Because she’s got zero government experience and generally, self help gurus are full of crap.
Because I believe in all those things too, but I, like Williamson, have absolutely no business running the country. She’s a self-help author. I’m gobsmacked that there are people willing to even entertain the notion she should still be in that debate stage.
Her views are in line, so why not pick someone with experience in government?
We don’t get better policies with Williamson, and we get dramatically less experience.
Bah! I don’t buy into that theory. Warren came across to me as shrill and condescending. Men can be that way as well.
Mostly because she used part of her extra inning on CNN to mention it. I have not heard every candidate propose it; if it’s everyone, then that is a certain amount of voters written off.
Ha! Cannot disagree.
So you shrugged and “just saying” to agree with me? Ok, was a little confused. Fyi, McCain actually did worse with fundies compared Republicans in the previous and next elections but that was across the religious spectrum.
I’m going to miss the edit window, but it was discussed in another thread:
This two minute video shows a reenactment of a debate between Trump and Clinton with a woman playing the role of Trump and a man playing the role of Clinton. It is astounding to watch the body language and the exchanges. The man seems like a slimy politician and the woman seems like an average voter and someone you would trust.
If the election were held based on that two minute video, the woman would win in a landslide. She comes across as passionate and confident, not bitchy or shrill. This whole idea that women cannot be assertive is, IMHO, an excuse for some women not learning the art of advocacy v. lecturing and just chalking it up to sexism. It really is an art form.
Lol
MMV, clearly. I don’t think that woman comes off well, and the man is fine.
Funny stuff (Darrell Hammond is the best), but I’m sure they test these things in focus groups and find they work. Sophisticated political observers are not the targets for this stuff.
Oh, please. :rolleyes:
(1) I have been touting Kamala Harris all over these threads.
(2) I have given Bernie shit many times for bellowing at interviewers.
(3) Any man who glares at the audience when they start laughing, admonishing “that’s not funny!” would also not be seen in a positive light.
Yeah, I dont see why “Medicare for all” has to also equal= “taking away private insurance”. That is a loser in my mind. Other nations with UHC also allow private insurance.
I like Mayor Pete, but face it, Buttigieg won’t play in Peoria. 
Nominating a gay man in 2020 is a sure way to let trump back in. Now, I think this will change, and fairly soon, but not by 2020.
Yes, but when the rubber meets the road, there could be exceptions for family transfers. I hope so.
I think he’d be a good in the VP slot (Pence debates would be a hoot). But I’d be okay with him at the top of the ticket too.
Lots of people thought it would be another generation before “we’d be ready” for gay marriage. And that we’d never have a black President. But once it was real, it was normal.
Buttigieg can’t hope to get much of the fundie vote, sure, but no Democrat can.
It’s more that there wouldn’t be a place for it anymore in primary care, just Medicare supplement policies which are already a staple product. Warren and Sanders would be doing themselves a solid by explaining that part. Medicare is a familiar and loved brand, and hard for the GOP to fun against (their “socialized medicine” scare of the Sixties doesn’t have strong echoes today).
ISTM that it depends on the septuagenarian. Warren’s got energy and determination in abundance, despite having recently turned 70.
I think Pete’s problem in a general election isn’t just that he’s gay; it’s that he’s gay and he’s had noteworthy difficulties in terms of how he’s perceived by people of color back in his hometown. I’m guessing Buttigieg is very popular among white audiences but a lot of African Americans and Hispanics are socially conservative and I don’t get the impression that Black Americans in particular are sold on the idea that he’s moved forward on matters of race in South Bend.
The one candidate from last night’s debate with a clear path to the nomination is Elizabeth Warren. We’ll see tonight if that’s still true for Joe Biden and Kamala Harris.
I am not worried about the fundy vote, I am worried about the rust belt.
Which are… *private insurance. *
But still, some rich people would like better more personalized care, and as long as they are willing to pay for it, why not?
Yeah, everybody just *loves *the private insurance companies, don’t they?
It’s supplemental only, just like with Medicare. Where UHC exists as a basic, tax-paid right for basic but adequate coverage, there is simply no room for private insurance except to cover some extras.
I’m astonished by the people who thought Bullock seemed strong. I think just the opposite. I was horrified to see his stumbling and bumbling and even his facial expressions were unsettling. And his response to the question about nuclear weapons was godawful. He should have just said “this is not the appropriate time to be discussing that type of military strategy. It’s not in the best interest of national security. Full stop.” He should have said that and nothing more. If anyone pushed him to talk any further he should have said “I’ve made my position clear already.” That’s it. Talking himself into circles did him no favors at all. His closing statement was also horrible.