ericredaxe
Veteran
Was it a re-run of his earlier CNN town Hall or a second one?
I’ve been watching them on-demand and the one I saw I agree he didn’t do so well.
Of the ones I’ve watched, I thought Moulton did really well.
USCHO Fan Forum
This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
-
The USCHO Fan Forum has migrated to a new plaform, xenForo. Most of the function of the forum should work in familiar ways. Please note that you can switch between light and dark modes by clicking on the gear icon in the upper right of the main menu bar. We are hoping that this new platform will prove to be faster and more reliable. Please feel free to explore its features.
2020 Democrat Challengers Part II: There Can Be Only One
- Thread starter joecct
- Start date
- Status
Was it a re-run of his earlier CNN town Hall or a second one?
I’ve been watching them on-demand and the one I saw I agree he didn’t do so well.
Of the ones I’ve watched, I thought Moulton did really well.
Re: 2020 Democrat Challengers Part II: There Can Be Only One
I think it was live? He was clueless to how little chance he had.
I think it was live? He was clueless to how little chance he had.
dxmnkd316
Lucia Apologist
Re: 2020 Democrat Challengers Part II: There Can Be Only One
Here’s the thing. I don’t think climate change is going to win the election. It’s a great thing to have on the platform, but to beat trump you’re going to have to convince the moronic sliver of the electorate that somehow considers themselves “independents”. As if there’s such a thing anymore. Honestly it’s just republicans who are too embarrassed to vote for the GOPand they’re having seller’s remorse.
Here’s the thing. I don’t think climate change is going to win the election. It’s a great thing to have on the platform, but to beat trump you’re going to have to convince the moronic sliver of the electorate that somehow considers themselves “independents”. As if there’s such a thing anymore. Honestly it’s just republicans who are too embarrassed to vote for the GOPand they’re having seller’s remorse.
ericredaxe
Veteran
Actually in my state of Massachusetts , the majority (or at least plurality) of the electorate is registered as unenrolled / independent. (Although many certainly lean blue).
D
Deutsche Gopher Fan
Guest
To ban it from debates is dumb.
Re: 2020 Democrat Challengers Part II: There Can Be Only One
I researched this climate change debate story because it didn't make any sense. What actually happened if I'm reading this correctly is that Inslee wanted a debate focused solely in climate change. The DNC said no, because all the debates are focused on multiple topics, not one in particular. I've seen nothing that says climate change is banned as a topic in any debate. If you give a Inslee climate change debate, then you need to give Bernie income inequality, etc etc. The jury's still out on Perez but that seems reasonable to me. Unfortunately that didn't stop people from running with a disinformation campaign.
I researched this climate change debate story because it didn't make any sense. What actually happened if I'm reading this correctly is that Inslee wanted a debate focused solely in climate change. The DNC said no, because all the debates are focused on multiple topics, not one in particular. I've seen nothing that says climate change is banned as a topic in any debate. If you give a Inslee climate change debate, then you need to give Bernie income inequality, etc etc. The jury's still out on Perez but that seems reasonable to me. Unfortunately that didn't stop people from running with a disinformation campaign.
mookie1995
there's a good buck in that racket.
D
Deutsche Gopher Fan
Guest
Huh, that wasn’t what I read but I can’t find the source. Not having an entire debate dedicated to it makes sense
mookie1995
there's a good buck in that racket.
D
Deutsche Gopher Fan
Guest
Still, nothing Perez has done so far is giving me a ton of confidence
FadeToBlack&Gold
Microlot Marxist
Re: 2020 Democrat Challengers Part II: There Can Be Only One
Wake me up when the big league debates start. I can't be bothered to watch town halls for these small fry, boring centrist warmongers.
Wake me up when the big league debates start. I can't be bothered to watch town halls for these small fry, boring centrist warmongers.
Re: 2020 Democrat Challengers Part II: There Can Be Only One
Can't say if he's more Howard Dean or Debbie Wasserman Schultz at this point! Dems did very well in 2018 considering a brutal map in both the House (gerrymandering) and Senate (worst map in a generation). However they continue to blow winnable races in Florida and Ohio as both state parties would have trouble winning an uncontested race for a major office. Having said all that they've done two un s exy things right. 1) they needed some sort of criteria to make the debates and what they've come up with isn't bad. 2) they continue to try to modernize the selection process by curbing super delegates and encouraging states to hold primaries instead of caucuses.
Bottom line is, win in 2020 and the dude's a genius. Lose and he's a failure.
Can't say if he's more Howard Dean or Debbie Wasserman Schultz at this point! Dems did very well in 2018 considering a brutal map in both the House (gerrymandering) and Senate (worst map in a generation). However they continue to blow winnable races in Florida and Ohio as both state parties would have trouble winning an uncontested race for a major office. Having said all that they've done two un s exy things right. 1) they needed some sort of criteria to make the debates and what they've come up with isn't bad. 2) they continue to try to modernize the selection process by curbing super delegates and encouraging states to hold primaries instead of caucuses.
Bottom line is, win in 2020 and the dude's a genius. Lose and he's a failure.
Handyman
Hug someone you care about...
Re: 2020 Democrat Challengers Part II: There Can Be Only One
2018 has zero to do with him and everything to do with the actual elected leadership like Pelosi (war mongering centrist that she is) framing Health Care as the issue of the election. Perez is an empty suit who is best to just get out of the way.
I like Inslee and all but he is an idiot to suggest that if true. If he wants an hour long discussion on the topic have a Town Hall. No one will watch a debate on climate change and it will do nothing to advance the agenda OR help it get more exposure.
Can't say if he's more Howard Dean or Debbie Wasserman Schultz at this point! Dems did very well in 2018 considering a brutal map in both the House (gerrymandering) and Senate (worst map in a generation). However they continue to blow winnable races in Florida and Ohio as both state parties would have trouble winning an uncontested race for a major office. Having said all that they've done two un s exy things right. 1) they needed some sort of criteria to make the debates and what they've come up with isn't bad. 2) they continue to try to modernize the selection process by curbing super delegates and encouraging states to hold primaries instead of caucuses.
Bottom line is, win in 2020 and the dude's a genius. Lose and he's a failure.
2018 has zero to do with him and everything to do with the actual elected leadership like Pelosi (war mongering centrist that she is) framing Health Care as the issue of the election. Perez is an empty suit who is best to just get out of the way.
I like Inslee and all but he is an idiot to suggest that if true. If he wants an hour long discussion on the topic have a Town Hall. No one will watch a debate on climate change and it will do nothing to advance the agenda OR help it get more exposure.
Kepler
Si certus es dubita
Re: 2020 Democrat Challengers Part II: There Can Be Only One
Dr. Mrs. knows Perez and respects him, FWIW.
The reporting on facts is bad enough. The reporting on the politicization of facts is even worse and the reporting on the politics of the politicization of facts is now three steps removed from anything real and probably bears about as close a resemblance to truth as sports reporting.
My experience of personally knowing a few of the people inside the Beltway who are making these decisions is that on past events first tier news outlets (NYT, WaPo, NPR, BBC, DW, Economist) get a lot right, second tier news outlets (cable news, network news, Time, US News) get almost nothing right, and social media and talk radio are worse than worthless. When even first tier news outlets speculate on strategy, motive, and deals they are just pulling it from their butt. There is no way to get a fix on which people are doing a good or bad job based on Twitter or 99% of news media outlets. They are primarily entertainment providers. The only way to have even the slightest idea of truth is to actually be part of the process (which by definition can only be within a very narrow, specialized, myopic scope) and/or to judge objectively from results, which requires time.
Based on all that... I don't see Perez as a problem. He seems to be a classic technocrat who works within his lane, networks well with others, is fairly non-biased, and keeps his head down. Each of those things is a marked improvement over what has colonized the DNC at times before.
As with Mueller, he doesn't self-promote so people with narratives to push simply write whatever is most convenient for them onto him as a tabula rasa. But they don't know anything, and when they speculate they're just writing their own autobiographies.
Dr. Mrs. knows Perez and respects him, FWIW.
The reporting on facts is bad enough. The reporting on the politicization of facts is even worse and the reporting on the politics of the politicization of facts is now three steps removed from anything real and probably bears about as close a resemblance to truth as sports reporting.
My experience of personally knowing a few of the people inside the Beltway who are making these decisions is that on past events first tier news outlets (NYT, WaPo, NPR, BBC, DW, Economist) get a lot right, second tier news outlets (cable news, network news, Time, US News) get almost nothing right, and social media and talk radio are worse than worthless. When even first tier news outlets speculate on strategy, motive, and deals they are just pulling it from their butt. There is no way to get a fix on which people are doing a good or bad job based on Twitter or 99% of news media outlets. They are primarily entertainment providers. The only way to have even the slightest idea of truth is to actually be part of the process (which by definition can only be within a very narrow, specialized, myopic scope) and/or to judge objectively from results, which requires time.
Based on all that... I don't see Perez as a problem. He seems to be a classic technocrat who works within his lane, networks well with others, is fairly non-biased, and keeps his head down. Each of those things is a marked improvement over what has colonized the DNC at times before.
As with Mueller, he doesn't self-promote so people with narratives to push simply write whatever is most convenient for them onto him as a tabula rasa. But they don't know anything, and when they speculate they're just writing their own autobiographies.
Last edited:
trixR4kids
New member
Re: 2020 Democrat Challengers Part II: There Can Be Only One
If nobody was going to watch it then Perez probably wouldn't be going out of his way to make threats regarding having a debate on the topic. It also might have something to do with the fact that the DNC removed its ban on fossil fuel donations a while back.
If nobody was going to watch it then Perez probably wouldn't be going out of his way to make threats regarding having a debate on the topic. It also might have something to do with the fact that the DNC removed its ban on fossil fuel donations a while back.
Re: 2020 Democrat Challengers Part II: There Can Be Only One
Why do you go through all the trouble of creating your own reality if you're going to be upset all the time when you're in it? If you want to be insane, try being a happy insane.
Why do you go through all the trouble of creating your own reality if you're going to be upset all the time when you're in it? If you want to be insane, try being a happy insane.
trixR4kids
New member
Re: 2020 Democrat Challengers Part II: There Can Be Only One
The DNC didn't remove its ban from fossil fuel donations? Who's creating their own reality?
The DNC didn't remove its ban from fossil fuel donations? Who's creating their own reality?
Re: 2020 Democrat Challengers Part II: There Can Be Only One
They may very well have, but nobody is banning this subject matter from being discussed at the DNC debates, so clearly the fossil fuel industry is wasting their money. Its like arguing that the DNC accepting donations from the legalized weed industry shows bias in favor of the Bernie Sanders campaign.
The DNC didn't remove its ban from fossil fuel donations? Who's creating their own reality?
They may very well have, but nobody is banning this subject matter from being discussed at the DNC debates, so clearly the fossil fuel industry is wasting their money. Its like arguing that the DNC accepting donations from the legalized weed industry shows bias in favor of the Bernie Sanders campaign.
mookie1995
there's a good buck in that racket.
They may very well have, but nobody is banning this subject matter from being discussed at the DNC debates, so clearly the fossil fuel industry is wasting their money. Its like arguing that the DNC accepting donations from the legalized weed industry shows bias in favor of the Bernie Sanders campaign.
One has a greater impact than the other
Handyman
Hug someone you care about...
Re: 2020 Democrat Challengers Part II: There Can Be Only One
Because it is a flipping waste of time. Or its a conspiracy...cause that seems to be your go to.
This isnt a one issue candidacy for anyone but him (and Yang with UBI) so a one issue debate is stupid. Inslee will take the hardest stance, everyone else will kowtow to show how Green they are and nothing will change in the minds of the voters or on the agenda.
Or its a conspiracy...and Perez fears it so much he is screwing Inslee because...reasons?
Because it is a flipping waste of time. Or its a conspiracy...cause that seems to be your go to.
This isnt a one issue candidacy for anyone but him (and Yang with UBI) so a one issue debate is stupid. Inslee will take the hardest stance, everyone else will kowtow to show how Green they are and nothing will change in the minds of the voters or on the agenda.
Or its a conspiracy...and Perez fears it so much he is screwing Inslee because...reasons?
- Status