The 2020 Presidential Election Primary Thread

[Uncle Ted]

If she would win, I hope she gets in the race.

Hillary could beat Drumpf again... duh.

[Eddie]

If she would win, I hope she gets in the race.

Running Hillary again would be a bigger mistake than running Mitt a second time. If the Dem's want to see Trump stay in the White House, that's a great way to do it.

Unfortunately, it looks like their other options would lose as well. So I guess if they want to lose by less votes, maybe they do want Hillary.

But as for me and my house...I'm still waiting for her to go away and stop blaming everyone else for her losing the first time. I really don't want to see what excuses and who she begins to blame when she loses a second time. Or a reset of the clock as far as her non-victory tour is concerned.

[wapiti]

I don't see any actual facts in the stuff that you've quoted to lead me to believe the company that she represented was evil. Somebody is jumping to big conclusions here.

And the two million fee adds up to less than $150,000 a year. Not at all unreasonable.

Yeah, I don't see an issue here. She was writing that memo on behalf of a client, not as a statement of her own beliefs. I don't see how something written over 20 years ago on behalf of a client would trump her well established public record as a candidate and senator.

[falafel]

I don't see any actual facts in the stuff that you've quoted to lead me to believe the company that she represented was evil. Somebody is jumping to big conclusions here.

And the two million fee adds up to less than $150,000 a year. Not at all unreasonable.

Yeah, I don't see an issue here. She was writing that memo on behalf of a client, not as a statement of her own beliefs. I don't see how something written over 20 years ago on behalf of a client would trump her well established public record as a candidate and senator.

Its only significant because she has been so anti-corporation and big business in her campaign, yet she willingly accepted their money back when she was a working stiff (term used loosely).

[SeattleUte]

Its only significant because she has been so anti-corporation and big business in her campaign, yet she willingly accepted their money back when she was a working stiff (term used loosely).

Yes. More evidence that Elizabeth Warren is completely soulless, completely without scruple, like the parties themselves just looking for an issue she can ride to the top.

Plus this is the new standard in the new lunatic democratic party. Mayor Pete has to account for working for McKinsey when he was fresh out of grad school.

[Moliere]

Yes. More evidence that Elizabeth Warren is completely soulless, completely without scruple, like the parties themselves just looking for an issue she can ride to the top.

Plus this is the new standard in the new lunatic democratic party. Mayor Pete has to account for working for McKinsey when he was fresh out of grad school.

Plus they demand Trump release his tax returns but Warren only seems to release the returns that don’t have all the corporate shilling income included in them. Why won’t she release them? There must be something she wants to hide, most likely very large sums of income from corporations that she hasn’t already disclosed.

I’d be a democrat if they weren’t anti capitalism

[Uncle Ted]

Yeah, the Dems are screwed... Their impeachment strategy for winning the 2020 election seems to be backfiring.

Majority of voters don’t want Trump impeached, removed from office: poll

A majority of voters now oppose impeaching and ousting President Trump from office, according to a Quinnipiac University poll released Tuesday — the same day Democrats unveiled articles of impeachment against the commander in chief.


The poll found that 51% of registered voters surveyed said they don’t want to see Trump impeached and removed from office — compared to 45% who do.
[...]

https://nypost.com/2019/12/10/majori...m-office-poll/

[Uncle Ted]

Biden now claims no one warned him about the conflict of interest with his crackhead, whore chasing son on the board of a corrupt Ukrainian energy company... and then throws his dead son under the bus.

[...]
You know it didn't look good for Hunter Biden to be on that board, even if he did nothing wrong. The optics weren't good. And you talk a lot about what it means to be a Biden and the integrity that is imbued in that family name. But there were former White House aides of yours who tried to warn you about the potential conflicts of interest.

Nobody warned me about a potential conflict of interest. Nobody warned me about that. And at the same time —

George Kent, the State Department official, testified that he raised it to you, and your staff.

No, he didn't say me. He did not say me.

To your staff. To your staff, I stand corrected.

I never, never heard that once at all.

To your staff. And your staff told him he has no bandwidth for family matters.

Well, my son was dying, so I guess that's why he said it, because my son was on his deathbed. But that, that's not the reason why — they should have told me.
[...]

https://www.npr.org/2019/12/06/78552...e-biden?live=1

Well, at least Joe is now acknowledging that he knew that Hunter was on the board of Burisma. I am disappointed that Joe didn't see the obvious conflict of interest. I thought Joe was smarter than that. Of course, this is the guy that can't stop plagiarizing. I thought he learned his lesson.

[beefytee]

Plus they demand Trump release his tax returns but Warren only seems to release the returns that don’t have all the corporate shilling income included in them. Why won’t she release them? There must be something she wants to hide, most likely very large sums of income from corporations that she hasn’t already disclosed.

I’d be a democrat if they weren’t anti capitalism

I'm nothing close to a Warren fan. Her native american heritage claim is auto-disqualifying, not even getting into her liberal policies.

But are your really whatabouting Warren to defend Trump not releasing his tax returns?

"She only released the most RECENT decade's worth of returns!"

Totally equivalent to not releasing them at all.

[Uncle Ted]

C'mon Ted... go kick his ass:

Embedded Tweet

You can spot him and his YangGang 10.

[Moliere]

I'm nothing close to a Warren fan. Her native american heritage claim is auto-disqualifying, not even getting into her liberal policies.

But are your really whatabouting Warren to defend Trump not releasing his tax returns?

"She only released the most RECENT decade's worth of returns!"

Totally equivalent to not releasing them at all.

Why are they not equivalent? Warren has only released tax returns for the years she was in public office or was on public committees. She hasn’t released tax returns for when she worked in the private sector. I find it interesting that she cuts off the tax return disclosures at the very point that something interesting or damning could be found.

[beefytee]

Why are they not equivalent? Warren has only released tax returns for the years she was in public office or was on public committees. She hasn’t released tax returns for when she worked in the private sector. I find it interesting that she cuts off the tax return disclosures at the very point that something interesting or damning could be found.

You make it sound like if she only released one more year, there would have been something juicy in there.

Her 10 years do include some time in the private sector work as she wasn't elected until 2012, and as the Washington Post article Ted linked above is talking about her campaign having released the details of those consulting jobs.

Releasing 10 years of tax returns is about the average. Some release more, some less. https://www.taxnotes.com/presidential-tax-returns

You make it sound like she is hiding some nefarious dealings, which just isn't the case here.

We obviously see different value in releasing tax returns. I think it is unlikely you'll find anything in tax returns that are over a decade old that would compromise a potential presidents ability to act in their capacity in office. Sure you might find some interesting things (or at least accountants might find them interesting), but nothing that will affect their ability as president. Recent tax returns are a different story.

Look, I have zero support for Elizabeth Warren, but this is a silly argument.

[Moliere]

You make it sound like if she only released one more year, there would have been something juicy in there.

Her 10 years do include some time in the private sector work as she wasn't elected until 2012, and as the Washington Post article Ted linked above is talking about her campaign having released the details of those consulting jobs.

Releasing 10 years of tax returns is about the average. Some release more, some less. https://www.taxnotes.com/presidential-tax-returns

You make it sound like she is hiding some nefarious dealings, which just isn't the case here.

I think releasing tax returns is silly. But releasing cherry-picked details of consulting jobs is even more ridiculous. If certain information should be made public by government employees, then we should have a law that requires it. Oh wait, we already have that and every candidate, including Trump, has complied with that law.

[Uncle Ted]

The Dems' Drumpf re-election campaign (aka, impeachment inquiry) seems to be working well...

Embedded Tweet

Embedded Tweet

[Uncle Ted]

Booker won’t be in next week’s presidential debate. We don’t need it, his campaign says.

It’s official: Cory Booker won’t be on stage for next week’s Democratic presidential debate because of dismal poll numbers.

But his campaign manager on Thursday said the New Jersey senator really doesn’t need it.

https://www.nj.com/politics/2019/12/...aign-says.html

Yeah, Spartacus doesn't need the debate... he is from New Jersey: