2018 Democrats thread

[Reddy]

1 hour ago, southsider2k5 said:

Back to bullying and shaming about two posts after wondering why people are fighting.  This is quality work.

Why are you even in this thread? What have you contributed to it?

[Reddy]

18 minutes ago, StrangeSox said:

this district is nearly 60% hispanic and went big for Hillary in 2016 and the incumbent Republican retired. it was supposed to be a slam-dunk pickup.

 

Florida Dems are a hot mess right now. Hopefully Gillum carries some of these down-ticket races and helps Nelson not blow his race, too.

Shalala is a mess. Agree completely re: Gillum. He's the great Dem hope right now in FL

[BigSqwert]

 

 

 

[GoSox05]

15 minutes ago, BigSqwert said:

 

 

 

 

Something tells me Jake Tapper won't do 40 segments of "how are we going to pay for this?" on his show like he did with medicare for all.

 

Edited September 19, 2018 by GoSox05

[southsider2k5]

47 minutes ago, Reddy said:

Why are you even in this thread? What have you contributed to it?

Uh, oh, guess it is my turn to be targeted.

[StrangeSox]

15 minutes ago, GoSox05 said:

 

Something tells me Jake Tapper won't do 40 segments of "how are we going to pay for this?" on his show like he did with medicare for all.

 

I love the endless stupidity of the Tappers and various "fact-checkers" on this issue. Really highlights how useless they are.

A libertarian (Blahous) at a libertarian institute does a big study that, whoops, finds Medicare 4 All as actually proposed would save money! Trillions of dollars over a decade! When various politicians that support M4A point out that even a study done by someone ideologically opposed to M4A found it saved money, all of the "fact-checkers" rushed to rate this as "false" or "half true" because M4A doesn't save money based on an "alternative scenario" invented by Blahous but not advocated by any of the politicians.

[Reddy]

1 hour ago, BigSqwert said:

 

 

 

Um. Voting not to fund the government 48 days out from the midterms is a terrible idea.

[Dam8610]

4 hours ago, Reddy said:

Dam, I'll ask again, there are 48 days left. Where are you volunteering?

There's not a politician worth my time in a 50 mile radius of me.

4 hours ago, Reddy said:

Yes. Dam brings it up (again) and somehow I'm the one who won't stop whining. Got it. Y'all are pro-gaslighters. Kind of like...... Bernie Bros...

I didn't bring it up. You started your Bernie Bro bullshit after the NY primaries before I even commented on it.

4 hours ago, Reddy said:

I wasn't calling anyone HERE that when I said it - I was referring to the arguments some people were making on twitter denigrating high turnout, yet somehow y'all took offense anyway? What does that say? Jesus.

 

On 9/16/2018 at 11:33 AM, Reddy said:

Eh, maybe a little ironic I'll grant you. But I'm *not* a corporatist, while you definitely *are* a Bernie Bro that just said that police brutality isn't an issue in this country. So maybe that's the distinction. 

And now you're just outright lying, a tactic straight out of the HRC playbook.

[Dam8610]

8 minutes ago, Reddy said:

Um. Voting not to fund the government 48 days out from the midterms is a terrible idea.

Voting to authorize increased military spending is a terrible idea.

[Dam8610]

This is a good article for Reddy to read. I have no doubt his first move will be to try to discredit the source.

[caulfield12]

Let’s not forget the biggest “political party” in America is non voters, around 100 million...either as a result of hopelessness, gerrymandering, difficulties getting to a polling station, age/feeling their voice doesn’t mean anything.

It wasn’t Bernie Bros that stopped Clinton, it was the fact that millions and millions of Americans had a pretty strong indication what Trump would be like and still voted him over the alternative...which was a bunch of warmed over platform items that excited pretty much nobody.  Trump at least excited his supporters and energized them to vote or buy hats.

Even today, there isn’t a really exciting set of proposals for the Dems...only the most “outlandish” ones (Medicare for All, abolish ICE, free college for everyone) that have split the party into two.  The only thing saving the party is the womens’ vote (Roe vs. Wade when it might be too late), young people in some states and then the elderly have flipped away from Trump over the last year due to the ObamaCare failure, threats to Medicare/SS and the fact that Trump’s simply the most likely politician to get everyone in the US killed prematurely by his actions.

[BigSqwert]

2 hours ago, Reddy said:

Um. Voting not to fund the government 48 days out from the midterms is a terrible idea.

Well at least you admit you don't care about doing the right or wrong things. It's all about optics.

Edited September 19, 2018 by BigSqwert

[BigSqwert]

1 hour ago, Dam8610 said:

Voting to authorize increased military spending is a terrible idea.

As is being a Democrat who votes for Trumps' garbage policy.

[StrangeSox]

Just awful. This will get zero Republicans to vote for her, and I'm sure it'll do wonders for any progressive support

 

 

[StrangeSox]

Oh wait I got trolled by her

 

Nice one, senator

 

 

 

[The Beast]

So, Illinois voters, do we think Pritzker or Rauner is going to win? For the state, I am considering splitting my ballot for Rauner since I don’t know that I can trust Pritzker to come up with a solution for the pension issue. (My wife is a teacher and pays into the pension system and may not receive her pension when she retires many, many years from now. We can’t afford higher property taxes as a solution either.) I’m not thrilled with Rauner but I don’t like Madigan either.

Edited September 19, 2018 by The Beast

[Dam8610]

34 minutes ago, The Beast said:

So, Illinois voters, do we think Pritzker or Rauner is going to win? For the state, I am considering splitting my ballot for Rauner since I don’t know that I can trust Pritzker to come up with a solution for the pension issue. (My wife is a teacher and pays into the pension system and may not receive her pension when she retires many, many years from now. We can’t afford higher property taxes as a solution either.) I’m not thrilled with Rauner but I don’t like Madigan either.

Rauner has been absolutely disastrous for Illinois and has exacerbated several of the problems the state already faced by acting more like a petulant child than a governor. I don't trust Pritzker, either, but at least he has some good agenda items, like a progressive income tax at the state level instead of a flat tax. I just don't know that he'll act on them, because the Democratic party talks a big game on the campaign trail, then caves when it comes time to deliver on those promises. That's why they can't consistently win elections. Daniel Biss would've been a better choice for governor than either of the candidates running now IMO.

[Two-Gun Pete]

45 minutes ago, The Beast said:

So, Illinois voters, do we think Pritzker or Rauner is going to win? For the state, I am considering splitting my ballot for Rauner since I don’t know that I can trust Pritzker to come up with a solution for the pension issue. (My wife is a teacher and pays into the pension system and may not receive her pension when she retires many, many years from now. We can’t afford higher property taxes as a solution either.) I’m not thrilled with Rauner but I don’t like Madigan either.

Ok, help me understand your view:

1. There's a snowball's chance in hell of Madigan going away anytime soon.

2. Rauner & Madigan TOGEHTER did exactly Jack and Shit for the pension issue over 4 years.

3. After 4+ years of Rauner talking shit about Madigan, exactly how will 4 more years of Rauner will make any difference?

In other words, isn't doing the same thing over and over again [Keeping Rauner & Madigan together] what some call "insanity?"

 

Thanks in advance for your elucidation of your viewpoint.

[The Beast]

1 hour ago, Dam8610 said:

Rauner has been absolutely disastrous for Illinois and has exacerbated several of the problems the state already faced by acting more like a petulant child than a governor. I don't trust Pritzker, either, but at least he has some good agenda items, like a progressive income tax at the state level instead of a flat tax. I just don't know that he'll act on them, because the Democratic party talks a big game on the campaign trail, then caves when it comes time to deliver on those promises. That's why they can't consistently win elections. Daniel Biss would've been a better choice for governor than either of the candidates running now IMO.

Daniel Biss was who I voted for in the primary since he wasn’t entirely in bed with Madigan and made some mention of pension reform. I would prefer a progressive tax as well. I am concerned with the pension problem being spread over to the taxpayers and that it will be in the form of a property tax increase. I am concerned that Pritzker won’t solve the financial issues the state faces and that he will be in lockstep with Madigan.

 

1 hour ago, Two-Gun Pete said:

Ok, help me understand your view:

1. There's a snowball's chance in hell of Madigan going away anytime soon.

2. Rauner & Madigan TOGEHTER did exactly Jack and Shit for the pension issue over 4 years.

3. After 4+ years of Rauner talking shit about Madigan, exactly how will 4 more years of Rauner will make any difference?

In other words, isn't doing the same thing over and over again [Keeping Rauner & Madigan together] what some call "insanity?"

 

Thanks in advance for your elucidation of your viewpoint.

Madigan is 76 years old and eventually will have to step down or pass away. One of my concerns is that if Pritzker gets elected, he will draw a challenger in Jeanne Ives the next time the election is held. I would not want Ives as governor, we already have someone like her in our federal government (Pence).

I like the progressive tax Pritzker proposes and I would like the state to legalize marijuana and tax the crap out of it. I worry that he will work with Madigan and the financial issues won’t get fixed. My wife is a teacher and I know she’s worried she won’t get anything to retire on, she would have to contribute to her 403b to guarantee she would get something for retirement.  And like I said, I’m worried about property taxes increasing as a new homeowner as a result of the impacts of Illinois’ financial state.

I don’t particularly care for either Rauner or Pritzker and I think Pritzker is likely to win. I’d like to vote for someone I like, but for me it comes down to my money and property taxes, at least locally. 

 

[Reddy]

6 hours ago, Dam8610 said:

Voting to authorize increased military spending is a terrible idea.

how do they vote against that without voting against the funding of the govt?

[Reddy]

4 hours ago, BigSqwert said:

Well at least you admit you don't care about doing the right or wrong things. It's all about optics.

It's about winning fucking elections because that's HOW we actually help people. Losing elections so you can have moral victories hurts people.

[Soxbadger]

Rauner cost the state over $1bil in late fees by refusing to pass budgets last year.

The only way to pay for pensions you are worried about is increasing taxes and finding new revenue streams. Rauner isnt going to do that. Also Rauner is proposing an idea which would lesson the states responsibility to pay for teacher pensions, which would almost assuredly be a much greater risk to your wife's pension than anything Pritzker will ever propose.

[Reddy]

8 hours ago, Dam8610 said:

There's not a politician worth my time in a 50 mile radius of me.

1

It's 2018 and you can volunteer remotely for literally any candidate you want. I can happily get you on a remote phone bank! (So can everyone else. I know a bunch of folks calling for Beto)

Let me know who you want to volunteer for and I'll hook you up! 

[The Beast]

7 hours ago, Soxbadger said:

Rauner cost the state over $1bil in late fees by refusing to pass budgets last year.

The only way to pay for pensions you are worried about is increasing taxes and finding new revenue streams. Rauner isnt going to do that. Also Rauner is proposing an idea which would lesson the states responsibility to pay for teacher pensions, which would almost assuredly be a much greater risk to your wife's pension than anything Pritzker will ever propose.

She’s a few years into the pension system and is going to get a 403(b) to supplement a pension she might not got. What about the increase in property taxes? Will that occur to fund the pensions?

[StrangeSox]

Nobody has a real plan for the pension problem from what I've seen. Gov. Quinn and the state Congress did pass a bill that basically said "lol sorry we're not going to ever pay what we promised," but the Illinois Supreme Court found it unconstitutional. The Illinois constitution has iron-clad protections for pension benefits. They can and have changed the system for pensioners going forward (TRS Tier 2 started in 2011 I think?), but there's a gigantic funding hole because both the state Congress and various Governors didn't come close to properly funding for decades. Pritzker wants to find a way to pay for the pension obligations but doesn't really say how, and Rauner wants a constitutional amendment to allow the state to renege on the promised and earned pension benefits.

Rauner's single driving goal as Governor seems to be "break unions." It's a big part of why he refused to sign a budget for years, which cost the state billions and caused unnecessary harm to thousands. Republicans eventually had to work with Democrats to override Rauner's vetoes, and they did it under the threat that Rauner would spend millions funding challengers to any Republican who didn't follow his line.

As for the 403(b), check out the options and their expenses/fees in it. My wife is also a teacher, and the options available to her in her 403(b) plan were a bunch of garbage high-cost annuities, and her district doesn't offer any sort of contribution match (I don't know that any public school district does). She pays into an IRA account instead where she can still get the tax benefits but can also choose low-cost index funds.