The Democrat Primary Race Is Filling Up

[jamil]

Nancy Pelosi Warns Democrats That President Trump Won't 'Respect' Losing Election Results

 

[Ingomike]

Me thinks that most of the "candidates" in the running are actually just adding "Democratic Presidential Candidate" to their resume. Not that they wouldn't love it if they caught lighting in a bottle...

 

[actaeon277]

Nancy Pelosi Warns Democrats That President Trump Won't 'Respect' Losing Election Results

Things that make you say MMmmmm

 

[MCgrease08]

At this point the Democratic primary is looking less like a horse race and more like the running of the bulls.

 

[actaeon277]

Well, it worked for the repubs last time.

 

[Mikey1911]

At this point the Democratic primary is looking less like a horse race and more like the running of the bulls.

. . . And a great deal of bull exhaust will be generated by all participants.

 

[Doug]

Nancy Pelosi Warns Democrats That President Trump Won't 'Respect' Losing Election Results

It is so sad they are so filled with hate.
We should not expect them to ever again accept the results of a presidential election.

 

[BugI02]

The Democrat Primary Race Is Filling Up


Like an outhouse during a dysentery outbreak

 

[KG1]

It is so sad they are so filled with hate.
We should not expect them to ever again accept the results of a presidential election.

They have already proven that they won’t.

They are even trying their damndest to rig future elections so they won’t have to by calling for things like the elimination of the electoral college and fighting for the voting rights of illegal aliens and hardcore incarcerated felons in an attempt to gain an edge.

 

[printcraft]

Nancy Pelosi Warns Democrats That President Trump Won't 'Respect' Losing Election Results

Holy hell, someone tell her 2016 called and wants their talking points back.

 

[SheepDog4Life]

Politico: ‘An existential threat’: Desperate drive to make the debate stage shakes Dem campaigns
https://www.politico.com/story/2019/05/06/2020-democrats-debates-1302646

Dem candidates must have 65,000 donors (plus polling thresholds) to make the stage for the first primary debates.

So, some are pleading for $1 donations to bolster their numbers, since they have little organic support, lol!

 

[KLB]

The polling threshold will be the determining factor.

 

[actaeon277]

Gonna be hard for them to run on the economy.
Of course, they say, they are the reason the economy got better.

 

[KLB]

Gonna be hard for them to run on the economy.
Of course, they say, they are the reason the economy got better.

They are claiming it is not good. I have a relative that is very much a devoted Democrat, and she was spouting about it on Facebook recently. I am betting it was copied from elsewhere.

"The economy is good." 38 million people in the US on food stamps; every child eligible for free breakfast and lunch in Muhlenberg (same as in Appalachia); 18,000 keep the unemployment statistics looking good by leaving the job market due to opiod overdose in one year; the suicide rate higher than ever before and CEOs raking in 200 times the amount of the annual salaries of workers in their companies. That's not my idea of a healthy economy; is it yours?

 

[KG1]

They are claiming it is not good. I have a relative that is very much a devoted Democrat, and she was spouting about it on Facebook recently. I am betting it was copied from elsewhere.

Compared to eight years of an Obama economy I think the current economy stacks up pretty good. All they had to offer back then was doom and gloom, more dependency on the government and a suggestion that we better just get used to a new norm of higher unemployment, lower wages (except for a $15 minimum wage increase proposal )and lower GDP.

 

[jamil]

Gonna be hard for them to run on the economy.
Of course, they say, they are the reason the economy got better.

Because the best way to make the economy boom is to tax and regulate the **** out of businesses.

 

[jamil]

They are claiming it is not good. I have a relative that is very much a devoted Democrat, and she was spouting about it on Facebook recently. I am betting it was copied from elsewhere.

"The economy is good." 38 million people in the US on food stamps; every child eligible for free breakfast and lunch in Muhlenberg (same as in Appalachia); 18,000 keep the unemployment statistics looking good by leaving the job market due to opiod overdose in one year; the suicide rate higher than ever before and CEOs raking in 200 times the amount of the annual salaries of workers in their companies. That's not my idea of a healthy economy; is it yours?

1) The Obama administration actively recruited people to be on food stamps and other government programs. Many of whom did not really need it. The key thing to compare between administrations is to get at the number of people who needed food stamps then vs now. Given that actual real ass employment is up, and wages for lower income jobs are up, they're pretty full of **** on this one.

2) The problems in Appalachia have more to do with the failing coal industry. It's true enough that the downturn in that industry is largely due to competitive prices from natural gas. But it is dishonest for progressives to say that their "all the above" policies (energy should not come from sources below ground level) have not impacted coal producing regions. Progressives answer to careers lost in the coal industry is "Learn to code". THAT's not helpful. They need jobs they can do. And THEY are as much to blame for poverty in Appalachia as anything. Also, the cause of the opioid crisis is not the economic policies that are causing the growth in GDP and wages in other areas. The solution to that problem may be economic, but it certainly isn't needle exchange programs. Which seems to be all progressive can think of. Unless they're telling the addicts to learn to code as well.

3) The suicide rate: 70% of suicides are men; most of those are white middle aged. More than likely, telling white middle aged men that they're toxic, and problematic, and misogynists, and the cause of everything bad, is not going to help that statistic. More jobs at higher wages is not why men are committing suicide at such high rates.

4) CEO's are making more money, and poor people are making more money. Should it be 200 times as much? That's a different argument from whether or not lower wage people are making more than they used to make under Obama's economic policies. I remember that Obama once said that the days of 3 - 4 % growth were over, and that we had to start living with 1-2% growth. You know, because we must regulate and tax the **** out of businesses.

So yes, what's happening now is indeed my idea of a healthy economy. The things cited are either Democrat's fault, or actually have nothing to do with the policies which are contributing to the higher numbers.

 

[jamil]

Compared to eight years of an Obama economy I think the current economy stacks up pretty good. All they had to offer back then was doom and gloom, more dependency on the government and a suggestion that we better just get used to a new norm of higher unemployment, lower wages (except for a $15 minimum wage increase proposal )and lower GDP.

Their answer to no jobs is more government programs to get people reliant on government. I remember back in maybe 2010 hearing an NPR segment on the difficulties in getting the Cuban community in FL to accept government assistance, because they believed in hard work and making their own way. Their segment was about how social workers were going out into Cuban communities to try to sign up as many as they could get to for welfare, and food stamps, even though they were getting by and didn't want it, and didn't think they needed it.

 

[KLB]

1) The Obama administration actively recruited people to be on food stamps and other government programs. Many of whom did not really need it. The key thing to compare between administrations is to get at the number of people who needed food stamps then vs now. Given that actual real ass employment is up, and wages for lower income jobs are up, they're pretty full of **** on this one.

2) The problems in Appalachia have more to do with the failing coal industry. It's true enough that the downturn in that industry is largely due to competitive prices from natural gas. But it is dishonest for progressives to say that their "all the above" policies (energy should not come from sources below ground level) have not impacted coal producing regions. Progressives answer to careers lost in the coal industry is "Learn to code". THAT's not helpful. They need jobs they can do. And THEY are as much to blame for poverty in Appalachia as anything. Also, the cause of the opioid crisis is not the economic policies that are causing the growth in GDP and wages in other areas. The solution to that problem may be economic, but it certainly isn't needle exchange programs. Which seems to be all progressive can think of. Unless they're telling the addicts to learn to code as well.

3) The suicide rate: 70% of suicides are men; most of those are white middle aged. More than likely, telling white middle aged men that they're toxic, and problematic, and misogynists, and the cause of everything bad, is not going to help that statistic. More jobs at higher wages is not why men are committing suicide at such high rates.

4) CEO's are making more money, and poor people are making more money. Should it be 200 times as much? That's a different argument from whether or not lower wage people are making more than they used to make under Obama's economic policies. I remember that Obama once said that the days of 3 - 4 % growth were over, and that we had to start living with 1-2% growth. You know, because we must regulate and tax the **** out of businesses.

So yes, what's happening now is indeed my idea of a healthy economy. The things cited are either Democrat's fault, or actually have nothing to do with the policies which are contributing to the higher numbers.

Yeah, pretty much what came to mind. I refrained from commenting though. Just not worth trying to discuss with them.

 

[actaeon277]

Because the best way to make the economy boom is to tax and regulate the **** out of businesses.

According to them, yes.