100% agreement there! For instance, in Virginia unless you know of a way to move about 800,000 votes out of Northern Virginia, 2000 vote results here in the Commonwealth are pretty much useless as a predictive factor.
Matt_W
3478
OK, let me qualify my statement, which was factually incorrect:
Evangelicals comprise a plurality of American Christians. There are more evangelicals than Catholics (the second largest group), and many more than mainline protestants. Also, the perception of Christianity in America is dominated by evangelicalism, and by its dogmas and ways of talking about faith. When people say “speak in the language of Christian faith” they’re not talking about Thomas Merton mysticism or Dorothy Day activism.
I could accept that outcome, even if it’s not my first choice.
I might even vote for Harris here, if she’s got a better shot at hurting Biden than Warren or Bernie does.
The big thing is I just want Biden to not get the nomination at almost any cost (I’d take BIden over Tulsi, but that’s it)
Also, we need to stop calling Evangelicals Christians. Language matters, and the best way to marginalize evangelicals is to show that we no longer consider them Christians.
rowe33
3480
I’d prefer that Democratic candidates don’t speak in any religious language, instead focusing on the issues and how they can be resolved. I’m fine with a candidate bringing their Christian values to the Presidency as long as they match up with my non-religious opinions on refugee cages, guns, healthcare, etc. But don’t tell me you’re in favor of this or that because of your religious beliefs. Believe in it because it’s the right thing to do.
Have seen a lot of discussion in social media this past week or so about whether the Democrats should even try to reach out to Trump voters, or just play to the base. A guy who knows a few things weighs in.
Debates matter, at least to left voters.
I’ve seen the same discussion but wouldn’t characterize it that way. What I see is the very small cohort of never-Trump conservatives insisting that Democratic candidates abandon popular positions like Medicare for all, and predicting that they can’t win without so doing.
Swiiiiiiiiiing State, gonna have a Swing State!
I will brook no fun-making of the awesome kitsch that is Clam Bake. That is all. :)
I knew it was a joke, I even chuckled. Yes Harris, Warren, Butigeg, and Booker all range from very smart to scary smart. Booker’s academic credentials are merely Stanford, Oxford (Rhodes Scholar) and Yale law. Harris aren’t as impressive Howard (probably the top historically black college) and UC Hasting for law but still top tier and listening to her it is no fluke she was the AG of California.
So one of those donors was me. Questions for Triggercut. If I donate this quarter do I count as second donor? Also can my cats donate or is that campaign violation? and if so in the age of Trump does that matter?
You count as a single donor, regardless of what quarter you donate in, or if you donate across multiple quarters.
And all the revealing information you have to provide to make a campaign contribution is used in regular audits to ensure that there’s no hanky panky, like people donating from their cats.
I think the requirement in the age of Trump is a twitter account, per cat. Note that they may possibly be required to show a cat photo ID to vote, but it depends on which part of the country you live in.
On Meet the Press, Al Cardenas who is soft Never Trumper, had a similar reaction to the debate that I did I really want an alternative Trump, but the stuff they candidates were saying was pretty radical. Every election is a base election and we know that Trump is going to get at least 40%. Democrats will also get at least 40%, but there is still is ~20% who have voted for both Republicans and Democrats presidents in the past. Eliminating employer healthcare, confiscating assault weapons, decriminalizing crossing the border, and providing free health care to immigrants are going to alienate a lot of swing voters.
It shouldn’t be " free health care to immigrants"; it should be “adding non-citizen residents to the insurance pool”.
I don’t disagree…but good luck with that. ;)
Does our side ever get to nudge the overton window? Pretty please?
Menzo
3494
I’m not sure anyone serious is suggesting free health care to immigrants. Under M4A they pay into the system just like anyone else in order to get care. Otherwise, they pay in via payroll and other taxes.
This is easy to misconstrue. We need better language about this, because the point isn’t to just let everyone in, it’s to eliminate the law breaking that occurs when a migrant has to cross the border to seek asylum. That’s one reason the system is so jammed up, because there has to be adjudication of the crime of crossing the border before the asylum process can begin.
This is indeed radical and that’s why nobody is taking it seriously.
Only a few candidates are suggesting this. This is not a mainstream opinion among them.
That’s good spin but that’s not what everybody raised their hand that they’d support. You can blame the shitty MSNBC moderators for poorly worded question. But the Republicans ads and Trump tweets are already starting with everybody promising free healthcare to immigrants.
Yep, there was a coordinated effort by the Never Trumpers over the weekend to spin the debates that way.
(It’s absurd. The Never Trumpers are proven fuckups and failures, and now for some reason the Dems are supposed to rush to them for advice? But of course these people don’t actually want Dems to succeed in getting rid of Trump: they literally earn their salaries by being professional Republicans. Their only goal at the moment is to give shy Trumpers intellectual cover - “I’m sorry, I have no choice but to reluctantly support the racist rapey corrupt traitorous incompetent guy who puts children in concentration camps. Why, the other candidate supports universal health care!”)
