USA Democratic party 2020 candidates and primaries thread

[Ludicus]

Warren is hardly an establishment candidate. The fact Warren and Sanders support stiff financial marketing regulation, free healthcare and education makes them pariahs to the system.

Exactly...Wall Street Frets Privately About Warren's 2020 Campaign - The wall Street Journal

...Interviews with dozens of Democrat-supporting bankers, lawyers and others in New York's finance sector revealed growing anxiety and a sense of powerlessness about the Massachusetts senator who is now one of the front-runners in national and early state polls

[Heathen Hammer]

Again what evidence do you have Warren will continue neocon policies? Don't ignore my post because i'm picking your points apart.

Well, I refuted your points and you just repeated same points again, and I'm not a parrot to repeat same thing over and over again.
As I said, we have Warren's long history of being a milktoast neoliberal and we somehow are supposed to believe that she became a woke defender of proletariat at a drop of a hat. We may need something a bit more substantial then quoting her campaign website to believe such claim.

[Vanoi]

Well, I refuted your points and you just repeated same points again, and I'm not a parrot to repeat same thing over and over again.

You didn't refute anything. You just kept ignoring everything. Do try again.

As I said, we have Warren's long history of being a milktoast neoliberal and we somehow are supposed to believe that she became a woke defender of proletariat at a drop of a hat.

And that has to do with??

We may need something a bit more substantial then quoting her campaign website to believe such claim.

Moving the goalposts now i see? I proved my claim. You have yet to post one shred of evidence that shows she's pro-war at all. Its just been your baseless conjecture.

[Love Mountain]

Warren is hardly an establishment candidate. I think the establishment prefers her to a Sanders presidency but Klombuchar, Butti, Harris or Biden are easily the establishment candidates in this race. The fact Warren and Sanders support stiff financial marketing regulation, free healthcare and education makes them pariahs to the system. The only thing which makes warren more palatable to the establishment is that she's a academic not a movement builder or organizer. Sanders is a movement builder. I.E. while Warren has great ideas I don't think she'll change the system in order to get them passed, like Obama once they're defeated she'll shrug and move on. Sanders on the other hand is likely to fundamentally alter the system in order to push his ideas to fruition. That shake up is dangerous to the establishment.

Sanders is definitely more of a revolutionary. Which, in my opinion, is not necessarily a bad thing. There's actually a lot of things I disagree with him on, like universal health care, wealth taxes, labor retraining... the list goes on. However, his ideas about government accountability and political reform is healthy for democracy. There needs to be a power shift towards labor instead of capital.

[Heathen Hammer]

And that has to do with??

Politician changing her views at a drop of a hat is a sign that she'll do that again.

Moving the goalposts now i see? I proved my claim. You have yet to post one shred of evidence that shows she's pro-war at all. Its just been your baseless conjecture.

Okay, so can I use Trumps' campaign website as source then? We have history of neoliberal Democrats doing a complete 180 on various things, including foreign policy.

[Vanoi]

Politician changing her views at a drop of a hat is a sign that she'll do that again.

You haven't even once gave an example of a view she changed at the drop of a hat.

Okay, so can I use Trumps' campaign website as source then?

Sure go for it. Show me any actual source showing Warren is pro-war as you claim.

We have history of neoliberal Democrats doing a complete 180 on various things, including foreign policy.

Such as what? Thats evidence of other people flip flopping, not Warren. I know its hard for you to understand but Democrats are not a hive mind. Just because Obama did something doesn't mean Warren will too otherwise i could easily claim Trump is no different than Bush simply because he's a Republican.

[Heathen Hammer]

Its almost like a politician that lied about multiple things is likely to do that again or something.

[irontaino]

Its almost like a politician that lied about multiple things is likely to do that again or something.

And yet you're one of our forum's biggest Trump devotees.

[conon394]

He's pretty mediocre at best, and at times it's hard to distinguish him from a communist Democrat. There's a reason America's enemies can't contain their glee over the fact that he's president.

Sorry I missed a communist running as a democrat please enlighten me?

[alhoon]

Sorry I missed a communist running as a democrat please enlighten me?

With pleasure.
Here.

[alhoon]

In a new poll by Fox, Hillary Clinton hilariously leads Donald Trump 43% to 41% in 2019. Americans have learned from their mistake. Again: that's Fox News.
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/fox...ber-27-30-2019
#FoxFakeNews anyone?

[swabian]

Trump's narcissism is basically a nuisance that is survivable without problems (from the US perspective). But Hillary would be an actual asset. She's a woman who has to prove her phallic unscrupulousness. She actually would bomb Iran's nuclear facilities, just to prove how manly she is lol.

[saxdude]

Sanders and Tulsi are the only real good candidates, I do get an Obamaesque feeling from Warren tbh, but I'd hope I'm wrong.

[Ἀπολλόδοτος Α΄ ὁ Σωτήρ]

She actually would bomb Iran's nuclear facilities, just to prove how manly she is lol.

I believe you would be right, if Clinton would have repudiated the JCPOA. Since Clinton embodies Democratic establishment it's safe to assume she would not reject what is considered in such establishment as one of Obama's most important legacies, especially since she has stated that Iran should be permitted to enrich uranium under IAEA supervision once the international concerns over its nuclear program are resolved.

[Ἀπολλόδοτος Α΄ ὁ Σωτήρ]

Sorry I missed a communist running as a democrat please enlighten me?

You've missed Sanders and Warren.

There are some people who believe that one doesn't need an economic system where "means of production" are common ownership or owned by the state, therefore there is no such thing as private ownership in such a system, or if it does exist is merely limited to a small workshop/farm operated by a single person along with their immediate family, to have a communist economy. For instance single person can own factories, stocks, or service businesses, but it's still communism.

While I am someone who opposes communism due to my love of my property, I must say that proposals of these two Senators just doesn't sound communistic enough for me to classify them as such.

With pleasure.
Here.

I merely skimmed trough that article due to many Racist! Islamophobia! words written, seemed a bit repetitive for my sore eyes, but I do see that giving right to vote to a terrorist and believing in climate change is one of the things mentioned about Sanders. While I was aware of these I wouldn't include them into a piece trying to prove him of being a Communist instead of a Socialist. That's not to say that people who write articles about the two can differentiate between them. Additionally it's pointless to differentiate if one considers both to be equally evil just because people in the US are starting to fear less of one (Socialism), what they should be doing is continuing to say that they are still the exact same thing.

Now, I do know this will come as a surprise to many people but Communism is just one facet of Marxism and as such if one wants to implement communism which is an economic system one can be perfectly racist, I mean actually a racial supremacist, even a genocidal one. For example, one can be a American white nationalist who wishes to expel all colored people AND make sure that gender differences are strictly enforced while still maintaining a communistic economy, including one run on fossil fuels and with as much of deforestation as one wishes. I mean that's pretty much how Stalin run the USSR, just replace white nationalism with Russification. Russify, Deforest, Mine, make a lot of black smoke...

[PointOfViewGun]

With pleasure.
Here.

Does Sanders want to transfer any and all private properties to the state?

[alhoon]

Does Sanders want to transfer any and all private properties to the state?

Yes.

[PointOfViewGun]

Yes.

That's something you should back up with a source. Where is it?

[alhoon]

That's something you should back up with a source. Where is it?

No source. He has been supporting such movements in the 80s. Also, that he wants that doesn't mean he expects that he can pass it. From the way he talks and his stance on unions and nationalization and all the work of "without you the factory doesn't work!" to the laborers it is quite clear that he is an old-school communist that is against private ownership. However he's not insane to think he can pass it nor, I think, he plans to push for it. He holds it as an ideal, an unattainable dream. In short: He wants it, he knows he can't have it.

[PointOfViewGun]

No source. He has been supporting such movements in the 80s. Also, that he wants that doesn't mean he expects that he can pass it. From the way he talks and his stance on unions and nationalization and all the work of "without you the factory doesn't work!" to the laborers it is quite clear that he is an old-school communist that is against private ownership. However he's not insane to think he can pass it nor, I think, he plans to push for it. He holds it as an ideal, an unattainable dream. In short: He wants it, he knows he can't have it.

Gotcha. Putting it aside as a baseless and worthless opinion then. Thanks.