Democratic Challengers 8: Candidates Can Only Work for A Vegan Farm Market

[burd]

Re: Democratic Challengers 8: Candidates Can Only Work for A Vegan Farm Market

Good is good
Bad is bad

Good is dumb

Where's Ralph Baer

[mookie1995]

Good is dumb

Why evil always wins

[Kepler]

Re: Democratic Challengers 8: Candidates Can Only Work for A Vegan Farm Market

If I point out that Dump has been impeached that is "negative campaigning"?

[mookie1995]

If I point out that Dump has been impeached that is "negative campaigning"?

Be positive
Work with the other side!

[Spartanforlife4]

If I point out that Dump has been impeached that is "negative campaigning"?

Yeah I don’t understand how this is getting twisted.

Traditional negative campaigning is when they say, “candidate X hates children and wants to force you to only eat soup!” because they voted against the bill that would’ve reduced restrictions on dumping nuclear waste, but included a Children Are Great! rider, and later voted to make February 2nd National Soup Day.

[Kepler]

Re: Democratic Challengers 8: Candidates Can Only Work for A Vegan Farm Market

Meanwhile, in another part of the forest.

[FadeToBlack&Gold]

Re: Democratic Challengers 8: Candidates Can Only Work for A Vegan Farm Market

Seems to me these East Coast washouts aren't taxed enough and have too much time on their hands...

[Rover]

Re: Democratic Challengers 8: Candidates Can Only Work for A Vegan Farm Market

Insinuating nefarious intent without any evidence is negative campaigning. Most campaigns do it of course, but it is what it is. For example, Lizzy Warren attacked Buttigieg over some fund raiser in a wine cave during the last debate. While I get her point, the inference was that either Buttigieg is a fat cat, or he's going to be influenced by fat cat donors. That's a negative attack IMHO despite my preference for the candidate who made it.

[The Rube]

Re: Democratic Challengers 8: Candidates Can Only Work for A Vegan Farm Market

Insinuating nefarious intent without any evidence is negative campaigning. Most campaigns do it of course, but it is what it is. For example, Lizzy Warren attacked Buttigieg over some fund raiser in a wine cave during the last debate. While I get her point, the inference was that either Buttigieg is a fat cat, or he's going to be influenced by fat cat donors. That's a negative attack IMHO despite my preference for the candidate who made it.

I won't point out what a shady candidate my opponent is. I'm above that. I'm here to talk about what I will and won't do. What I won't do is pander to the rich, bow down to the lobbies, etc, like s/he would, I can tell you that much.

[burd]

Re: Democratic Challengers 8: Candidates Can Only Work for A Vegan Farm Market

I'm here to talk about what I will and won't do. What I won't do is pander to the rich, bow down to the lobbies, etc, like s/he would, I can tell you that much.

That's fine, but people are tired of hearing that from so many who don't live up to the promise. At a minimum, they have to specify policies or legislation they will or have supported or oppose on those subjects. While that may be a little to wonky for the average voter with a 5-second attention span, generalizations on those subjects wont distinguish one panderer from another.

[Kepler]

Re: Democratic Challengers 8: Candidates Can Only Work for A Vegan Farm Market

Pretty simple. Just roll back all the tax cuts and pass a wealth tax. Rhetoric is cheap. All that matters is actions.

[burd]

Re: Democratic Challengers 8: Candidates Can Only Work for A Vegan Farm Market

Pretty simple. Just roll back all the tax cuts and pass a wealth tax. Rhetoric is cheap. All that matters is actions.

So the candidate rolls back all the tax cuts and passes a wealth tax during the campaign?

[Rover]

Re: Democratic Challengers 8: Candidates Can Only Work for A Vegan Farm Market

I won't point out what a shady candidate my opponent is. I'm above that. I'm here to talk about what I will and won't do. What I won't do is pander to the rich, bow down to the lobbies, etc, like s/he would, I can tell you that much.

Purity tests don't work though. Or, if you're going to impose that standard, you have to apply it to your own candidate as well. For example, Bernie Sanders voted against the Brady Bill and for the wasteful F-35 fighter jet program. I'm sure he has his reasons but what's worse - giving a speech to Wall St or voting to approve hundreds of billions of dollars to a boondoggle?

[Kepler]

Re: Democratic Challengers 8: Candidates Can Only Work for A Vegan Farm Market

So the candidate rolls back all the tax cuts and passes a wealth tax during the campaign?

The candidate says: "This is specifically what I will do and how and why. If you want this elect me and a Congress that will do it, otherwise go suck it."

She does not say "If elected I will blah blah Main Street blah blah The Common Man blah blah Work Hard and Play by the Rules blah blah The Greatest Nation on the Face of the Earth."

[burd]

Re: Democratic Challengers 8: Candidates Can Only Work for A Vegan Farm Market

The candidate says: "this is specifically what I will do. If you want this elect me and a Congress that will do it, otherwise go suck it" She does not say "If elected I will blah blah Main Street blah blah The Common Man blah blah Work Hard and Play by the Rules blah blah The Greatest Nation on the Face of the Earth."

I thought that was your point, and I completely agree. Along with historical proof of commitment on specific issues.