Amira’s Nevada Debate 2020 Summary

by with No Comment FeaturedPolitics

Warren was the clear winner. ?

I feel like Sanders needs to do a better job explaining how his plans won’t cost Americans more money in taxes. For instance, when he brought up the Green New Deal and he mentions “job creation” – all I think of is that taxes will be raised to fund all of these federally guaranteed government jobs. ? If you’re a Sanders supporter maybe you can explain this in the comments. I understand taxes will go up for M4A. Sanders is clear about that. I feel like it’s time for Sanders to say MORE about his policies during the debates to make more people feel confident in him as a leader. I’m not a fan of Sanders but if it’s between him and Bloomberg in NY, Sanders will have my vote. I’ll vote for anyone opposing Bloomberg.

Klobuchar might not have the most perfect record BUT she responds very well, isn’t evasive which is a pretty unheard of for a politician, and she seems to learn from her mistakes. I honestly like her more after each debate. I understand why her polling numbers go up with each debate.

Bloomberg IS evasive (he never answered the question regarding allegations) and doesn’t learn from his mistakes.

Besides his rambling ?, I was really disappointed with Biden’s comments about Bloomberg’s Stop & Frisk ramp up. I was expecting him to say that Bloomberg cut back after the policy was deemed unconstitutional.

Mind you, Stop & Frisk is just one of several things showing how regressive and, as Pete describes, polarizing Bloomberg is. Choosing him as the nom would give us a loss similar to 2016. He’s a bad candidate just like Clinton was.

Bloomberg likes to say he’s not taking any money. That’s not a good thing. Yes, we want corporate donors out of the equation. Receiving support from the average American; however, is a GOOD thing. It means you want to work for OUR interests instead of corporations’. Bloomberg self-funding means that he’s doing this for his own interests. He’s beholden to himself. It’s a power move. The fact that he wants to throw a ton of money behind whoever the nominee is another power move. He wants to be able to pull the strings no matter what.

Buttigieg was his typical self. He’s condescending and continues to sound manufactured. I can understand why people who miss politicians who act and sound like politicians favor him. I, personally, really don’t like him – but Bloomberg makes him look better. Oh, Pete really lost me when he attacked Amy for nonsense and NOT Bloomberg. Warren ended up swooping in and came out the victor.

1. Warren ?
2. Klobuchar (confident, clear)
3. Sanders (needs to get more specific)
4. Buttigieg (childish and got facts wrong)
5. Biden (rambled and got facts wrong)
6. Bloomberg (was ill-prepared for the expected attacks, won’t own up to his faults unless he feels he’ll benefit)

In terms of who I feel is most genuine, here’s my ranking:

1. Sanders and Warren
2. Klobuchar and Biden
3. Buttigieg and Bloomberg

EDITED TO ADD comments I’ve seen in my feed:

“It might have been just been on my stream from MSNBC, but there were multiple ads against Medicare For All (and any other options). The healthcare and pharmaceutical industries are at work trying to keep their large profits by confusing voters. The interests of big business many times doesn’t align with that of the people.” – Anonymous (not a public post)

“Let’s say it comes down to Trump and Bloomberg. Sexual assaults/harassment of women no longer matters. (especially if you can afford to get away with it.)

Singling out minorities through stop and frisk laws is ok (Bloomberg) and opposing it is divisive. (Trump)

New Muslims won’t be admitted (Trump) and those here can expect to be spied on. (Bloomberg)”

Similar Read: Amira’s Debate Summaries 

Beto’s Stance on Guns and Churches Proved To Be Too Much For Liberals

by with No Comment FeaturedPolitics

Beto O’Rourke ended his campaign for Democratic presidential nominee last week. His run to win the nomination was a disappointment to say the least. Despite gracing the cover of Vanity Fair and tons of media coverage, he never did well enough in the debates to garner enough national support. His appeal in Texas, which was enough to make his 2018 Senate race against Republican Ted Cruz closer than anyone could imagine, never resonated on the national stage in regard to his presidential candidacy.

There’s probably a number of reasons why Beto was forced to end his race, but his stance on two issues, in particular, missed the mark and were probably the final straw for potential voters and donors.

Issue #1: GUNS

Very few reasonable lawmakers or voters on either side of the aisle will argue that we don’t have a gun violence issue in America. But the reasons why the issue exists and the solutions to fix it are all over the place. Beto proposed a mandatory gun buyback program for all AK-47s and AR-15s. It’s important to note that even liberals love their guns. While some applauded his bold proposal, it didn’t fall in line with Congressional Democrats and their goals for gun reform. In fact, Senate Democrats want nothing to do with mandatory buyback programs.

“I don’t know of any other Democrat who agrees with Beto O’Rourke, but it’s no excuse not to go forward.” – Minority Leader Chuck Schumer

In other words, if you want to commit political suicide, go right ahead… you will get no support in these congressional halls.

Issues #2: CHURCHES

In an “LGBTQ Equality” town hall on CNN, Beto called for all religious institutions to lose their tax-exempt status if they oppose same-sex marriage. Whether you believe in the true separation of Church and State, similar to guns, this was a mile too far. Upholding and protecting the rights and equality of every American is paramount, but forcing churches to get on board by threatening to remove their tax-exempt status might’ve even been too much for the left, mainly Democrats, who are the main party trying to make sure same-sex marriage is protected and upheld.

While Beto’s exit from the race for Democratic presidential nominee shouldn’t deter future candidates from proposing big and bold ideas, it should make them consider the details of such ideas and how best to roll them out. 

Similar Read: Who Did Well in the 4th Dem Debate… Sanders, Yang, Buttigieg?  

Luke’s Consciousness from Night 1 of the Debates

by with One Comment FeaturedPolitics

My thoughts… 

Instead of 2 nights of 10 candidates, they should move to 4 nights of 5 candidates. Too many candidates on one stage muddles the message and it feels more like a spelling bee or an 80s dating show. People committed to watching two nights will watch four. 

Single-payer is the dividing line for the party and candidates. Removing the option for private policies is the sticking point.

Elizabeth Warren does not want to be labeled as raising taxes on the middle-class by supporting Medicare for All, even though the sponsor, Bernie Sanders, says it will require an increase in taxes. 

Kudos to Jake Tapper for making each candidate answer about raising middle-class taxes. 

Beto is trying the Goldilocks approach, but it appears he is provoking both sides instead of uniting them.

Bernie has the healthcare debate cornered in this debate. He will say what others won’t and it shows he is the most comfortable saying it.

Delaney has the policy that is most likely to get through both Houses of Congress, but he is likely to become the Dems John Kasich – possible crossover support, but will not find a receptive audience in a segmented primary. 

The red-state/blue-state Dems divide when it comes to public health care for illegal immigrants. Red-state Dems have had to appeal to Trump-leaning voters, and they view Trump’s landmines very differently. 

Steve Bullock is extremely uncomfortable answering questions about gun violence. Red-state Dems do NOT want to answer questions about guns and are hiding behind changing issues. 

Based on the answers provided on climate change, immigration, and health care, President Obama is a borderline blue dog Democrat. 

These candidates throw out the term ‘trillions’ like Oprah with new cars. 

Tim Ryan, Bullock, Hickenlooper, and Delaney are running for the Hillary 2008 voters, who turned to Trump. Bernie, Warren, Buttigieg, and Beto are running for the Obama 2008 voters. It’s Midwest blue-collar working-class union voters versus coastal cosmopolitan upscale liberals. 

Buttigieg is what Beto was supposed to be. Beto had the perfect foil in Ted Cruz, he doesn’t have that luxury in a large primary. 

Watching an entirely White stage debate reparations was interesting because most of the candidates were not comfortable discussing it. 

Delaney embraced TPP! I never expected to see a presidential candidate do that, especially since Trump opposes it too. Delaney has fully embraced the DLC mantle, but that group has not been relevant for more than a decade. He has potential to get Never-Trump former Republicans. 

It will be interesting to see how effective Warren, Sanders, and Biden will be able to combat the potential issue of ageism. 

Warren and Sanders elevated themselves from the rest of the stage when it comes to seizing the progressive mantle. They need to face Biden in the next debate. Delaney has unabashedly seized the moderate mantle. It will get him new donors, but being the moderate candidate has too low of a ceiling to win. Klobuchar reminds me of another former MN presidential candidate, Tim Pawlenty. Solid resume, but in a giant field, she won’t have the dedicated support to make a dent. Beto won’t make it to the Iowa caucus. Buttigieg is a wildcard. He has potential, but he doesn’t have the stage presence Warren or Sanders command. 

Similar Read: Luke’s Consciousness From Night 2 of the Debates

War Taxes and Other Radical Ideas From the Left

by with One Comment FeaturedPolitics

Joe Biden is the clear front runner in the Democratic race for the presidential nomination. Regardless of his tone-deaf comments and self-inflicting blunders, his poll numbers haven’t wavered and the race is his to lose. With that being said, nearly every Democrat trailing him is willing to say and do anything to gain traction, including radical ideas and “sound good” policy.

Bernie Sanders, who is second in most polls, just proposed cutting student loan debt, all $1.6 TRILLION. It sounds good, but unrealistic by any measure and a weak attempt to gain traction. Student loan debt can be crippling, and maybe that’s why so many people have quickly jumped on the Bernie bandwagon after he made the announcement… some probably knowing it sounds too good to be true, and others really believing it could happen (if he wins of course). Let’s just say we defer to the former.

If that wasn’t a stretch goal, last week Beto O’Rourke proposed a “war tax”, which would require non-military households (so roughly 99% of the population) to pay a “war tax” to help cover the health care of veterans of newly-authorized wars. Healthcare for veterans, including mental health and other related services for them and their families, should be a primary concern of every White House administration. We can safely say both parties have dropped this ball. But more taxes to address this issue isn’t the answer, and if Beto didn’t know that before his announcement, Twitter quickly confirmed that it’s a nonstarter. While the taxes would be nominal, it’s still a bad idea thrown at an even worse problem.

Household income…

  • Making less than $30,000/year would pay $25
  • Making less than $40,000/year would pay $57
  • Making less than $50,000/year would pay $98
  • Making less than $75,000/year would pay $164
  • Making less than $100,000/year would pay $270
  • Making less than $200,000/year would pay $485
  • Making more than $200,000/year would pay $1,000.

Just a thought… Considering we budget more for our military than the next 7 countries combined, why don’t we start by allocating a small percentage of that to veterans healthcare? I think we’ll have enough… to still say we budget more for our military than the next 7 countries combined. 

The US House – Opening Volleys of a New Regime

by with No Comment FeaturedPolitics

By a narrower margin than any mid term “wave” in recent history, the Democratic Party has now regained the House, and along with that, the chairmanship of the House’s most important statutory committee – the Ways and Means Committee.  The Constitution says that the budget process must begin in the House, making setting budget priorities one of the single most important special functions of the entire body.  In the chorus of America’s electorate in returning control of the House to Democrats, the primary concerns were healthcare (specifically preservation of pre-existing condition protections), rising deficits resulting from corporate tax cuts, and the cost of “the Wall”.  Now in his first resounding action as he prepares to take the gavel, Richard Neal, likely the next Ways and Means Chair has stated that among his first actions as chair will be……  to demand Donald Trump’s tax returns?

President Trump was among the first presidents in modern history not to publicly release his returns – even though the president has no more need to do so than any other private citizen.   Candidates have done so largely to show transparency.  While IRS firewalls exist specifically to make certain that elected officials may not influence IRS actions against themselves, and while elected officials have statutory audits that mandate laser focus on the propriety of their taxes, the decision to release them is their own.  However, most candidates have decided that even if there were awkward issues in their returns, that to face the American electorate without releasing their own returns was too risky to contemplate.

President Trump has continually resisted such a release, citing such issues as audits most of which seem like changing the subject because he just doesn’t want to, and he chose to face the voters (as was his right) without the release.  Most Americans on both sides assume that the release of his returns is likely to show that despite his wealth, Donald Trump pays very little in taxes.  While many Democrats have tried to associate this with not paying his “fair share”, and while there may be a strong argument to that case, Trump is also unique to history in not having been a part of any branch of government before his presidential election – meaning that even if he’s paid nothing in taxes, that the laws that governed Trump’s tax payments were passed without any of the President’s doing.  More to the point, those tax systems were hashed out in the House Ways and Means Committee which now seeks to order the President to turn them over – and not because of any specific issue… But because every other President has done so and he has not.

The Democrats have been given a limited mandate of power to show they can deliver on the issues the current administration has put on the back burner.  If they can use the House to set budget objectives, preserve benefits to Americans and return to an environment of civility in the public sphere, perhaps they’ll be rewarded.  This is my country.  Regardless of my own “side”, I wish the House leadership success, and hope they listen to those who have given them this opportunity.  I strongly implore them not to focus first on political posturing.  If their early priorities really are seeking the president’s taxes, impeachments sent to a Senate unlikely to convict, and lines in the sand that create a government shutdown, this foothold given by one of the most precarious margins in recent history may instead ensure this president a second term and deliver all three branches of government back to the Republicans in another two years.

Midterms… From the Left, Center, Right

by with No Comment FeaturedPolitics
Different perspectives are important, especially regarding the 2018 Midterms. The dust has settled. We asked three of our contributors from the Left, Center, and Right, to weigh in… and here’s what they had to say…
“Midterms… we came, we saw, we partially conquered. To know so many women (particularly minority women) were elected to office for the first time in history was a bittersweet moment. Sweet because I, along with future generations, have a predecessor to look up to. Bitter because in 2018, the fact that we are still having such firsts is unacceptable.” – Left Healthcare Professional 
“A rising tide lifts all boats” is a common way of thinking when making policies. We must realize however, that although the tide will raise the boat I am on, there are some citizens not privileged enough to be on that boat and those policies can have a negative impact on them. In this election I voted for the good of people, ALL people. Although there are some policies that may benefit some tax brackets over others, we as people need to look out for our brothers and sisters (regardless of racism, sexism, and classism) and do what is good for humanity. I appreciate the campaigns that stayed away from the hate and division. Unfortunately, not enough campaigns can say they did that.”  – Center Single Mom
The Democrats now have a tool to prove their worth again to the American people or just enough rope to hang themselves. This “wave” is milder and different in character than the midterm wave of the last three presidents. If Democrats can focus around healthcare and assemble a compromise budget deal (perhaps around issues such as infrastructure), and can find a strong presidential candidate, perhaps they will be rewarded. If this turns into an army of subpeonas… if they continue to focus their entire agenda (or allow their news cycles to focus on) the president’s taxes or scandals, or if their intransigence leads to a government shutdown, they may well have just enough stake in the government to take the blame for a market correction after several years of low inflation growth. If that happens, the house may turn again in two years, and Trump will have another four years. – Right Army Veteran 

Trump’s Tax Bill Might Destroy the Middle-Class

by with 2 Comments Uncategorized

Inside the numbers… According to a recent WSJ Poll, only 24% of Americans believe this is tax bill is a good idea and 41% think it’s a bad idea; 63% of Americans think it’s designed for corporations and the wealthy, and only 7% think it’s designed for the middle-class, which has been a Republican talking point over the past few weeks.

As this recent poll states, this tax plan is highly unpopular.

Without going into grave policy detail… this tax plan will absolutely benefit corporations and wealthy individuals more than the middle-class. It will increase wage inequality and shrink the middle-class, sending more households to the lower class and fewer to the upper class. Also, this tax plan repeals the individual mandate in the Affordable Care Act. According to the CBO (Congressional Budget Office), a nonpartisan group of economists, roughly 13 million people will lose their health insurance due to repealing the mandate.

What Republicans are not telling us, excuse me, what they’re not admitting, is that they know trickle down economics doesn’t work. They also know that corporations likely won’t hire more employees or increase wages when these tax cuts are signed into law, instead, they’ll reinvest in their businesses, buy back stock, and give out record bonuses to their top management and c-suite executives. While this tax bill adds $1.5 trillion to our national debt, they’re already planning on proposing huge cuts to entitlement programs in 2018_ all while 6-7-8 figure earners, as well as select groups like real estate developers and private equity professionals, benefit from these massive tax cuts.

With all that being said, Republican’s brilliantly designed this bill to have an immediate positive impact on most middle-class households [short-term]. But considering the personal tax provisions are set to expire in 10 years, it’s important to note that the business tax cuts will not. Therefore, the positive impact for corporations and the wealthy [in the long-term] is astounding and much greater. For example, in 2027, two-thirds of middle-class households will see a tax increase in their personal income taxes, and none of them will see a tax cut.

By design, this middle-class tax honeymoon will surely last long enough to surpass the 2018 mid-terms and 2020 presidential election. However, can Democrats capitalize on recent big wins in Virginia, New Jersey, and most recently Alabama, and pick up enough seats to challenge Trump and maybe win the White House? IF Democrats can somehow win the House and Senate, and the White House in 2020, can such a massic tax bill be easily reversed, or amended to thwart such a negative long-term impact on lower and middle-class households?