The 2020 Presidential Election - Convention & General Election

[BigRedBuster]

9 hours ago, RedDenver said:

I'd like to see Bernie answer a question about his stance on busing. Maybe he'll give a good answer or maybe he'll continue to double- and triple-down with his foot in his mouth like Biden.

 

But looking at the bigger picture, Biden has way, way more problematic stuff than Bernie. The both sides attempt to equate them is pretty lame.

If Bernie had the same opinion as Biden, why shouldn’t they be equated?

[BigRedBuster]

Question.....

 

Why is it ok for people to make these type of comments when an employer could easily be sued for the same thing when hiring someone?

 

 

[RedDenver]

8 hours ago, Danny Bateman said:

 

It's pretty simple. Both of them opposed busing. I'm guessing a lot of white Democrats did back then, because a lot of white people did.

 

I just think it's silly the entire thing has been a line of attack against Biden when Bernie had literally the same position. Not that that excuses Biden's inability to apologize for anything.
 

Also, Biden didn't say he was proud of being anti-busing. He just said he worked with segregationalists in the Senate.

It's not just that they held positions decades ago, but how they acted during that time as well. Biden didn't just work with segregationists - he worked with segregationists on busing.

 

Letters from Joe Biden reveal how he sought support of segregationists in fight against busing

 

 

15 minutes ago, BigRedBuster said:

Question.....

 

Why is it ok for people to make these type of comments when an employer could easily be sued for the same thing when hiring someone?

 

 

Because elections and hiring are not the same things?

[BigRedBuster]

3 minutes ago, RedDenver said:

 

 

Because elections and hiring are not the same things?

How so?  In both situations, an older person wants a job and people are openly discussing how they don’t want an older person. 

 

How is saying you don’t want an old president any different than me saying I don’t want an old sales manager?

[RedDenver]

Just now, BigRedBuster said:

How so?  In both situations, an older person wants a job and people are openly discussing how they don’t want an older person. 

 

How is saying you don’t want an old president any different than me saying I don’t want an old sales manager?

Because one is a hiring process and between employer and employee and the other is an elected official that's selected by voting. Those aren't the same. Getting elected is not just about getting a job.

[Danny Bateman]

28 minutes ago, RedDenver said:

It's not just that they held positions decades ago, but how they acted during that time as well. Biden didn't just work with segregationists - he worked with segregationists on busing. 

 

Letters from Joe Biden reveal how he sought support of segregationists in fight against busing

 

 

Because elections and hiring are not the same things?

 

Does that surprise you?

 

From the story:

 

Quote

While Biden supported integration during his 1972 campaign, he rarely discussed busing until many of his constituents urged him to take a forceful stand against mandatory busing in the aftermath of a court-ordered desegregation plan in Delaware.

 

Jason Sokol, a civil rights historian and the author of "All Eyes Are Upon Us," reviewed the letters for CNN that Biden wrote to Eastland during that tumultuous time.

 

"At the very least, they present further evidence to suggest that Biden was quite committed to the anti-busing cause," said Sokol, a professor at the University of New Hampshire who has extensively studied Biden's role in the anti-busing debate. "He was strongly opposed to busing and was very interested in the passage of the anti-busing legislation that he sponsored. It wasn't a half-hearted thing."

 

For most of the next four decades, Biden has become known as a champion of civil rights legislation like the expansion of the Voting Rights Act and changes to the Fair Housing Act. But he has rarely explained his views surrounding busing.

 

The bolded makes it seem like Biden was trying to appease his angry (white) constituents. I don't think that makes it morally defensible, but at the very least isn't surprising. FWIW, the last paragraph is more important. What did he go on to do from there and what will he support moving forward?

[Moiraine]

3 hours ago, BigRedBuster said:

Question.....

 

Why is it ok for people to make these type of comments when an employer could easily be sued for the same thing when hiring someone?

 

 

 

 

 

It's legal for people to vote for anyone based on any basis they want, including age, race, sex, etc.

 

And regardless of that, some jobs have certain health standards. Even though it's not manual labor, it's obvious the presidency takes a physical toll on people, and the consequences of picking an unhealthy person could be severe. There should be health standards for that job and older people are less likely to be in prime health.

[BigRedBuster]

 

[TGHusker]

6 hours ago, BigRedBuster said:

 

So is she a good 'consensus' choice as the article notes?    What do all of you think?  Perhaps too early to tell.  She is a good debater and her experience as a AG shows in that regard as it did on the judiciary committee.  She knows how to take advantage of a high profile opportunity. 

[Landlord]

Warren is still the front runner imo.Harris will eventually have trouble with people thinking she's too angry and a mean "bitch" to be president. She's not past the heat she's about to get for her prosecution record either.

[BigRedBuster]

25 minutes ago, TGHusker said:

So is she a good 'consensus' choice as the article notes?    What do all of you think?  Perhaps too early to tell.  She is a good debater and her experience as a AG shows in that regard as it did on the judiciary committee.  She knows how to take advantage of a high profile opportunity. 

 

I don't know about a "good consensus choice" but, I'm interested enough to keep listening and watching what she does.  She is at least in my top 3 (if not #1) choice right now on the Dem side.  (which, sadly enough, means she would be my top choice overall)

[TGHusker]

53 minutes ago, BigRedBuster said:

 

I don't know about a "good consensus choice" but, I'm interested enough to keep listening and watching what she does.  She is at least in my top 3 (if not #1) choice right now on the Dem side.  (which, sadly enough, means she would be my top choice overall)

   I know what you mean.

 

At this point, I want an adult in the office even if I may only agree wt 50% of their platform. 

[Ratt Mhule]

42 minutes ago, BlitzFirst said:

Honestly there is only one candidate that doesn't take money from large corporations and lobbies/super pacs.  Can't be bought...that's enough for me.

 

Bernie2020! 

[mrandyk]

30 minutes ago, Frott Scost said:

 

Bernie2020! 

I want him in if only because he is independent. Sure, he's aligned with the Democrats for his presidential bids, but only so that he could stand a chance. We would be so much better off if people would divest themselves from these two parties that don't really represent anyone's interests but their own.

[Moiraine]

How many brain cells go into how the DNC decides who qualifies for a debate? Or are they purposely watering it down because it helps Biden?

 

I just read that the rules for the debates in July are the same, meaning 3 polls since January of 1%+ and a fundraising minimum.

 

The 2nd set of debates should have required 3 polls since June of 1%+. If you haven’t improved from January to June you’re not going to win. We need to hear more from candidates that have a chance. We need to hear more from Warren, Harris, Buttigieg, Sanders, and Biden. I’m fine with giving others a chance but it should be at 10 max for the 2nd set of debates, then lowered again maybe to around 6-8 for the 3rd set of debates. Have it be the 6 candidates with the best poll results of the 18 polls they’ve decided are acceptable.