No, I don’t concede them. Cruz isn’t hated in Texas but I don’t think he has a positive approval rating. I would have to look it up to see what he was sitting at during the election.
And you can throw your tiresome :dubious: around all you like but in the end, you are just making excuses for the reality that he lost and one long distance head to head poll to “prove” he would win next time.
Not one of them - all of them. Every single Democrat, running or not, needs to do this. They need to take a leaf from the GOP playbook and all start dropping key words and phrases into their rhetoric. And the word they all ought to be using as much as possible is “Integrity”.
In Texas - Trump > Cruz. Cruz > O’Rourke (in a D wave election). O’Rourke weaker now that he was.
This is pretty straightforward stuff.
As to polls … we’ve well covered the little significance of head to heads about November this early on. The primary polling data for Texas has been all over the place but of the well reputed pollsters the most recent YouGov had Biden up by 10, and the last Quinnipiac had him up by 14. I’d take the University of Texas at Tyler’s one outlier result of O’Rourke way up by 19 with a salt rimmed Mezcal.
I will be shocked if Beto comes in first in Texas and mildly surprised if he gets any delegates anywhere else.
Beto has the best chance. Even as Veep, his being on the ticket will force the GOP to fight hard for Texas, which is a win all by itself.
So, I would say doubtful, but maybe. And that “maybe” has GOP strategists peeing their pants, since if TX goes blue, it’s all over.
Booker is a* extreme* anti-gun radical. That wont play in Peoria. He will lose the rust belt, sure as shootin.
Mind you, other than that he seems well spoken, with interesting ideas. But he, like Sanders and Mayor Pete is a sure loser to trump.
Booker could work as Veep, however.
Consider the source. :dubious:
A background check law is extreme and radical? That’s mainstream.
Ok starting with yours:He voted to prohibit people on terror watch lists from buying guns. Those watch lists are *worthless *for this purposes, the amount of False positives in the USA (since there are very very few extant terrorists running around in the uSA) is over 99.99%. I know this, i am a certified subject matter expert on this subject.
But why not look at what Booker* said*, as opposed to a wiki article: Let us
*“consider the facts”. *
*Booker wants a national gun licensing program, which would force Americans to apply for 5-year gun licenses before obtaining a firearm. The process would include fingerprinting, an interview, gun safety courses and a federal background check.
The plan will ban assault weapons, high-capacity magazines and bump stocks.
It would seek to close loopholes, like the one that allows people on the federal terror watch list to obtain guns.
It would increase oversight on gun manufacturing, giving more leeway to the Consumer Product Safety Commission to put warnings on firearms and recall them, if necessary.*
Cory Booker’s ambitious new gun control plan, explained - Vox (pretty anti-gun biased but I want to show all sides)
*Among the bolder proposals to restrict access to guns are those of Sens. Cory Booker of New Jersey and Kamala Harris of California.
and here’s what the NRA has to say (biased, of course)
So, banning magazines by capacity has already been ruled a NoNo by the federal courts- it has yet to reach SCOTUS.
Booker also wants to take away the NRA non-profit status.
He wants to allow SLAPP lawsuits against American gun makers, forcing them out of business.
so Booker goes FAR and AWAY beyond background checks.
SLAPP lawsuits? Against gun manufacturers? Please don’t abuse the term.
Unconfirmed report that Hickenlooper will drop out and run for CO Senate. If so, good on him – Bullock and O’Rourke should follow his example. https://twitter.com/coloradopols/status/1157344666691334144
Again, extreme and radical? Your words. And yes, I know the absolutists call everything that.
Good news for Senate chances.
I’m hesitant though to jump on the hope for Bullock to follow too quickly. Like asahi I read Biden’s performance as good enough to not lose his supporters but still weak enough to keep my worries about his edge high. Warren is my back-up choice for now but I have worries about her too. I think someone like Bullock could reasonably be in position to leapfrog into contention if Biden does collapse with a future horrible debate performance.
In other news Morning Consult finds the second debate round caused little change in anyone’s momentum.
Yep. extreme and radical. Unconstitutional . The most extreme antigun policy of any Dem candidate. That, by definition is *extreme. * And it wont play in the rust belt, which means- he loses. Plain and simple. Look background checks (depending on the details) and banning “assault weapons” (depending on the details) wont hurt in the midwest and rust belt. But his ideas strike at the average gun owner, the hunter, the plinker, the person with one pistol for home defense. And there are like 100 million of those in the uSA. You can’t win without their votes. period.
I notice you forgot to post how wrong your were about his policy being mostly background checks. But I guess I have to "Consider the source.":rolleyes:
I’m surprised Booker has gone that far. I thought he was more politically savvy than that.
Booker spent weeks criticising others in the press only to go on stage and moralize “hey guys we shouldn’t be arguing among each other”
Somebody said he’s the democrat version of Chris Christie - a grandstander. Maybe that’s accurate. Maybe it’s a New Jersey thing!
Uh, no, that’s *not *what it means, and you’re not helping yourself or your fellow single-issue ideologues by pressing it.
Not a surprise – he’s running out of money. His former staffers tried to tell him that over a month ago, apparently. Tim Ryan is also probably short on cash. That’s why most of the people who don’t make the next debate will have little choice but to suspend their campaigns. The exceptions will be those like Tom Steyer or John Delaney who may be able to survive by self-funding, although Delaney’s loaning himself money, so I doubt he goes too far down the road with that approach.
One thing that really concerns me is the fact that some really good, well-qualified candidates just aren’t getting any attention at all. I like Hickenlooper, but he also strikes me as a bit of an ass at times, so it’s not that hard to see why some voters haven’t taken to him in particular.
However, I’m really, really impressed with Jay Inslee. He strikes me as really intelligent and innovative. There don’t seem to be any major controversies or blemishes on his record - at least none I’m aware of. He’s clearly got progressive bona fides, and unlike Hickenlooper, despite the fact he’s a statewide officeholder, he doesn’t seem to be trashing progressives for their “radical” ideas. He’s obviously a pragmatist, but a pragmatist with vision. And he seems a lot like former California governor Jerry Brown, a very young ‘old’ guy. I can’t for the life of me understand why he hasn’t gotten beyond 1%, and it’s really disheartening not only for the Democratic party but for the country if we can’t get our system to value more than just celebrity.
That’s why as much as I want Trump out of office, I’m really not that excited about what the Democrats are going to offer up as an alternative. Our political system is still fucked, and a large part of the problem is that we lack imagination and taste in selecting candidates. We can blame the system and the machinations of the primary process, but it’s still very much a problem that is rooted in the lack of curiosity and awareness of the average voter.
Hear, hear, asahi! Specifically on Inslee: he has experience in the federal government as a former member of Congress, as well as executive experience that can well serve any president. He is a very positive guy, but won’t look like a wimp next to Trump because he is physically imposing.
But your last paragraph is very well stated also. Right after Mueller appeared before Congress and everyone was criticizing it for not being good TV or whatever, I posted a link to an op-ed that really took us to task collectively for being so superficial. And when people lambaste Hillary for “blowing” the election, I like to point out that if the voters possessed basic common decency on the level I always assumed, she would not be able to blow that election with garden variety tactical errors—she would have won by 20 points without doing anything.
I am not a single issue ideologue. In fact, I have proposed we go after straw man sales. I think Bump stocks should be illegal, and better background checks.
But let’s just look at one tiny part of Bookers extreme and radical proposals. Well besides that gun license thing, which is radical.
He voted to prohibit people on terror watch lists from buying guns. and that’s one of his points- still.
Ok, there are no terrorists on that list in the USA. None. Period. But here’s the thing- several names on that list are fairly common, one being Johnson. * So, no one named Johnson gets to buy a gun (depends on the search criteria, but the first name is also quite common). There are several very common hispanic and muslim last names, so a lot of hispanic and muslim people wont be able to buy guns either- which is pretty damn racist.
But you say, what happens if some terrorist sneaks into the USA? Ok, he has to get by the Border patrol- not that hard, I admit- but also the CIA, FBI and NSA, and those guys know what they are doing. Not to mention the Treasury Dept. So, he gets in. Then of course he needs to get a fake ID to buy a gun- again, not that tough. But now you are gonna try and make me beleive that this sly, clever guy, who has fooled the FBI, NSA, Treasury and CIA- gets his fake ID in his real name. :rolleyes::dubious: Even a reasonable bright 8 yo would laugh at that as a plot point in a film.
So, there’s two choices: Either Booker is so fucking stupid he doesnt know that. He isnt as smart as that hypothetical 8 YO boy.
OR, he knows damn well it’s useless, and only presses for it because it sounds good and hell, who cares if some Johnsons or Garcias or Mohameds dont get to buy a gun, that’s a few thousand less guns out there, amirite? In which case he is a bald faced liar.
So which is it? Stupid or liar?
But the gun license thing is the extreme part. It is by far the most* extreme* gun law proposed by any Dem candidate. And yes, that’s what “extreme” means. " furthest from the center or a given point; outermost. Radical:*"advocating or based on thorough or complete political or social change; representing or supporting an extreme or progressive section of a political party.
*