Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The Republicans feel genuinely threatened by this woman and want to try and torpedo her early.
They are skeeered....
Exactly, and the number of threads started about her on this forum is unbelievable!!!!
(I hardly know who she was, until that!)
Quote:
Originally Posted by ahzzie
With the exceptions of abolishing ICE and a weapons ban most of this sounds good. I think a lot of people would support a majority of these.
I was thinking the same thing.
Quote:
Originally Posted by TigerLily24
Debate her to what purpose?
Is Candace Owens running in her district?
Why should Ms Ocasio-Cortez validate this proposed dog-and pony show?
So that this organization can further spout their propaganda?
Ridiculous.
She came out of nowhere and they haven't had years to chip away at her reputation and dig up or make up dirt about here, so they feel they have to do what they have to do. Sad.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MMS02760
The only people that Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez should be debating are those running for election to the seat she seeks.
I mean - they are OBSESSED with this one particular candidate.
Will they try and demonize her like they do other democratic women?
Absolutely. The only people she should be debating is anyone running against her in her district. Period.
I don't think so.
I mean - ya'll never showed BERNIE this much attention.
What up?
You have to be kidding, Bernie was slapped around like a red headed step child in this forum when he ran for POTUS. Stop spreading your fake news about this forum people with brains are offended.
Wait wait! I thought this thread was about that Florida bombshell Fox News ready blonde that faked her diploma! What is going on here! Rebulicans running crap candidates?
Ocasio-Cortez won because she's a latina with a D in front of her name, in a heavily latino district in NY where she busted her extrema stumping. She's no scholar. And she knows that. Her constituents don't care, and no debate will budge them. Hell, they won't even watch. So I don't see the point.
She's right about universal health care (medicare for all) though. Even if she can't intellectual defend it, she's still right.
The same way every other civilized country in the world funds it. It's not rocket surgery.
1. I wasn't asking you.
2. However...since you did respond....your answer is a non answer. It isn't specific. I asked for specifics. How would you do it?
Would you fund it the way CD member Informed Consent has pointed out?
Or would you scale back those numbers and cut something in the federal budget?
If the latter, what would you cut?
Which model do you think the U.S. should follow? (there have been many threads on CD about that, and when it has been debated, some CD members whose work is related to that industry has pointed out which components within different models wouldn't work under current U.S. law)
yawn. 100K donation....to a charity. So they get to write it off on their taxes. Their offer is not compelling.
TRANSLATION: They send $100,000 from their own pocket to the charity. And then there's $30,000 they don't have to pay in their taxes at the end of the year. Meaning, they are still out $70,000.
Since $70,000 cash out of your pocket isn't any big deal to you, how about sending me a check for $70,000? I can PM you my address.
Too bad Ocasio-Cortez is refusing to debate so far
She'd get her clock cleaned, and she knows it. No way will she ever agree to debate with somebody who actually has experience in the real economic world and knows what they are talking about.
Quote:
*Cisgender definition: Denoting or relating to a person whose sense of personal identity and gender corresponds with their birth sex.
In other words, a woman who knows she's a woman, and a man who knows he's a man. That's 99% of the population, also known as "normal people" who haven't gotten warped by the latest kooky fad in sexual pretension and fakery.
2. However...since you did respond....your answer is a non answer. It isn't specific. I asked for specifics. How would you do it?
Would you fund it the way CD member Informed Consent has pointed out?
Or would you scale back those numbers and cut something in the federal budget?
If the latter, what would you cut?
Which model do you think the U.S. should follow? (there have been many threads on CD about that, and when it has been debated, some CD members whose work is related to that industry has pointed out which components within different models wouldn't work under current U.S. law)
Its very simple. Just look at the numbers. A single payer program should easily be able to cost 12% of GDP which would be the most expensive single program in the world (but far below the 18% of GDP we spend now on healthcare). 12% of GDP is about $2.3 trillion. We spend $1.7 trillion of tax payer money right now and another $1.8 trillion in private outlays, for a total of $3.5 trillion in health care spending. We would have to raise $600 billion to get to $2.3 trillion. A 5% federal sales tax can raise that money.
So we would pay less, get more and everyone would be covered.
If Ocasio wanted to debate a Fox talking head over socialism, she would have done it for the $10,000 or for free.
Thinking the amount of the offer wasn't enough was just plain bonehead dumb. If she turned down $10k, she wouldn't accept $100k. To do that would betray the reasons she turned down the first money in the first offer. All it would prove was that she could be bought if the offer was fat enough. That was the very thing that defeated her opponent.
And Ocasio never took any big money at all when she won her primary. She only accepted small individual donations, because her opponent depended on big $10k donations and he ignored all the small voters down on the street that elected him. But she didn't, and she won. He did, and he lost.
She won for exactly the same reasons why Trump passed up big donations.
He, too, either financed himself or took small donations from individuals in the primaries.
It was the way both of them won by staying down at the street level where the votes are, but not the big money.
Fox or it's big-money sponsors could offer here $1 million for a debate, but she won't take it. That does not mean she may decide to debate her positions on Fox, though, if and when she decides the timing is right for her to do such a thing. I wouldn't hold my breath waiting for her to debate, though- she still has an election to win, and that will be her goal until it's over. She won't be wasting time dinking around on Fox that she could be spending down on the streets in her district where the time counts.
Just like Trump, she's a rank beginner. She has never run before, but like Trump, she was savvy, saw an opening, and took it and ran with it all the way to the primary win.
But her ambition is to become the district's next Representative. She doesn't intend to become the public face of populist socialism any more than Trump does, and he's also a populist socialist. He's just at the other end of the same thing.
It appears to me that others in both parties will follow their lead this election.
Taking big money in order to run a big, expensive, over-loaded campaign in 2018 simply isn't going to work like it did in the past.
All that money means the candidate is too willing to go along with the status quo in D.C. now, and the voters in both parties do not like the status quo, no matter what label gets hung on it.
The voters in both parties are looking for candidates who won't say one thing during a campaign and do another once elected.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
