EPT2020 Democratic Nominees - Page 44
| Forum Index > Closed |
If this thread turns into a USPMT 2.0, we will not hesitate to shut it down. Do not even bother posting if all you're going to do is shit on the Democratic candidates while adding nothing of value. Rules: - Don't post meaningless one-liners. - Don't turn this into a X doesn't stand a chance against Trump debate. - Sources MUST have a supporting comment that summarizes the source beforehand. - Do NOT turn this thread into a Republicans vs. Democrats shit-storm. This thread will be heavily moderated. Expect the same kind of strictness as the USPMT. | ||
|
JimmiC
Canada22817 Posts
| ||
|
Mohdoo
United States15661 Posts
... Elizabeth Warren! https://www.wbur.org/news/2020/02/28/wbur-poll-sanders-opens-substantial-lead-in-massachusetts-challenging-warren-on-her-home-turf Warren is headed towards a humiliating defeat in her own state. And yet she is still in the race. I wonder why? Does she intend to benefit from a contested convention? Weird! | ||
|
JimmyJRaynor
Canada16679 Posts
On February 29 2020 04:13 JimmiC wrote: Sensationalizing the actual issues with comments like "This fed an already booming underground economy. When you tried to pay someone less than the minimum wage prior to 2018 it was considered a disgusting social faux pas. It was not only illegal it was highly frowned upon. Now, when you pay someone less than minimum wage people just shrug." Which are incorrect, and directly countered by your own sources which actually state that the problem is being taken more seriously, it helps no one. The prosecution rate was 0.2%. So its easy to improve on that #. By the time Doug Ford is done with his cutbacks it'll be back down to 0.2% again. On February 29 2020 04:13 JimmiC wrote: Your article seems to indicate that the problem is being dealt with better now than it was in the past. Check the date of that article. What tangible steps has the Ontario government undertaken under Doug Ford to improve minimum wage enforcement? Nothing. IMO, Doug Ford's government won't fix or partially fix this problem. However, this belongs in the Canadian politics thread. Not here. If you want to detail how the Ford government will improve the situation I'm all ears. In conclusion, minimum wage laws without proper enforcement do more harm than good. Whether it is Canada's most populous province, Ontario, or in the USA ... its bad to have minimum wage laws and then not enforce them On February 29 2020 04:39 Mohdoo wrote: Introducing, the 2020 recipient of the "Marco Rubio award"... ... Elizabeth Warren! https://www.wbur.org/news/2020/02/28/wbur-poll-sanders-opens-substantial-lead-in-massachusetts-challenging-warren-on-her-home-turf Warren is headed towards a humiliating defeat in her own state. And yet she is still in the race. I wonder why? Does she intend to benefit from a contested convention? Weird! I thought Sanders handled the "no woman can be president" fiasco brilliantly. To me, that incident eliminated Warren's slim chances of winning. | ||
|
Danglars
United States12133 Posts
| ||
|
JimmiC
Canada22817 Posts
| ||
|
JimmyJRaynor
Canada16679 Posts
On February 29 2020 05:38 JimmiC wrote: On top of that the 15000 complaints per year represents (15000/7,100,000) .2% of people working in Ontario. there are far less than 7.1 million minimum wage wokers in Ontario. Again though, this isn't the place for it. On February 29 2020 05:38 JimmiC wrote: Your conclusion does not fit even the evidence you have provided. What evidence do you have that it would be worse without those laws? The .2% is also a pointless number because we have no way of knowing how many of those claims are legitimate. On top of that the 15000 complaints per year represents (15000/7,100,000) .2% of people working in Ontario. So while it is certainly unfortunate that it is not working out for everyone. That .2% of the people are filing complaints suggests that it is working fairly well for the vast majority. But if you would like to actually present some info on how removing the rules that without union representation is the only thing creating a floor for what people can be paid, I'd be interested to read it and very surprised if it existed. Even business groups in Canada like the CFIB and Chamber of commerce's have never argued that we should do away with minimum wage because it drives down pay to the poor. They have argued that it would shut down small business and create unemployment, but the evidence so far has supported that it does not and in fact there is benefits to having those people being able to spend more money. Welp, the USA is what we're talking about in this thread right? My sources cover how enforcement in the USA does not match the size of the problem. Here they are for a 2nd time. https://www.demos.org/research/steal-urgent-need-combat-wage-theft-retail https://www.epi.org/files/pdf/125116.pdf If you want to dig into what is going on in Ontario do it in the Canadian Politics thread not in here. | ||
|
JimmiC
Canada22817 Posts
| ||
|
WombaT
Northern Ireland25046 Posts
On February 29 2020 05:26 Danglars wrote: Warren's big push for Native American ancestry, and later campaign insistence that Sanders made a sexist comment in a meeting just between the two of them, will be remembered in the annals of major campaign failures. She made so many attempts to own a Bernie + high pragmatism synthesis, and fell flat for major campaign blunders. It’s amazing what is considered a gaffe now vs even 10/15 years ago. Seems almost quaint to look back to a time where Howard Dean’s classic scream had such an adverse affect. | ||
|
Sermokala
United States13891 Posts
On February 29 2020 06:43 Wombat_NI wrote: It’s amazing what is considered a gaffe now vs even 10/15 years ago. Seems almost quaint to look back to a time where Howard Dean’s classic scream had such an adverse affect. Dude was on his way to becoming president easy and then died like a fish. | ||
|
Mohdoo
United States15661 Posts
On February 29 2020 05:26 Danglars wrote: Warren's big push for Native American ancestry, and later campaign insistence that Sanders made a sexist comment in a meeting just between the two of them, will be remembered in the annals of major campaign failures. She made so many attempts to own a Bernie + high pragmatism synthesis, and fell flat for major campaign blunders. Imagine thinking it is a good idea to Tweet about the fact that you are between 1/32 and 1/512 native American. That is such a hilarious level of stupid that I'm not concerned she tanked her chances of ever being president. She is clearly so disaster-prone that it isn't even worth thinking about. She makes great sound bites and is a decent speaker, but she should be kept as that. "I can make people vote for me by calling Bernie a sexist" "I can make people vote for me by proving I am indeed at MOST 1/32 native American" Each of those 2 statements would likely not be made by many people. Somehow, Warren's inner monologue said BOTH | ||
|
Geo.Rion
7377 Posts
On February 29 2020 06:56 Mohdoo wrote: Imagine thinking it is a good idea to Tweet about the fact that you are between 1/32 and 1/512 native American. That is such a hilarious level of stupid that I'm not concerned she tanked her chances of ever being president. She is clearly so disaster-prone that it isn't even worth thinking about. She makes great sound bites and is a decent speaker, but she should be kept as that. "I can make people vote for me by calling Bernie a sexist" "I can make people vote for me by proving I am indeed at MOST 1/32 native American" Each of those 2 statements would likely not be made by many people. Somehow, Warren's inner monologue said BOTH 1/32? i thought it was somethign like 1/256 1/512 | ||
|
Drusas_
24 Posts
On February 29 2020 06:56 Mohdoo wrote: Imagine thinking it is a good idea to Tweet about the fact that you are between 1/32 and 1/512 native American. That is such a hilarious level of stupid that I'm not concerned she tanked her chances of ever being president. She is clearly so disaster-prone that it isn't even worth thinking about. She makes great sound bites and is a decent speaker, but she should be kept as that. "I can make people vote for me by calling Bernie a sexist" "I can make people vote for me by proving I am indeed at MOST 1/32 native American" Each of those 2 statements would likely not be made by many people. Somehow, Warren's inner monologue said BOTH The Native American blunder was simply something that she should have ended before starting the campaign. Warren and her campaign probably thought it would just go away. Going after Bernie was clearly a Hail Mary toss as he began to pull away with the progressives. At least she finally got rid of the pandering beseeching tone from the previous debates. Now its a bit more reserved. | ||
|
Mohdoo
United States15661 Posts
On February 29 2020 07:16 Geo.Rion wrote: 1/32? i thought it was somethign like 1/256 1/512 Its basically a probability distribution. Technically it was possible she was 1/32. No one would bet on it, but it was possible. Regardless, people would laugh at her if she could prove she was 1/32. It was a terrible idea from the beginning. It has been 1 of many instances where her strategic judgment is abnormally terrible. | ||
|
semantics
10040 Posts
Blood quantum's just imply being part of a group. It doesn't actually mean people even met people who have lived a life being defined as part of said group. It's just werid to bring up and weird to respond to. | ||
|
JimmiC
Canada22817 Posts
| ||
|
GreenHorizons
United States23170 Posts
On February 29 2020 00:27 Bourgeois wrote: Poll: Who do you support now? Bernie (47) Warren (5) Yang (5) Biden (4) Gabbard (4) Bloomberg (3) Buttigieg (2) Klobuchar (1) Steyer (1) 72 total votes Your vote: Who do you support now? (Vote): Bernie The Klobuchar vote is serm right? Wonder if the Bloomberg supporters will speak up either | ||
|
JimmiC
Canada22817 Posts
| ||
|
IgnE
United States7681 Posts
On February 29 2020 06:56 Sermokala wrote: Dude was on his way to becoming president easy and then died like a fish. I still don’t understand why that happened. Truly puzzling. | ||
|
Bourgeois
81 Posts
On March 01 2020 01:22 IgnE wrote: I still don’t understand why that happened. Truly puzzling. If you're truly puzzled and believe the scream was the reason he didn't become the nominee, then you're the exact kind of person who falls for the media's sensationalism and might as well believe Trump's wall will be paid for by Mexico. He exited because he came third far behind Kerry and Edwards despite banking everything on Iowa, not because of the scream. It's the equivalent of Tom Steyer believing he'd come second in Nevada after spending millions, but instead coming 5th and receiving 4.7% of the vote (versus Bernie's 46.8% and Biden's 20.2%). Howard Dean was basically the Beto O'Rourke of 2004. Overhyped but nothing to show. For some reason, a lot of ignorant Democratic voters are somehow under the delusion that Dean had a chance. What he was remembered for (the scream) is the exact same kind of thing O'Rouke is remembered for (i.e. saying the word "fuck") - in other words, nothing of substance. Do you actually even remember any of Dean's (or O'Rouke's) policies that made him seem presidential to you? | ||
|
WombaT
Northern Ireland25046 Posts
On March 01 2020 02:23 Bourgeois wrote: If you're truly puzzled and believe the scream was the reason he didn't become the nominee, then you're the exact kind of person who falls for the media's sensationalism and might as well believe Trump's wall will be paid for by Mexico. He exited because he came third far behind Kerry and Edwards despite banking everything on Iowa, not because of the scream. It's the equivalent of Tom Steyer believing he'd come second in Nevada after spending millions, but instead coming 5th and receiving 4.7% of the vote (versus Bernie's 46.8% and Biden's 20.2%). Howard Dean was basically the Beto O'Rourke of 2004. Overhyped but nothing to show. For some reason, a lot of ignorant Democratic voters are somehow under the delusion that Dean had a chance. What he was remembered for (the scream) is the exact same kind of thing O'Rouke is remembered for (i.e. saying the word "fuck") - in other words, nothing of substance. Do you actually even remember any of Dean's (or O'Rouke's) policies that made him seem presidential to you? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yi3qMl8QwWw Dat scream though, so memorable. Nah I was aware it’s not as framed, my point was regardless of it not being the reason he tanked it was still portrayed as this huge gaffe, whereas by modern standards it would barely cause a ripple of controversy. It’s been a while since I read up on Howard Dean in depth (despite it being one of my main hobbies), I do think he laid some solid groundwork in areas such as soliciting smaller donations etc that others have taken and run with. | ||
| ||
