• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Democratic Candidate's Debates 2019

Surrealistik said:
A proper democracy doesn't demand hiveminds and monoliths of its people, nor expect that voters not hold candidates to account. Trump is bad, but not so bad that I'm willing to conform to a strict orthodoxy of unwavering, unconditional and enthusiastic support for whoever we Dems decide to nominate.

Besides, we've been through worse; remember Dubya?
Click to expand...

It's as I said: you would be fine with another Trump term. Very well.
 
MovingPictures said:
Lot of good they did us in 2014 and 2016.

If all it takes to bring down Biden is Democratic voters voicing their disapproval of his past, then how's he going to survive the attacks from the right?
Click to expand...

With all due respect, you're treating this like a game. You would only behave as you are behaving now if you believed that there were voters we could afford to shed and still win. I don't believe it should be seen so cavalierly.

If Trump wins a second term, everything he has done to us will be permanently etched into our national character for generations.

This is not a game.
 
Cardinal said:
It's as I said: you would be fine with another Trump term. Very well.
Click to expand...

If Trump gets us involved in a war with Iran, then I may have to reconsider my present stance, until then that's where I'm at.
 
joko104 said:
Yang's thing is he wants the government to subsidize the employees of WalMart, Amazon, Google, Apple etc $1000 per month because in his opinion Jeff Bezos with only $80 BILLION and the 4 WalMart heirs with only $20 BILLION each don't have enough to pay their employees a living wage - so he wants money taken out of the paychecks of working people to subsidize them by billions each year. Plus how else are drug addict bums going to have money to finance drug cartels?

In Yang's view, the government exists solely to serve the super rich - and drug cartels - though of course he explains it otherwise to extra stupid people.
Click to expand...

Are you a Yang supporter?
 
Cardinal said:
Sorry, but if you can't check your emotions, then you're just not that serious about defeating Trump.

Condemning a Democrat is doing free re-election campaign work for Trump.
Click to expand...
So anybody that doesn't just fall in line and bite their tongue like you isn't serious about defeating Trump? Get out of here with that crap.

The Democratic party is shambles, Cardinal. Wake up and smell the coffee. While we should always vote for the eventual 'D' on the ticket, whoever they might be, that does not change the fact that our party is a hot mess of cowardice and incompetence, waiting to make the same mistakes they did the last time.

There'a a reason Democrats lost in 2014 and 2016. Voters became disgusted with how easily their party rolled over and figured it didn't make a difference, as even winning meant losing.

The party needs a revolution like the Republicans had in 1994 and we won't get it being quiet.
 
MovingPictures said:
So anybody that doesn't just fall in line and bite their tongue like you isn't serious about defeating Trump? Get out of here with that crap.

The Democratic party is shambles, Cardinal. Wake up and smell the coffee. While we should always vote for the eventual 'D' on the ticket, whoever they might be, that does not change the fact that our party is a hot mess of cowardice and incompetence, waiting to make the same mistakes they did the last time.

There'a a reason Democrats lost in 2014 and 2016. Voters became disgusted with how easily their party rolled over and figured it didn't make a difference, as even winning meant losing.

The party needs a revolution like the Republicans had in 1994 and we won't get it being quiet.
Click to expand...

I'm looking at the bigger picture. There are obviously candidates I feel less excited about. My primary motivation, however, is seeing Trump gone from office. Fortunately, I'm not faced with a clear moral ambiguity so this is relatively easy for me. An example of this would be if a literal, liberal version of trump...say, Michael Avenatti...were running for office. Since there is no liberal version of trump, this isn't hard.

You're overlearning the lessons from 2016, and your "revolution" will destroy everything you ever valued about this country.
 
dcsports said:
lol -- whoops! Trying to deflect to Trump there?

We're talking about the race for the democrat nomination. But yes, he was far less qualified than Trump when he ran, and certainly after 3ish years of the presidency.

I do stand corrected though. He would likely be the second least qualified after the author running.
Click to expand...

They know nothing but hate and attack Trump. :mrgreen:
That is why the president will win his reelection easily in 2020!
 
Cardinal said:
With all due respect, you're treating this like a game. You would only behave as you are behaving now if you believed that there were voters we could afford to shed and still win. I don't believe it should be seen so cavalierly.

If Trump wins a second term, everything he has done to us will be permanently etched into our national character for generations.

This is not a game.
Click to expand...
You're right, this isn't a game.

This is a long term war and so far, we're losing badly because of the people we've put in charge for 30 years.

FFS, the current gang of Dems are too afraid to open an impeachment inquiry of a guy that left a bigger crime scene than OJ Simpson. That's too pitiful for words.
 
MovingPictures said:
You're right, this isn't a game.

This is a long term war and so far, we're losing badly because of the people we've put in charge for 30 years.

FFS, the current gang of Dems are too afraid to open an impeachment inquiry of a guy that left a bigger crime scene than OJ Simpson. That's too pitiful for words.
Click to expand...

I don't disagree with the impeachment issue. That is frustrating, and quite specifically rejects one of the major motivations that some people had for electing trump: "Better to vote for someone courageous enough to do the wrong thing than the person too cowardly to do the right thing."

Is that a morally bankrupt rationale? Of course, but it's still a rationale that many people operate on, and to ignore it is foolish in the extreme.
 
Cardinal said:
I'm looking at the bigger picture. There are obviously candidates I feel less excited about. My primary motivation, however, is seeing Trump gone from office. Fortunately, I'm not faced with a clear moral ambiguity so this is relatively easy for me. An example of this would be if a literal, liberal version of trump...say, Michael Avenatti...were running for office. Since there is no liberal version of trump, this isn't hard.

You're overlearning the lessons from 2016, and your "revolution" will destroy everything you ever valued about this country.
Click to expand...
I don't want a liberal version of Trump's personality.

I want someone that cares about gun violence, LGBT rights, immigration, social help for those in need, and all of the things you and I both value.

But you know what else I want? Someone that's willing to do anything to make those things happen, even if it means using political WMD's to do it. Whether we get that in a new speaker, majority leader, or president, that's something the Democratic party has needed for the better part of fifteen years.

We need a liberal Gingrich and McConnell.
 
Jetboogieman said:
Electing Buttigeig would be incredible for a couple of reasons, first of all, having evangelicals absolutely **** a brick, secondly though, what the hell countries like Saudi are gonna do cause they have to deal with him lol.

That’s gonna be a weird situation for the entire ruling class of a country like Saudi and a state visit.
Click to expand...


Buttigeig seems like a good man, smart and principled but you don't have enough whiny Millennials or Hollywood liberals to get a pole smoker elected. Sorry, it's just not happening.
 
MovingPictures said:
I don't want a liberal version of Trump's personality.

I want someone that cares about gun violence, LGBT rights, immigration, social help for those in need, and all of the things you and I both value.

But you know what else I want? Someone that's willing to do anything to make those things happen, even if it means using political WMD's to do it. Whether we get that in a new speaker, majority leader, or president, that's something the Democratic party has needed for the better part of fifteen years.

We need a liberal Gingrich and McConnell.
Click to expand...

You say you don't want a "liberal version of Trump's personality," but then you go on to describe a person who's willing to be just as bad as Trump. Believe me, I get it. But as I said, you're overlearning the lessons from 2016, an underlearning the lessons from 2018. We took back the House, all without a single candidate being anything like Trump. We can take back the country in 2020 the same way we took the House in 2018.
 
Cardinal said:
I don't disagree with the impeachment issue. That is frustrating, and quite specifically rejects one of the major motivations that some people had for electing trump: "Better to vote for someone courageous enough to do the wrong thing than the person too cowardly to do the right thing."

Is that a morally bankrupt rationale? Of course, but it's still a rationale that many people operate on, and to ignore it is foolish in the extreme.
Click to expand...
You're proving my point.

Trump is eating Pelosi's launch on oversight. We all know he's a complete imbecile, so what does it say that's able to do that to Pelosi? Just look at Twitter and how many Democratic voters are saying they're done with Pelosi if she doesn't budge.

Biden has a similar history of getting onboard Republican ideas, and believing that can't be used effectively against him is to not learn anything from 2014's landslide.
 
Cardinal said:
...says the Trump supporter.
Click to expand...
What's your point? If you said Obama you might have had a point. His lack of experience was costly. Trump has worked out fine.

Common Sense 1 said:
Yup... the DNC! Blocked Bernie in 2016 so Hillary could lose to President Trump! :peace
Click to expand...
Not really. The Clinton campaign stacked things at the convention when no one else was paying attention. Trump beat Clinton and one of the best machines ever assembled. he would have crushed Sanders, though it would have been a more entertaining debate.

MovingPictures said:
I don't want a liberal version of Trump's personality.

I want someone that cares about gun violence, LGBT rights, immigration, social help for those in need, and all of the things you and I both value.

But you know what else I want? Someone that's willing to do anything to make those things happen, even if it means using political WMD's to do it. Whether we get that in a new speaker, majority leader, or president, that's something the Democratic party has needed for the better part of fifteen years.

We need a liberal Gingrich and McConnell.
Click to expand...
You have a liberal version of Trump's personality anyway. She goes by AOC.

You have Gingrich already. Nancy is better at the job than Newt ever was. You don't want McConnell. If you had drug up Bob Dole's name you would be a lot closer. Senate leaders from both parties have been caretakers for many years.
 
Last edited:
MovingPictures said:
You're proving my point.

Trump is eating Pelosi's launch on oversight. We all know he's a complete imbecile, so what does it say that's able to do that to Pelosi? Just look at Twitter and how many Democratic voters are saying they're done with Pelosi if she doesn't budge.

Biden has a similar history of getting onboard Republican ideas, and believing that can't be used effectively against him is to not learn anything from 2014's landslide.
Click to expand...

I know it feels like Trump is eating her lunch on oversight, but I also feel like it's too soon to say that. I think we have to wait a little longer to see how this plays out.

Remember this is the same chick who faced down trump on the shutdown and beat him with his own fists.
 
Cardinal said:
You say you don't want a "liberal version of Trump's personality," but then you go on to describe a person who's willing to be just as bad as Trump. Believe me, I get it. But as I said, you're overlearning the lessons from 2016, an underlearning the lessons from 2018. We took back the House, all without a single candidate being anything like Trump. We can take back the country in 2020 the same way we took the House in 2018.
Click to expand...
I didn't say I want a moral despot and fascist.

I want leadership that says: "Republicans declared a national emergency on immigration, so under that precedent, I'm declaring one for gun violence and assault rifles".

The kind of leadership that cuts Republicans with their own swords.
 
Cardinal said:
I know it feels like Trump is eating her lunch on oversight, but I also feel like it's too soon to say that. I think we have to wait a little longer to see how this plays out.

Remember this is the same chick who faced down trump on the shutdown and beat him with his own fists.
Click to expand...
I'm not convinced that wasn't because we screamed for her to not back down in the polls.

If I see that leadership again I'll be persuaded.
 
MovingPictures said:
I'm not convinced that wasn't because we screamed for her to not back down in the polls.

If I see that leadership again I'll be persuaded.
Click to expand...

Hmm. That's not a bad point.

Well, I still want to see how this plays out. I'm not convinced we've seen Act II yet.
 
MovingPictures said:
I didn't say want a moral despot and fascist.

I want leadership that says: "Republicans declared a national emergency on immigration, so under that precedent, I'm declaring one for gun violence and assault rifles".

The kind of leadership that cuts Republicans with their own swords.
Click to expand...


lol

You don't even know what an assault rifle is.


But by all means, declare a national emergency and take the military's weapons from them. Your side will be even more of a joke than it already is.
 
dcsports said:
It would also be incredible because he's probably the absolute least qualified person in the race. Being a mayor of a small city for a few years does very little to prepare a person to be president of the United States. I think his inexperience is really going to show.
Click to expand...

Being unqualified didn't hurt Obama. But then he won the racist vote...
 
Cardinal said:
Hmm. That's not a bad point.

Well, I still want to see how this plays out. I'm not convinced we've seen Act II yet.
Click to expand...
They better get Tom Brady then, if they're planning a comeback.
 
dobieg said:
lol

You don't even know what an assault rifle is.


But by all means, declare a national emergency and take the military's weapons from them. Your side will be even more of a joke than it already is.
Click to expand...
Aren't you going to miss your swamp buggy race?
 
MovingPictures said:
Aren't you going to miss your swamp buggy race?
Click to expand...


Sure.

But it's worth it to watch the clown show.


So are you going to explain why you want to declare a national emergency to ban weapons used by the military or are you just going to slink away or pretend you didn't actually say that?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom