2020 US Presidential Election

[Christiaan]

Apparently immigration reform will be the first thing to get addressed if Biden and Schumer take power.

https://nypost.com/2020/07/13/democrats-to-take-up-immigration-first-if-successful-in-2020/

The plan seems logical to me

 

[Christiaan]

Apparently immigration reform will be the first thing to get addressed if Biden and Schumer take power.

https://nypost.com/2020/07/13/democrats-to-take-up-immigration-first-if-successful-in-2020/

"I cried tears of joy a few minutes ago when I heard the decision of the Supreme Court on DACA. These wonderful DACA kids and their families have a huge burden lifted off of their shoulders. They don't have to worry about being deported. They can do their jobs, and I believe … someday soon they will be American citizens," he said [Chuck Schumer]

Good news that the Dems are making a priority of this issue. Hopefully Biden wins. It's just sick to think that some of these kids are locked in cages, separated from their parents.

 

[Christiaan]

Joint Biden-Sanders task forces unveil progressive platform after months of negotiations

https://edition.cnn.com/2020/07/08/...sanders-task-force-recommendations/index.html

Possibly the most progressive government since FDR. It doesn't go that far for policies like Medicare4all and Green New Deal, but they want to achieve the following:

Climate
Complete reduction carbon emissions in 2030 for new buildings
Eliminating carbon polution from power plants by 2035
Huge investment in the green energy sector (500 m. solar panels + 60.000 wind turbines)

Criminal justice
Ban on police chokeholds
National database for tracking abuse police officers

Economy
Expanding unemployment insurance system +financial support small businesses
Support for 15 dollar minimum wage
Support for more affordable housing
Support for investment infrastructure & transport
Expanding social security

Education
College free education for low/medium income families
Ban on for profit charter schools

Health
Affordable care act expanded with public option
Medicare eligibility age lowered from 65 to 60 years

Immigration
Rescinding travel ban, ending prosecution asylum seekers
ICE + CBP accountable for any form of abuse

And there's a lot more mentioned in the article.

 

[PeteJ]

Biden is embracing the far left. You live in the Netherlands, which not surprisingly has a ton of leftist parties.

You are clueless and so is the rest of you.

 

[WillBeNimble]

FDR and his "LEFTIST" policies are what helped pull us out of the great depression and preserved capitalism without a violent revolution.

 

[Zugzug]

Biden is embracing the far left. You live in the Netherlands, which not surprisingly has a ton of leftist parties.

You are clueless and so is the rest of you.

Why add the "You are clueless and so is the rest of you"? Do you honestly not see that this is inflammatory? Why not just say "Biden is embracing the far left, which I think is a giant mistake." What gain does the inflammatory part add?

 

[Zugzug]

"I cried tears of joy a few minutes ago when I heard the decision of the Supreme Court on DACA. These wonderful DACA kids and their families have a huge burden lifted off of their shoulders. They don't have to worry about being deported. They can do their jobs, and I believe … someday soon they will be American citizens," he said [Chuck Schumer]

Good news that the Dems are making a priority of this issue. Hopefully Biden wins. It's just sick to think that some of these kids are locked in cages, separated from their parents.

DACA is something even Stephen Miller should agree with.

 

[Markku]

We've been getting numerous reports about PeteJ's behavior in this thread for quite some time now. We've tried to wait it out to see if things would change, but unfortunately it doesn't seem so.

Personal attacks and the type of behavior PeteJ has engaged in is unacceptable. We won't tolerate it. As a result, PeteJ has been banned from this thread for two weeks starting now. After that he is welcome to return to the topic at hand, assuming he apologizes and changes how he treats his fellow members.

 

[Lucifer]

We've been getting numerous reports about PeteJ's behavior in this thread for quite some time now. We've tried to wait it out to see if things would change, but unfortunately it doesn't seem so.

Personal attacks and the type of behavior PeteJ has engaged in is unacceptable. We won't tolerate it. As a result, PeteJ has been banned from this thread for two weeks starting now. After that he is welcome to return to the topic at hand, assuming he apologizes and changes how he treats his fellow members.

Thanks Markku. I was tired of seeing @PeteJ personally attack members in this thread because they had a different opinion compared to his.

 

[Contrast]

You can bet your life savings that the fathers and mothers of the hearing regeneration movement are card carrying liberals. These nerdy scientists are not in your clown world, whatever that is. They are often typical "liberals " like Stephen Heller at Stanford or Liberman at Mass Eye and Ear. They defer to science, not to scripture. The scientists who will save us are very far from the likes of the Orange haired leader of the "free world" who rejects science and embraces race hate.

I am a lefty, but you are inappropriately fusing tinnitus research with US political controversy. We don't know where these scientist stand on the political spectrum, but we can strongly assume they are not bigots. Please don't tie US politics to hearing research, it doesn't make sense.

 

[Contrast]

Trump doesn't follow scripture, he didn't show any religious vibes until the 2016 election when he wanted religious people to vote for him. Trump doesn't embrace race hate, mindless critics just say he does. Anyone who says Trump is racist is not thinking critical. If you want to criticize Trump pay attention to him restricting disability income, cutting EPA funds and regulations, wasting money on a wall, not valuing education. Trump has major problems that I would call "backwards" but I'm not going to mindlessly call him "racist" like most leftist do.

I may be a leftist but I appreciate what libertarianism taught me. Part of biggest problem is the fact that medical science is heavily Government regulated. You can do whatever you want to a computer chip, the same cannot be said about the cells in your body. Medicine is too heavily regulated that is why doctors are 17 years out of synch with research.

 

[Zugzug]

I am a lefty, but you are inappropriately fusing tinnitus research with US political controversy. We don't know where these scientist stand on the political spectrum, but we can strongly assume they are not bigots. Please don't tie US politics to hearing research, it doesn't make sense.

To be clear, I am not pretending that the Democratic party is the path to prosperity. But do you really think it's fair to say that 50% of scientists are conservatives? @Daniel Lion may have gone a bit too far, but he makes a fair point that we have to be honest about. I am a scientist (in math), and where I used to work, there were jokes on the bulletin board openly mocking how anti-science Trump is. Dr. Fauci clearly thinks Trump is spreading misinformation. Up until recently, Trump had a 96% approval rating within the Republican party so it's not like he's on an island.

Also, as far as tying US politics to hearing research, it matters in the sense that Trump failed the coronavirus response, which will slow things down. Even if you want to argue that this isn't all Trump's doing (which is fair), he has not handled the pandemic well. Will Biden be any better? We may see. But it's certainly relevant.

 

[Contrast]

To be clear, I am not pretending that the Democratic party is the path to prosperity. But do you really think it's fair to say that 50% of scientists are conservatives? @Daniel Lion may have gone a bit too far, but he makes a fair point that we have to be honest about. I am a scientist (in math), and where I used to work, there were jokes on the bulletin board openly mocking how anti-science Trump is. Dr. Fauci clearly thinks Trump is spreading misinformation. Up until recently, Trump had a 96% approval rating within the Republican party so it's not like he's on an island.

Also, as far as tying US politics to hearing research, it matters in the sense that Trump failed the coronavirus response, which will slow things down. Even if you want to argue that this isn't all Trump's doing (which is fair), he has not handled the pandemic well. Will Biden be any better? We may see. But it's certainly relevant.

Trump is forcing a situation to work with the corona virus, I don't know how anyone else would have handled it, the only examples we have other then Trump are what City and State Govenors and mayors are doing.

 

[Zugzug]

Trump doesn't embrace race hate, mindless critics just say he does. Anyone who says Trump is racist is not thinking critical. If you want to criticize Trump pay attention to him restricting disability income, cutting EPA funds and regulations, wasting money on a wall, not valuing education. Trump has major problems that I would call "backwards" but I'm not going to mindlessly call him "racist" like most leftist do.

Whether or not all of his supporters are racists is debatable. He definitely is. Admittedly, the media calls everything racist so some of it gets drowned out. But when you sift through it all, there's still strong evidence. Here are some that are not subjective.

• The Muslim ban
• The Mexican judge who couldn't do his job because of his race (Even Paul Ryan said this was textbook racism).
• The Central Park 5
• The birther movement
• 1973 Federal Lawsuits against him and his father for housing discrimination based on race
• Both sides-ing Charlottesville
• His niece claiming she heard him use the n word. Even if you think she's motivated for malicious reasons, she does not come off like a liar. I'm sure she exaggerates certain dynamics in her book, but regularly using the n word or not is an objective thing.
• Him sharing a "White Power" re-tweet.
• His Senior Advisor (and speech writer), Stephen Miller, is an 'extremist' according to the Southern Poverty Law Center. He's the architect behind the hawkish immigration policies and is a known white nationalist.

Where I will partially agree with you is that some of the time, Trump is just a sociopath who views race as a topic to divide in order to get what he wants. This doesn't strictly fall under the purview of "active white supremacist," but is it really any better to excuse racism with callousness that borders on being a sociopath?

I obviously hate Trump, but I think it's easier to defend his policies (which I disagree with) than him not being a racist.

 

[Contrast]

To be clear, I am not pretending that the Democratic party is the path to prosperity. But do you really think it's fair to say that 50% of scientists are conservatives? @Daniel Lion may have gone a bit too far, but he makes a fair point that we have to be honest about. I am a scientist (in math), and where I used to work, there were jokes on the bulletin board openly mocking how anti-science Trump is. Dr. Fauci clearly thinks Trump is spreading misinformation. Up until recently, Trump had a 96% approval rating within the Republican party so it's not like he's on an island.

Also, as far as tying US politics to hearing research, it matters in the sense that Trump failed the coronavirus response, which will slow things down. Even if you want to argue that this isn't all Trump's doing (which is fair), he has not handled the pandemic well. Will Biden be any better? We may see. But it's certainly relevant.

There is a difference between Biden leftist and AOC leftist and it's big.

 

[Zugzug]

There is a difference between Biden leftist and AOC leftist and it's big.

I wouldn't call Biden a leftist. Personally, my ideal candidate is a centrist who is pulled to the left -- sort of like Biden now, but pulled a little harder left on economics. I like the far left at least outlining their positions, but most of the time, it's too much for me. For example, I don't agree with defunding the police, but I want my leader to critically think about this issue and at least hear the arguments for it; there could be some good mixed in with the bad. If there's a good argument for it besides "I wish the world was a wonderful place and crime didn't exist," I want to hear it.

 

[aot]

Sorry if this was mentioned before, but has anyone seen the Chris Wallace Trump interview?

"We had two world wars. Two world wars. Two beautiful world wars." An actual qoute.

 

[FGG]

I wouldn't call Biden a leftist. Personally, my ideal candidate is a centrist who is pulled to the left -- sort of like Biden now, but pulled a little harder left on economics. I like the far left at least outlining their positions, but most of the time, it's too much for me. For example, I don't agree with defunding the police, but I want my leader to critically think about this issue and at least hear the arguments for it; there could be some good mixed in with the bad. If there's a good argument for it besides "I wish the world was a wonderful place and crime didn't exist," I want to hear it.

I'm not aware of anyone that wants to abolish the police (which would be pretty out there, I agree). "Defund" here refers to decreasing the budget. There is no reason to outfit the police like the military.

I think licensing police isn't an idea that gets talked about a lot but it makes a lot of sense. You need a license to be a hair dresser but not a cop. That doesn't make any sense to me.

If there was a board, there would at least be an agency that could be appealed to for license removal in the case of bad actors. A licensing board would also be responsible for continuing education, which may help with educating police on appropriate use of force so colleagues could more easily have a reference in which to step in when they see something dangerous and unprofessional.

Having a licensing board also makes it easier to report someone rather than going up the chain of command. Doctors, veterinarians, etc have this ability. Cops should too.

The cost of the continuing education and licensing could easily be offset by less spending on the militarization equipment.

 

[Daniel Lion]

@Contrast, @Zugzug and fellow Tinnitus Talk contributors to this thread, I bid you farewell.

I have my own wish list concerning sustainable human habitation on this planet, wars, the wealth disparity in the US, and so much more... ever since I was little kid observing the world around me there has been a huge discord between what I was being fed by schools or the State, popular culture and what I saw with my own eyes and the beliefs I began to embrace.

I have been working on a garden and am trying to do art again. I am trying to undo brain damage I suffered from my acoustic trauma and hearing loss... it's slow going but I am trying my best.

I don't like either candidate or the status quo of US politics and discussing politics here always leaves me feeling shit.
I try to avoid it but occasionally get sucked in...

I like you guys and wish you well, @PeteJ you too.
I'll see you on the research or support threads...

Peace out.

 

[Born To Slay]

Sorry if this was mentioned before, but has anyone seen the Chris Wallace Trump interview?

"We had two world wars. Two world wars. Two beautiful world wars." An actual qoute.

That interview was god awful. The COVID-19 part was cringe in particular and him saying he would replace Obamacare in two weeks was just hilarious.

 

[Christiaan]

Sorry if this was mentioned before, but has anyone seen the Chris Wallace Trump interview?

"We had two world wars. Two world wars. Two beautiful world wars." An actual qoute.

Yeah, just saw it. Finally someone at Fox who is doing his job as a serious journalist. Hope they keep on nagging him about how well it's going with his plan. For three years, Trump has failed to replace Obama Care as it was one of his key targets. Healthcare is probably going to be one of the hottest topics during the elections, especially since lots of people with a healthcare plan are out of work due to COVID-19.

 

[FGG]

Sorry if this was mentioned before, but has anyone seen the Chris Wallace Trump interview?

"We had two world wars. Two world wars. Two beautiful world wars." An actual qoute.

I'm waiting for "beautiful 9/11"...

 

[Christiaan]

John Kasich expected to speak at Democratic National Convention for Joe Biden: report

''WASHINGTON — Former Republican Ohio Gov. John Kasich, an outspoken critic of President Donald Trump, is expected to speak on behalf of presumptive Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden at next month's Democratic National Convention, the Associated Press reported Monday''

Link: https://eu.usatoday.com/story/news/...k-dnc-convention-joe-biden-report/5470753002/

How is this helping the Dems get the progressive vote? The man has played a key role in trying to defund Planned Parenthood & Social Security in the last 20 years

 

[WillBeNimble]

John Kasich expected to speak at Democratic National Convention for Joe Biden: report

''WASHINGTON — Former Republican Ohio Gov. John Kasich, an outspoken critic of President Donald Trump, is expected to speak on behalf of presumptive Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden at next month's Democratic National Convention, the Associated Press reported Monday''

Link: https://eu.usatoday.com/story/news/...k-dnc-convention-joe-biden-report/5470753002/

How is this helping the Dems get the progressive vote? The man has played a key role in trying to defund Planned Parenthood & Social Security in the last 20 years

It's not. The Dems are gambling on getting former Trump voters, moderates and slight right leaning people fiscally. This is more to garner favor with Ohio than progressives. Then again, what choice do progressives have? We either vote green and it does nothing, or vote blue and get someone we might be able to bully to take the right moves.

 

[Zugzug]

John Kasich expected to speak at Democratic National Convention for Joe Biden: report

''WASHINGTON — Former Republican Ohio Gov. John Kasich, an outspoken critic of President Donald Trump, is expected to speak on behalf of presumptive Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden at next month's Democratic National Convention, the Associated Press reported Monday''

Link: https://eu.usatoday.com/story/news/...k-dnc-convention-joe-biden-report/5470753002/

How is this helping the Dems get the progressive vote? The man has played a key role in trying to defund Planned Parenthood & Social Security in the last 20 years

It's a game of numbers. A lot of non-extreme Republicans like Kasich. Biden has a chance to pull many of them his way. Progressives lean young, and young people tend to have worse voter turnouts. With that being said, Biden has not ignored the progressive vote, as he has adopted some Green New Deal ideals. Even AOC co-chaired his climate task force. Even if you are progressive, just objectively calculating probabilities, Biden would be making a mistake to become Bernie Sanders. Unlike some Democratic candidates, I think his greatest strength is pulling over disgruntled conservatives. Likewise, there's nothing he could do that the most extreme progressives would view as enough.

What's really funny is that "stable genius" Trump is helping Biden get the progressive vote. In his "urgent press conference," he said that Biden was being pulled way to the left -- even to the left of Bernie. I think all this accomplished was getting young progressives to google Joe Biden's task forces lol.

For better or worse, I honestly don't think Progressives have as much leverage as they think. It's a pretty bad look to let Trump win at this point. Not to mention the fact that the courts will be packed with judges that won't dream of passing progressive policies.

The whole schtick that the Dems are trying to "voter shame" progressives into submission is a losing battle. It comes off immature and hypocritical, since Bernie has plenty of supporters that don't hesitate to shame people or call them 'media sheeples' for not voting for him.

 

[Christiaan]

It's a game of numbers. A lot of non-extreme Republicans like Kasich. Biden has a chance to pull many of them his way. Progressives lean young, and young people tend to have worse voter turnouts. With that being said, Biden has not ignored the progressive vote, as he has adopted some Green New Deal ideals. Even AOC co-chaired his climate task force. Even if you are progressive, just objectively calculating probabilities, Biden would be making a mistake to become Bernie Sanders. Unlike some Democratic candidates, I think his greatest strength is pulling over disgruntled conservatives. Likewise, there's nothing he could do that the most extreme progressives would view as enough.

What's really funny is that "stable genius" Trump is helping Biden get the progressive vote. In his "urgent press conference," he said that Biden was being pulled way to the left -- even to the left of Bernie. I think all this accomplished was getting young progressives to google Joe Biden's task forces lol.

For better or worse, I honestly don't think Progressives have as much leverage as they think. It's a pretty bad look to let Trump win at this point. Not to mention the fact that the courts will be packed with judges that won't dream of passing progressive policies.

The whole schtick that the Dems are trying to "voter shame" progressives into submission is a losing battle. It comes off immature and hypocritical, since Bernie has plenty of supporters that don't hesitate to shame people or call them 'media sheeples' for not voting for him.

I understand your point about building a large coalition to win elections. On the other hand, there are huge risks to build a big tent party with people who clearly have a different picture of how politics should be done. If you already have the progressives at your side, but at the same time you are trying to persuade the conservatives, how long would this coalition stand after 2, 4 years?

I think that sooner or later left or right wing voters would feel disenfranchised by decisions made by the party. We have seen the same thing in France with the governing party La Republique En Marche (LREM), a centrist party that initially tried to incorporate progressive and conservative politicians & policies. They won the previous presidential elections with the idea of bridging the divide between people, and that appealed to a lot of voters on the right and left. However, during their current reign, lots of people on the left who voted for the party feel left out because of the party has watered down its promises (tackle pollution, inequality, better job protection) in favour of generally considered right wing topics like tax cuts for the well to do & companies and relaxed worker protections in an effort to liberalise France's economy. The party lost lots of support during the recent local elections and the left wing of the party decided to form a new party. This has badly damaged the image of LREM and the question remains if they will play a part in the next presidential elections.

This may not happen in the US given its unique political system, but I can imagine that it's incredibly hard to manage a centrist based big tent party that appeal to both left and right wing voters. Conservatives will eventually move back to the GOP or progressives will eventually refrain from voting / vote for the Green Party/ form a progressive party. The Dems will have to choose which side they're on.

 

[FGG]

I understand your point about building a large coalition to win elections. On the other hand, there are huge risks to build a big tent party with people who clearly have a different picture of how politics should be done. If you already have the progressives at your side, but at the same time you are trying to persuade the conservatives, how long would this coalition stand after 2, 4 years?

I think that sooner or later left or right wing voters would feel disenfranchised by decisions made by the party. We have seen the same thing in France with the governing party La Republique En Marche (LREM), a centrist party that initially tried to incorporate progressive and conservative politicians & policies. They won the previous presidential elections with the idea of bridging the divide between people, and that appealed to a lot of voters on the right and left. However, during their current reign, lots of people on the left who voted for the party feel left out because of the party has watered down its promises (tackle pollution, inequality, better job protection) in favour of generally considered right wing topics like tax cuts for the well to do & companies and relaxed worker protections in an effort to liberalise France's economy. The party lost lots of support during the recent local elections and the left wing of the party decided to form a new party. This has badly damaged the image of LREM and the question remains if they will play a part in the next presidential elections.

This may not happen in the US given its unique political system, but I can imagine that it's incredibly hard to manage a centrist based big tent party that appeal to both left and right wing voters. Conservatives will eventually move back to the GOP or progressives will eventually refrain from voting / vote for the Green Party/ form a progressive party. The Dems will have to choose which side they're on.

This is a great point and it points to short term vs long term thinking. I think the only reason this will work for this election is that people are highly motivated to vote against Trump.

 

[Zugzug]

In general, I view progressivism differently than most progressives. I like some of the ideas they are bringing forward, but I think that they have some work to do when it comes to crime, military spending, and immigration.

Fundamentally, I think there's a large "taking for granted" aspect. For example, the argument for lowering the military budget is that we fight too many wars in the name of American imperialism. While this is true, this doesn't account for the whole story. A lot of the spending is for preventative measures. What should the military budget be? I don't know. $700 billion is probably too high, but I haven't heard a good argument for a specific number and why that number would work. Most of the arguments I've heard are simply "we fight too many wars," which is true, but doesn't get at the heart of the issue, which is whether we would have vulnerabilities or not with a much lower budget. Again, I don't have the answer to this, but this is not a simple question like Bernie makes it seem. Bad people exist. Not as many as Trump makes it seem, but more than Bernie does.

Similarly with police. All we ever talk about are the (tragic) police brutality cases. What about the police protecting people in their communities? Protection from gangs in order to climb out? These are not simple problems.

More than anything, I want the progressive movement to grow and evolve. I don't want to rush it, have it fail, and then we spend the next 50 years ignoring all of Bernie's good ideas. I think the long-term outlook for progressives is much better than for the Biden types, but Obama and Biden do have a reasonable track record -- Biden less so in the past.

AOC is being really smart right now (I hope it stays that way) by joining task forces, getting in with the media -- maybe even learn a thing or two from Nancy Pelosi before AOC inevitably becomes speaker some day. I hope progressives see this as a long-term project to grow and learn.

 

[Zugzug]

I think licensing police isn't an idea that gets talked about a lot but it makes a lot of sense. You need a license to be a hair dresser but not a cop. That doesn't make any sense to me.

If there was a board, there would at least be an agency that could be appealed to for license removal in the case of bad actors. A licensing board would also be responsible for continuing education, which may help with educating police on appropriate use of force so colleagues could more easily have a reference in which to step in when they see something dangerous and unprofessional.

Having a licensing board also makes it easier to report someone rather than going up the chain of command. Doctors, veterinarians, etc have this ability. Cops should too.

The cost of the continuing education and licensing could easily be offset by less spending on the militarization equipment.

I like this idea, but I wonder what cops think of it. We need more good cops in order to weed out the bad ones. I'm not sure how we motivate more good people to become cops. I suppose the alternative is just less policing, but I don't totally agree with this.

 

[aot]

Similarly with police. All we ever talk about are the (tragic) police brutality cases. What about the police protecting people in their communities? Protection from gangs in order to climb out? These are not simple problems.

Respectfully, what's your stance on the Defund The Police movement?

Bad people do exist, true. But the majority of crime is caused mostly due societal inequality rather then malice.

Give people affordable housing, a decent education, and equality under the law, they'll have fewer reasons to join gangs in the first place.

(Sorry if you already answered.)