
|
PrettyInPeank
Pearl Clutcher
Posts: 4,691
Jun 25, 2014 21:31:58 GMT
|
Post by PrettyInPeank on Aug 1, 2019 14:14:37 GMT
there used to be 30 people on a line, and now there can be as few as 2. Speaking of Robots!! (CNN)Have you ever noticed the popularity of white robots? You see them in films like Will Smith's "I, Robot" and Eve from "Wall-E." Real-life examples include Honda's Asimo, UBTECH's Walker, Boston Dynamics' Atlas, and even NASA's Valkyrie robot. All made of shiny white material. And some real-life humanoid robots are modeled after white celebrities, such as Audrey Hepburn and Scarlett Johansson. The reason for these shades of technological white may be racism, according to new research. "Robots And Racism," a study conducted by the Human Interface Technology Laboratory in New Zealand (HIT Lab NZ) and published by the country's University of Canterbury, suggests people perceive physically human-like robots to have a race and therefore apply racial stereotypes to white and black robots. These colors have been found to trigger social cues that determine how humans react to and behave toward other people and also, apparently, robots. ** The researchers think this is an issue that needs to be addressed. "If robots are supposed to function as teachers, friends, or carers, for instance, then it will be a serious problem if all of these roles are only ever occupied by robots that are racialized as White," according to the study. ** Robot designers come from all corners of the world, Bartneck pointed out, yet they still idealize white robots. ** In a second study, the HIT Lab NZ team added lighter brown robots, finding that as they increased the racial diversity, participants' racial bias toward the robots disappeared altogether. This "potentially means that diversification of robots might lead to a reduction in racial bias towards them," according to that study. "This leads me to believe that we have everything to win by offering racial options and nothing to lose," Bartneck told CNN.** www.cnn.com/2019/08/01/tech/robot-racism-scn-trnd/index.html A LOT to think about with Robots!!! I am a staunch supporter of equal rights and condemn any hint of racism, but boy this is a stretch. The color paper white has great uses, including keeping items cool and hiding fingerprints and dust. It has ALWAYS been synonymous with technology. Think back to Star Wars or the inside of NASA's Space Ships, even the technology room in Willy Wonka. Suddenly the technology become anthropomorphic, and because it's white it's racist. Lol
|
|
|
Post by papercrafteradvocate on Aug 1, 2019 14:24:16 GMT
I’m a NO on: Williamson ( I thinks she’s doing this in lieu of a book tour, funded by donors!) Gabbard (I don’t trust her as far as I could spit) De Blasio (stay in NY and continue there) Beto (I think needs to run in Texas, the Democratic Party needs him there) Bullock (needs to continue in Montana, it’s too soon to lose what was gained in 2016) Delaney (be better at a cabinet or in administration) Steyer (I think he’d be better suited in a cabinet position) Bennet (who? ) Inslee (I think a cabinet position would be better) Hickenlooper (better suited for an administration role) Sanders (old, too angry. He’s not willing to compromise and he’s always yelling at people. He’s nuts.) Gravel (at 89, he’s too old)
|
|
|
Post by revirdsuba99 on Aug 1, 2019 14:55:25 GMT
Sanders (old, too angry. He’s not willing to compromise and he’s always yelling at people. He’s nuts.) Yes, somewhere I said he is not flexible! And for some reason his yelling last night bothered me.
|
|
Montannie
Pearl Clutcher
Posts: 3,486
Location: Big Sky Country
Jun 25, 2014 20:32:35 GMT
|
Post by Montannie on Aug 1, 2019 15:27:41 GMT
Booker has impressed me tonight. And Biden has moved (further) down my list. I’m okay with Biden. I think he’s being pragmatic on a lot of issues, but full disclosure, I’m a centre-left Democrat so I’m predisposed to his very moderate proposals. The reason I support Warren, who is very progressive, is because I find her plans bold and well-thought-out. They’re ambitious and aspirational, and she’s a very principled person. She forces me to think of what could be possible. I'm more center-left myself. But I like Warren, and want a candidate who is aspirational AND practical. Ambitious goals, but a reasonable path to reach them.
|
|
lizacreates
Pearl Clutcher
Posts: 3,856
Aug 29, 2015 2:39:19 GMT
|
Post by lizacreates on Aug 1, 2019 17:52:18 GMT
I’m okay with Biden. I think he’s being pragmatic on a lot of issues, but full disclosure, I’m a centre-left Democrat so I’m predisposed to his very moderate proposals. The reason I support Warren, who is very progressive, is because I find her plans bold and well-thought-out. They’re ambitious and aspirational, and she’s a very principled person. She forces me to think of what could be possible. I'm more center-left myself. But I like Warren, and want a candidate who is aspirational AND practical. Ambitious goals, but a reasonable path to reach them. Practical. Yes, that’s something that can’t be discounted, although whichever progressive may win, his/her agenda will be tempered by the reality of Congress because that’s just the way it is. Much as I support her, though, Democratic voters want the center. Whichever poll I look at – Morning Consult, YouGov, Politico, Quinnipiac, NBC/WSJ, Harris, etc – Biden, a Centrist, is leading, and in many instances, leading by double digits. There’s no denying it – Democratic and Democratic-leaning voters like Biden, especially black voters who are 50%+ for him. Whatever Obama aura he’s leveraging, it’s working. (Obama, another Centrist, had a 95% favorability rating among Democrats.) It’s becoming more and more apparent that far-left is a huge gamble, especially since we’re trying to broaden our base by courting Independents. The question is, should Dems be gambling at such high stakes during the most consequential election in our modern history or go the safe route to win? I’m stumped.
|
|
|
Post by revirdsuba99 on Aug 1, 2019 18:12:40 GMT
It’s becoming more and more apparent that far-left is a huge gamble, especially since we’re trying to broaden our base by courting Independents. The question is, should Dems be gambling at such high stakes during the most consequential election in our modern history or go the safe route to win? I’m stumped. You're not stumped alone!
|
|
|
Post by papercrafteradvocate on Aug 1, 2019 19:01:17 GMT
Sanders (old, too angry. He’s not willing to compromise and he’s always yelling at people. He’s nuts.) Yes, somewhere I said he is not flexible! And for some reason his yelling last night bothered me. I cannot watch the debates live because of all the telling, negative vibes and everyone talking over everyone else. I’m not someone who normally has anxiety but I tell you listening to sanders makes me anxious just like trump does.
|
|
|
Post by papercrafteradvocate on Aug 1, 2019 19:04:44 GMT
I'm more center-left myself. But I like Warren, and want a candidate who is aspirational AND practical. Ambitious goals, but a reasonable path to reach them. Practical. Yes, that’s something that can’t be discounted, although whichever progressive may win, his/her agenda will be tempered by the reality of Congress because that’s just the way it is. Much as I support her, though, Democratic voters want the center. Whichever poll I look at – Morning Consult, YouGov, Politico, Quinnipiac, NBC/WSJ, Harris, etc – Biden, a Centrist, is leading, and in many instances, leading by double digits. There’s no denying it – Democratic and Democratic-leaning voters like Biden, especially black voters who are 50%+ for him. Whatever Obama aura he’s leveraging, it’s working. (Obama, another Centrist, had a 95% favorability rating among Democrats.) It’s becoming more and more apparent that far-left is a huge gamble, especially since we’re trying to broaden our base by courting Independents. The question is, should Dems be gambling at such high stakes during the most consequential election in our modern history or go the safe route to win? I’m stumped. The thing is that most of these candidates (or even the Democratic Party in general) are NOT “far left”. The Republicans have gone so far right and have attacked on the narrative that Democrats are so far left we are nasty socialists, when the reality is that it is they who have jumped the ship and have headed for full on authoritarian/fascist governing. Democrats ARE the moderate choice.
|
|
|
Post by iamkristinl16 on Aug 1, 2019 19:27:28 GMT
Joe Scarborough... ”Democratic candidates, please read slowly: Hit Trump. Not Obama. Not that hard, folks.” I agree. I haven't watched either of the debates fully, but I am uncomfortable with the attacks against Biden. I think it comes across as attacking Obama, which is not what we need to do, let alone what I think is accurate.
|
|
|
Post by hopemax on Aug 1, 2019 19:46:40 GMT
It’s becoming more and more apparent that far-left is a huge gamble, especially since we’re trying to broaden our base by courting Independents. The question is, should Dems be gambling at such high stakes during the most consequential election in our modern history or go the safe route to win? I’m stumped. But with the way politics has been defined by the GOP, and eagerly repeated by the Press, there are no "Centrist" Democratic proposals. If the GOP is going to define anything and everything a Democrat says as far-left why not ask for the whole enchilada? What is becoming more and more apparent to me is that there is nothing to be gained by the so-called "center-ground" because whatever is center today will be re-defined as far-left, tomorrow. This GOP isn't interested in compromise in any form and has continually demonstrated that basically since Newt Gingrich. And if our country finds them the LESS scary option than single-payer healthcare and not locking up families at the border, I would actually be glad to have that information. We've been doing the centrist Democrat thing for the last 30 years, history will know that, even if people today think that the Clintons and Obama were some sort of left-wing socialists, and what has it gotten us? Trump. I think that is how the most significant progress actually works. To recognize that there are times when the revolutionary is needed not incremental, compromise. Our revolution started with just trying to get some concessions from the British government and then it became obvious incremental was never going to work. And I'm sure if we had modern day polling over going to war with Great Britain there would be very similar to how it is now. A chunk strongly in support, a chunk vehemently in opposition, and most people in the middle just trying to not end up broke and/or dead.
|
|
suzastampin
Pearl Clutcher
Posts: 2,587
Jun 28, 2014 14:32:59 GMT
|
Post by suzastampin on Aug 1, 2019 20:33:27 GMT
I had to turn it off after about an hour. Couldn’t listen any more. When watching hearings with Harris, I thought I’d like her, but I don’t. I found her condescending to Biden last night. She called him Senator Biden and I felt she did that to lower his status to equal her. If he had called her Ms. Harris, the internet would have broken. Add that to her blindsiding him at the last debate, I’m back to not knowing who I would like. I just want somebody who will beat Trump!
|
|
lizacreates
Pearl Clutcher
Posts: 3,856
Aug 29, 2015 2:39:19 GMT
|
Post by lizacreates on Aug 1, 2019 20:55:47 GMT
It’s becoming more and more apparent that far-left is a huge gamble, especially since we’re trying to broaden our base by courting Independents. The question is, should Dems be gambling at such high stakes during the most consequential election in our modern history or go the safe route to win? I’m stumped. But with the way politics has been defined by the GOP, and eagerly repeated by the Press, there are no "Centrist" Democratic proposals. If the GOP is going to define anything and everything a Democrat says as far-left why not ask for the whole enchilada? What is becoming more and more apparent to me is that there is nothing to be gained by the so-called "center-ground" because whatever is center today will be re-defined as far-left, tomorrow. This GOP isn't interested in compromise in any form and has continually demonstrated that basically since Newt Gingrich. And if our country finds them the LESS scary option than single-payer healthcare and not locking up families at the border, I would actually be glad to have that information. We've been doing the centrist Democrat thing for the last 30 years, history will know that, even if people today think that the Clintons and Obama were some sort of left-wing socialists, and what has it gotten us? Trump. I think that is how the most significant progress actually works. To recognize that there are times when the revolutionary is needed not incremental, compromise. Our revolution started with just trying to get some concessions from the British government and then it became obvious incremental was never going to work. And I'm sure if we had modern day polling over going to war with Great Britain there would be very similar to how it is now. A chunk strongly in support, a chunk vehemently in opposition, and most people in the middle just trying to not end up broke and/or dead. The point is to win, to beat Trump. That’s what’s facing us Democrats right now. You cannot have a “revolution” unless you win the election.
|
|
cycworker
Pearl Clutcher
Posts: 4,375
Jun 26, 2014 0:42:38 GMT
|
Post by cycworker on Aug 2, 2019 7:26:36 GMT
I really dislike Gabbard,mind I don't trust her. I think she's another Putin puppet, though an inadvertent one.
I am a Harris fan. Would love to see her on the ticket, in either slot. And if she's the VP nom this time I, of course, would love her to follow up with winning the presidency when her term is up.
|
|