2020 Democratic Party primary thread

[ceecee]

I think Klobuchar could be a real dark horse. I'd originally thought that about Gabbard, but I just don't see her having the momentum at this point to make it past the hurdles she needs to jump.

The dems need to run a moderate and focus on the economy and education. They need to leave the wokester shit out of their platform, as it will not resonate with working class people in Minnesota and Pennsylvania. Save debates over the culture war bullshit for when it comes time to nominate and evaluate judges and justices. And whatever the eventual nominee does, please don;t go calling half of voters deplorables. Biden's got too much baggage to be their moderate saviour. I might hold my nose and vote for Klobuchar in the primaries. I like her stance on education. Not everyone needs free tuition. Not everyone needs a 4 year degree. Some people do better with trade school or 2 year college. Certainly people should be able to easily attend a 4 year school if they so desire, but we need to make it easier and affordable for people to attend alternatives like trade school as well. My state has a good selection of 4 year colleges, but our community colleges fucking suck ass--they're overpriced and there aren't a ton of scholarships or assistance for 2 year programs here. In my job, I work with a lot of machine shops, and they always talk about having a hard time finding qualified machinists. No one wants to be a machinist because they assume it's a dirty, low pay job, but the pay can be quite good, especially considering the high demand for machinists. It's a high skill job and there's almost always machine shops looking to hire machinists.

We've raised the last couple of generations to believe that anything less than a 4 year degree is below them. Sorry, but college is not for everyone.

Is your employer sponsoring people to train as machinist? Right out of high school? Or hiring from union apprenticeship programs? Is your employer working with the community colleges to train for the jobs they need to fill? Yeah college isn't for everyone but what exactly is happening, outside of union facilitation, to give people more choices to fill the jobs that are in a critical shortage? Unless they are like some employers around here that refuse to consider union training or union positions for machinists and many other skilled trade positions. Then they cry about how they haven't been able to find one for the last 3 years.

People complain all the time but I have yet to see the least woke candidates thinking outside the same tired bullshit that worked 40 years ago and hasn't worked since. I never hear kids talk about about how a 4 year degree is beneath them (I hear that from parents, not kids). I only hear the stressed out teens wonder how they will pay for any schooling without loans as their parents won't be able to afford anything. Oh and maybe candidates may want to approach the employment sector and ask why the fuck their entry level jobs require a bachelors degree?

 

[Jaguar]

Who’s Leading Now

The latest results are based on 2,202 survey interviews conducted Oct. 16, 2019, among Democratic primary voters.

Joe Biden Former Vice President
31%

Elizabeth Warren U.S. Senator
21%

Bernie Sanders U.S. Senator
18%

Kamala Harris U.S. Senator
7%

Pete Buttigieg Mayor
6%

Andrew Yang Business Person
3%

Cory Booker U.S. Senator
2%

Amy Klobuchar U.S. Senator
2%

Beto O'Rourke Former U.S. Representative
2%

The State of the 2020 Democratic Primary

 

[Doctor Cringelord]

Is your employer sponsoring people to train as machinist? Right out of high school? Or hiring from union apprenticeship programs? Is your employer working with the community colleges to train for the jobs they need to fill? Yeah college isn't for everyone but what exactly is happening, outside of union facilitation, to give people more choices to fill the jobs that are in a critical shortage? Unless they are like some employers around here that refuse to consider union training or union positions for machinists and many other skilled trade positions. Then they cry about how they haven't been able to find one for the last 3 years.

People complain all the time but I have yet to see the least woke candidates thinking outside the same tired bullshit that worked 40 years ago and hasn't worked since. I never hear kids talk about about how a 4 year degree is beneath them (I hear that from parents, not kids). I only hear the stressed out teens wonder how they will pay for any schooling without loans as their parents won't be able to afford anything. Oh and maybe candidates may want to approach the employment sector and ask why the fuck their entry level jobs require a bachelors degree?

My employer doesn't staff machinists. I'm in supply chain management though and my company works closely with a lot of machining companies. However, you need to understand that a lot of them are very small mom and pop run companies, so expecting them to sponsor people to afford the classes isn't always realistic or viable. Some of the larger companies have mentioned having programs like this, but with the really small machining companies, they are barely able to afford their yearly operation costs, especially with prices of materials skyrocketing due to Trump's China tariffs, so sponsoring someone to go to school and learn machining isn't really realistic for many of these companies. I'm not sure that responsibility should really be put on those companies anyway. Let the government sponsor this with low or zero interest trade school loans.

I'm not sure what to make of your little rant about loans. I didn't say I thought college loans should be doe away with, quite the opposite. While I think a lot of college attendees aren't really "college material", I still think anyone who wants to go should be able to get a low or zero interest loan to pay for tuition costs. My point isn't that young people think 4 year college is beneath them, but that a lot of them think trade school or 2 year college is beneath them because we've raised the last couple of generations to think that a bachelor's degree was the ticket to easy street, and that anything less was undignified.

 

[Totenkindly]

I think Klobuchar could be a real dark horse. I'd originally thought that about Gabbard, but I just don't see her having the momentum at this point to make it past the hurdles she needs to jump.

Gabbard has no momentum, and there's a lot of resistance to her that I've seen in some circles. Her numbers haven't budged. I don't think she's going anywhere either. Pretty much we know who the top five are, and then maybe a dark horse or two in the very next tier, at this stage... which includes Klobuchar, who seemed to perform well this week finally. She's getting a little more attention. i just don't know if it is enough at this point.

We've raised the last couple of generations to believe that anything less than a 4 year degree is below them. Sorry, but college is not for everyone.

I am a college person myself, I value education for its own sake and my parents also didn't even give me a choice (so it was good I wanted to go and was suited for it).

But I think the country was a bit different at the time... and personally i hold similar views as mentioned in that (1) people should do what they enjoy, although obviously being able to support yourself and your family is a big part of it too, but that can be accomplished with various professions, and (2) there's no shame in doing good work at something you love, and (3) this includes a lot of stuff that you do NOT need a college education for. I feel like college got foisted on a lot of people who didn't need it, didn't want it, and now can't even make good use of it in the fields they're interested in... and meanwhile the money is rolling into some universities and money lenders.

You can actually make really great money learning certain tradeskills nowadays.

The job market itself has to stop requiring four-year degrees unnecessarily. Sometimes there's an incredible imbalance by the education/experience required by a position vs the pay and benefits for said position. [Clarifying too: the experience they demand isn't even necessary to do the job well sometimes]

 

[ceecee]

My employer doesn't staff machinists. I'm in supply chain management though and my company works closely with a lot of machining companies. However, you need to understand that a lot of them are very small mom and pop run companies, so expecting them to sponsor people to afford the classes isn't always realistic or viable. Some of the larger companies have mentioned having programs like this, but with the really small machining companies, they are barely able to afford their yearly operation costs, especially with prices of materials skyrocketing due to Trump's China tariffs, so sponsoring someone to go to school and learn machining isn't really realistic for many of these companies. I'm not sure that responsibility should really be put on those companies anyway. Let the government sponsor this with low or zero interest trade school loans.

None of the moderates, running at any level, are going to do anything like this.

 

[Doctor Cringelord]

I am a college person myself, I value education for its own sake and my parents also didn't even give me a choice (so it was good I wanted to go and was suited for it).

But I think the country was a bit different at the time... and personally i hold similar views as mentioned in that (1) people should do what they enjoy, although obviously being able to support yourself and your family is a big part of it too, but that can be accomplished with various professions, and (2) there's no shame in doing good work at something you love, and (3) this includes a lot of stuff that you do NOT need a college education for. I feel like college got foisted on a lot of people who didn't need it, didn't want it, and now can't even make good use of it in the fields they're interested in... and meanwhile the money is rolling into some universities and money lenders.

You can actually make really great money learning certain tradeskills nowadays.

The job market itself has to stop requiring four-year degrees unnecessarily. Sometimes there's an incredible imbalance by the education/experience required by a position vs the pay and benefits for said position.

I get that bolded sentiment, but unfortunately not everyone is an NT who values learning for the sake of learning.

Otherwise I agree with just about everything you wrote. Part of the problem is the fact that so many companies moved to making 4 year degrees a hard requirement--glad you mentioned that because it's a key component of the education crisis in the USA. Luckily some of the bigger tech giants are starting to change this, not always requiring a degree but instead looking at applicants' overall knowledge and skillset. Smaller companies will begin to follow suit gradually, I'm confident. The reason I believe this is because company CEOs and VPs I've listened to always want to talk about the trends they see in companies like Google and Apple, because they all have grand notions they might be the next Steve Jobs or John Sculley lol. Shit, I never finished school and got my degree, but was lucky enough to work in a company where they took a chance and promoted me into a position where they would normally require a bachelor's. I was very upfront with them about my lack of a degree. But I'd also spent years earning their confidence and building a rapport with the people that mattered there.

I hope other companies start doing this more. I think the college industry is a racket and companies that require degrees haven't helped one bit.

 

[ceecee]

My employer doesn't staff machinists. I'm in supply chain management though and my company works closely with a lot of machining companies. However, you need to understand that a lot of them are very small mom and pop run companies, so expecting them to sponsor people to afford the classes isn't always realistic or viable. Some of the larger companies have mentioned having programs like this, but with the really small machining companies, they are barely able to afford their yearly operation costs, especially with prices of materials skyrocketing due to Trump's China tariffs, so sponsoring someone to go to school and learn machining isn't really realistic for many of these companies. I'm not sure that responsibility should really be put on those companies anyway. Let the government sponsor this with low or zero interest trade school loans.

I'm not sure what to make of your little rant about loans. I didn't say I thought college loans should be doe away with, quite the opposite. While I think a lot of college attendees aren't really "college material", I still think anyone who wants to go should be able to get a low or zero interest loan to pay for tuition costs. My point isn't that young people think 4 year college is beneath them, but that a lot of them think trade school or 2 year college is beneath them because we've raised the last couple of generations to think that a bachelor's degree was the ticket to easy street, and that anything less was undignified.

My rant was that I don't hear any young people say trade school or 2 year degrees are beneath them/undignified - but I hear parents say that often. And why do so many employers require a bachelors degree for an entry level position? I think that plays into college decision for most people, regardless of them being college material or not.

 

[Doctor Cringelord]

My rant was that I don't hear any young people say trade school or 2 year degrees are beneath them/undignified - but I hear parents say that often. And why do so many employers require a bachelors degree for an entry level position? I think that plays into college decision for most people, regardless of them being college material or not.

Parents are stupid, and their kids should put less stock in their advice. I wish I had known this when I was 18.

I agree with what you and toten say about companies requiring degrees though. It's stupid, but I think some companies are starting to wise up. My company for instance now at least says "bachelor's degree OR EQUIVALENT EXPERIENCE" on their job postings. That's something I'm starting to see more and more on job postings from other companies as well. The degree will no longer be a hard requirement in a few decades, maybe less.

 

[Doctor Cringelord]

None of the moderates, running at any level, are going to do anything like this.

Yeah, but I don't really think a progressive running on Free College or Let's forgive all loans is a better alternative. There's no such thing as free college. And someone is still stuck with the bill for forgiven loans.

 

[Virtual ghost]

Yeah, but I don't really think a progressive running on Free College or Let's forgive all loans is a better alternative. There's no such thing as free college. And someone is still stuck with the bill for forgiven loans.

If you don't mind I will say something here.


What will American progressive forces really due is under the question but all of this doesn't have to be this simple.
One of the main benefits of having government more involved is that it can pressure for lowering of the prices if people really wants it to do that. From what I understand the main problem in the mix is the price and now someone just has to slap some collage administrations so that they return prices back to normal. Another trick in free collage is that it doesn't mean that they you have to give it to everyone, instead you can just give it to people that want to study something that is of general social use like STEM, foreign diplomacy, construction related stuff, military stuff, economy .. or something like that. The trick is that if you give "free college" to some courses you can divert more people into what is actually needed on the field. What in the end benefits everybody.

 

[Jaguar]

Dear Lizzie Borden-Warren, before taking an axe to everything in sight, read:

Wealth Taxes Don’t Work. Here’s Why.
The Real Problem With Wealth Taxes - Barrons

 

[Doctor Cringelord]

If you don't mind I will say something here.


What will American progressive forces really due is under the question but all of this doesn't have to be this simple.
One of the main benefits of having government more involved is that it can pressure for lowering of the prices if people really wants it to do that. From what I understand the main problem in the mix is the price and now someone just has to slap some collage administrations so that they return prices back to normal. Another trick in free collage is that it doesn't mean that they you have to give it to everyone, instead you can just give it to people that want to study something that is of general social use like STEM, foreign diplomacy, construction related stuff, military stuff, economy .. or something like that. The trick is that if you give "free college" to some courses you can divert more people into what is actually needed on the field. What in the end benefits everybody.

Err, I agree to an extent. I mean, the government IMO should work to limit excessive costs of services like healthcare and education. Ideally, removing the drive for profit from industries like healthcare and education should lead to overall lower costs for people using those services. But on the other hand, government involvement in any project is no guarantee that corruption, and higher costs won't still occur. Especially when you get a lot of people trying to jump aboard and dip their hand in the pot.

 

[Virtual ghost]

Err, I agree to an extent. I mean, the government IMO should work to limit excessive costs of services like healthcare and education. Ideally, removing the drive for profit from industries like healthcare and education should lead to overall lower costs for people using those services. But on the other hand, government involvement in any project is no guarantee that corruption, and higher costs won't still occur. Especially when you get a lot of people trying to jump aboard and dip their hand in the pot.

This is why you have democracy and preferably a developed multiparty system. This is exactly why I said that US needs that more than anything else, free college and M4A included. Since this allows you to throw out permanently the entire rotten structures (but your media need to be on the level as well). The thing is that currently there seem to be multi-polar cartels with fixed prices in US higher education and therefore someone needs to shake this a little bit. However since most are too broke or messed this probably needs to come from a focused political movement that isn't about status quo. However this need to be done because the number of educated people directly effects your competitiveness and general stability as a country. My country would be a third world in the case that education is less accessible, because of how our 20th century looked like. However this kept us afloat in what was objectively a storm.



Also take a look at the wider purely economic picture. I live in a free college system and therefore I am coming out with 0$ of student debt, the same as my colleagues. What means that I will start a company and have a clean start, instead of the scenario that I will be paying my college for the next 20 years doing shit. What will surely effect my impact in how I am doing compared to someone without more "regulated college" or someone who didn't get it at all. Yes I will still need to pay some chunk to rise a new generation of "free college" people but that will probably pay itself from the fact that I am more productive or that I took more market shares from those that don't have a free collage (like Americans). Not to mention that this new generation will actually be my kids, so I have killed extra bird with one stone. Therefore even if I die in a car accident the education of my children will be much safer this way (what saves me money in pills, counseling and street crime). Building this system to work well isn't easy but it really has benefits if it works well.


Other countries are constantly inventing new policies and economic doctrines while US sticks to it's paradigms. However experimenter will eventually find a way to outmaneuver you and in globalization this is exactly what happened. We all want all kinds of things but the price of ignoring "the game" and being unadaptable are always high.



My 2 cents

 

[Tellenbach]

Hillary Clinton says Tulsi Gabbard is a 'Russian asset' groomed to ensure Trump reelection

"She is a favorite of the Russians. They have a bunch of sites and bots and other ways of supporting her so far. That's assuming Jill Stein will give it up, which she might not because she is also a Russian asset.

Gabbard is but a blip on the radar; she did take out Kamala Harris but Harris was a weak candidate. Gabbard has responded saying she won't go 3rd party. Maybe Jill Stein will run again; maybe Hillary is right. But then again, Hillary's Clinton Foundation accepted over $100 million from the Russians and she's not a Russian asset.

 

[Tellenbach]

The reason why wealth taxes won't work is because the total taxes paid by the very rich is a constant; tax revenue is independent of tax policy for the very rich. It is a line with a slope of ZERO and has been for over a century. When you raise taxes on the rich, the rich will find loopholes around it or they'll just hide the money in another country. See, if Crazy Bernie or Pocahontas bothered to read Art Laffer's books, they'd know this.

 

[Tomb1]

The reason why wealth taxes won't work is because the total taxes paid by the very rich is a constant; tax revenue is independent of tax policy for the very rich. It is a line with a slope of ZERO and has been for over a century. When you raise taxes on the rich, the rich will find loopholes around it or they'll just hide the money in another country. See, if Crazy Bernie or Pocahontas bothered to read Art Laffer's books, they'd know this.

Laffer is a joke.

 

[Maou]

The reason why wealth taxes won't work is because the total taxes paid by the very rich is a constant; tax revenue is independent of tax policy for the very rich. It is a line with a slope of ZERO and has been for over a century. When you raise taxes on the rich, the rich will find loopholes around it or they'll just hide the money in another country. See, if Crazy Bernie or Pocahontas bothered to read Art Laffer's books, they'd know this.

Best solution to fix tax loopholes is to simplify the laws. Much of the reason the rich find loopholes, is because they put too many exemptions for things like charity. I say remove exemptions, and they'd pay more to the government, which will in tern help the same people the charities do. A lot of charities are just scams anyways. And the rich probably get reimbursed through them in some form of money laundering scam.

 

[Doctor Cringelord]

Hillary Clinton says Tulsi Gabbard is a 'Russian asset' groomed to ensure Trump reelection



Gabbard is but a blip on the radar; she did take out Kamala Harris but Harris was a weak candidate. Gabbard has responded saying she won't go 3rd party. Maybe Jill Stein will run again; maybe Hillary is right. But then again, Hillary's Clinton Foundation accepted over $100 million from the Russians and she's not a Russian asset.

I wish Hillary would just go away. I'm tired of the Clintons pretending they're still relevant. No one likes them anymore, not even their own party.

 

[Totenkindly]

i'm okay with Chelsea; but yeah, Hillary and Bill are done and they're just a distraction at this point. I think 2016 should have been the last hurrah. Things went how they went, in part because of all the noise; now they are just confusing matters a lot of the time.

 

[Jaguar]

Buttigieg gets an Iowa boost on strength of his debate performance

Here’s where the race stands in Iowa, per the latest USA Today/Suffolk University poll: Former Vice President Joe Biden (19%) leads Massachusetts Sen. Elizabeth Warren (18%), with Buttigieg capturing 13%. The poll also found that Buttigieg holds a narrow lead over Warren and Biden among debate-watchers, with 19 percent support compared to 17 percent for each of them.

Buttigieg has presented himself as a more moderate alternative to the progressive Warren, while remaining to the left of Biden. The Indiana mayor released a campaign ad on October 14 taking on Warren’s and Sanders’s support for universal Medicare coverage and proposing his own plan that preserves the private market while increasing access to Medicare coverage.



Kick it up another notch, Pete.