• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

2019 dem primary debates

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
I was really hoping to hear warrens response on foreign policy. The last time I heard her address a foreign policy question I was not impressed and I thought it was a major weakness.

So far beto seems like he's all fluff.

Amy's response to Medicare for all was pretty weak as well.
 
So far I'm impressed with "I'd introduce an innovative" Bill de Blasio, "Mr. Union" Jay Inslee, and of course Elizabeth Warren. And I'm not at all impressed with Beta O'Rourke.
 
ivwshane said:
Your bigotry causes you to be short sighted and unable to recognize how our foreign policy has/is used to stabilize/destabilize regions across the world. When you address the root cause of this migration, the costs become insignificant compared to the costs of dealing with the affects of this migration.

Your bigotry also prevents you from seeing that immigration is and had always been a net positive to this country and is one of its greatest strengths.
Click to expand...

Stop it. Stop making sense. Lock them up. Steal their children. Build the Wall!
 
soulcougher73 said:
I don’t think you’d need to abolish insurance if the gov plan was great. People would just choose it and insurance companies would most likely go bankrupt all by themselves.
Click to expand...

My concern about a government ran program would be with the nearly three million people in the insurance industry that would most likely lose their jobs.

No, I am not for keeping people employed in dying industries just for the hell of it but it is a concern that I have yet to hear how it would be addressed.
 
ivwshane said:
My concern about a government ran program would be with the nearly three million people in the insurance industry that would most likely lose their jobs.

No, I am not for keeping people employed in dying industries just for the hell of it but it is a concern that I have yet to hear how it would be addressed.
Click to expand...
I have to imagine there will be a lot of goverment bureaucratic jobs that will need to be filled.
 
ivwshane said:
Your bigotry causes you to be short sighted and unable to recognize how our foreign policy has/is used to stabilize/destabilize regions across the world. When you address the root cause of this migration, the costs become insignificant compared to the costs of dealing with the affects of this migration.

Your bigotry also prevents you from seeing that immigration is and has always been a net positive to this country and is one of its greatest strengths.
Click to expand...

Your ignorance prevents you from helping the American people.

There are limitations to how many people should live on a piece of land. In our lifetimes, 100+ million people will have moved into the United States. How many more of our FINITE resources should be strip mined to support our ever growing numbers? Your policy is to harm our quality of life, to reduce our standard of living. Because there is no other way. More numbers means more pollution and more destruction. Less of X resource for each of us.

If you weren't rabid and frothing at the mouth to call people bigots, maybe you could do some simple math. What worked for America when our population was 57 million WILL NOT work for 330+ million. Bernie Madoff wasn't a role model for you to emulate. Our society's obsession with growth is going to end our society if we don't have the intelligence to put the brakes on it some day. Far as I am concerned that day is here.

I reject your ignorant smear to defend that unsustainable growth, as you pretend it's about who is immigrating rather than the fact that we need to stop growing while we still have resources and natural lands for future generations. Our consumption does not stop with us, but the land we have striped will not return. Not in a hundred years, not in a thousand. Those resources are gone, and you just want to accelerate our population. To need more, to consume more. To harm us all faster.

I'd forgive you for not knowing better, if only it wasn't so vital that we obtain stability for sustainability today and not wait another generation. But the least you could do is be honest about it, and not shit post about bigotry.
 
Jaskalas said:
Your ignorance prevents you from helping the American people.

There are limitations to how many people should live on a piece of land. In our lifetimes, 100+ million people will have moved into the United States. How many more of our FINITE resources should be strip mined to support our ever growing numbers? Your policy is to harm our quality of life, to reduce our standard of living. Because there is no other way. More numbers means more pollution and more destruction. Less of X resource for each of us.

If you weren't rabid and frothing at the mouth to call people bigots, maybe you could do some simple math. What worked for America when our population was 57 million WILL NOT work for 330+ million. Bernie Madoff wasn't a role model for you to emulate. Our society's obsession with growth is going to end our society if we don't have the intelligence to put the brakes on it some day. Far as I am concerned that day is here.

I reject your ignorant smear to defend that unsustainable growth, as you pretend it's about who is immigrating rather than the fact that we need to stop growing while we still have resources and natural lands for future generations. Our consumption does not stop with us, but the land we have striped will not return. Not in a hundred years, not in a thousand. Those resources are gone, and you just want to accelerate our population. To need more, to consume more. To harm us all faster.

I'd forgive you for not knowing better, if only it wasn't so vital that we obtain stability for sustainability today and not wait another generation. But the least you could do is be honest about it, and not shit post about bigotry.
Click to expand...

I've already addressed your bullshit talking points in a previous thread where you made similar bigoted remarks. You didn't address the points then and I won't be wasting my time a second time.

https://forums.anandtech.com/threads/i-hate-to-say-it.2566411/post-39847907
 
-These debates are a joke. It's a gross theater.

-It's cringy and midly entertaining to see all the candidates squirm and dodge to answer a simple megabomb question: "will you take away existing guns?"

-Who are some of these nobodies? If I were an underdog, I would be loud as hell. No wonder you're last place.

-God, at one point Warren said like two paragraph and it was completely devoid of any information - ("I will bring democracy back!).
 
ivwshane said:
I was really hoping to hear warrens response on foreign policy. The last time I heard her address a foreign policy question I was not impressed and I thought it was a major weakness.

So far beto seems like he's all fluff.

Amy's response to Medicare for all was pretty weak as well.
Click to expand...

Don't need to hear Warren's stance on foreign policy, she was totally ok with Israel shelling Palestinian schools and hospitals in 2014. She sucks ass. Give me Sanders or Yang.
 
Booker came across as way more authentic than I thought he would but Warren definitely topped the bunch tonight
 
Zeze said:
-These debates are a joke. It's a gross theater.

-It's cringy and midly entertaining to see all the candidates squirm and dodge to answer a simple megabomb question: "will you take away existing guns?"

-Who are some of these nobodies? If I were an underdog, I would be loud as hell. No wonder you're last place.

-God, at one point Warren said like two paragraph and it was completely devoid of any information - ("I will bring democracy back!).
Click to expand...


Welcome to politics. Lots and lots of nothing at all. Empty promises that they won’t fulfill, saying whatever will get your vote and when asked real questions (which very rarely ever happens) they answer with lots of nothing.
 
I was disappointed in everyone's response regarding Mitch McConnell. Everyone gave a rather fluff answer and no one was willing to be 100% honest.

If McConnell is still the senate majority leader, none of their agenda or supreme court nominations go through.
 
Indus said:
Booker came across as way more authentic than I thought he would but Warren definitely topped the bunch tonight
Click to expand...


Warren is definitely the smartest of the bunch and if she’d drop the promising free stuff act she’d be a good candidate and make a fine president.
 
UglyCasanova said:
Welcome to politics. Lots and lots of nothing at all. Empty promises that they won’t fulfill, saying whatever will get your vote and when asked real questions (which very rarely ever happens) they answer with lots of nothing.
Click to expand...
Bernie seems sincere to me - his voting history, being independent all his life, he's been screaming universal healthcare decades before it was hip.

Yang is a result-driven intellectual, but he won't win. And I don't think his vision should be wasted on being a president, as much as I like him. Perhaps VP niche pick?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top