[POLITICS] John Delaney talk with Des Moines Register

"dogisbadob" (dogisbadob) 10/17/2019 at 11:42 • Filed to: None

0

46

He is a moderate and would probably have the best chance against Trump

Unfortunately, the editors asking the questions need to speak up or set up the sound better

jimz > dogisbadob 10/17/2019 at 11:54

1

The Des Moines Institute?

For Sweden > dogisbadob 10/17/2019 at 11:58

1

Ah America.  Where being liberal is considered “moderate”

For Sweden > dogisbadob 10/17/2019 at 12:01

2

Also, where do you all fall on the Political Alignment Compass , Oppo?

facw > dogisbadob 10/17/2019 at 12:02

4

Delaney can’t even do anything in the primary, why on earth would you expect him to have any chance against Trump? 

jimz > For Sweden 10/17/2019 at 12:10

3

considering we don’t really even have a “left wing” of any consequence...  the GOP has just tortured the political spectrum so badly that people believe the shit they spew. 

For Sweden > jimz 10/17/2019 at 12:13

1

There’s at least one self-described socialist with a real chance at winning a major party nomination.

vondon302 > dogisbadob 10/17/2019 at 12:17

1

The way we do primary voting in America is dumb. We always get a far right or far left candidate that most people hate. I don't have a better idea maybe make the loser the Vice President so both parties would have to work together but this system is broken. 

facw > For Sweden 10/17/2019 at 12:17

3

John Delaney would be considered a conservative in Europe. He is not very liberal at all. Indeed he’s a champion of the status quo, which is conservative by definition.

jimz > For Sweden 10/17/2019 at 12:18

3

wow, one.  he ain’t getting anywhere.  He’s only running as a “D” because running as a third party would be even more pointless. 

Grindintosecond > facw 10/17/2019 at 12:20

1

All it takes is for the party to not back the incumbent. The Incumbent doesn’t automatically have the party nomination. Happened to Andrew Johnson, who was so nasty the party just said no and backed Grant, who won. It’s one of those things of formality that’s taken for granted in teh process until they decide to actually not follow through again. Which, if things get really hot, may happen.....may not...

facw > Grindintosecond 10/17/2019 at 12:23

1

Sure, though I don’t see that happening. I also don’t see what at all it has to do with Delaney? If anything I think it would hurt him in a general election because he’d have more competition for moderate voters who are turned off by Trump.

Grindintosecond > facw 10/17/2019 at 12:24

1

If T isnt backed, then D has a chance to run, but itll be so late in the game by that time....

For Sweden > facw 10/17/2019 at 12:25

1

He’s the dictionary definition of liberalism.

Public option for health coverage

Removing barriers for immigration

Carbon tax & green energy research

Public education from pre-kindergarden to community college

remove tariffs

He’s just not a succ.

facw > Grindintosecond 10/17/2019 at 12:25

1

Run as a Republican? He’s not especially liberal, but I’m pretty sure they wouldn’t pick a registered Democrat regardless.

Grindintosecond > facw 10/17/2019 at 12:28

1

People are changing tickets now, not many, but in state elections, some are moving about. There so much distrotion of wher the center is, any moderate could make a case to be anything now. I love the purples. I hope people make sense enough to show that a purple candidate is whats really required for a smooth running system.

But we see it now, anyone talking sense never gets the attention. It’s not loud and attention grabbing enough. Generate alarmist shouting talking points. That’s all anyone wants. Just look at any morning sports show on TV. Just shouting over bad calls, no talk.

dogisbadob > facw 10/17/2019 at 12:31

0

Because the swing voters who matter the most will NOT want socialism or someone too old!

Most of the candidates are too old, too polarizing, or both. It would be nice to have a president who isn’t 70+ years old

Bernie is 78 and just had a heart attack. Biden is almost as old and is going senile and not aging well. Warren is a bit younger but still too old. Also, Bernie and Warren are splitting the progressive base, which could result in Biden getting the nomination. Also, he had 4 years to groom a successor.

I also like how, despite the way the DNC treated him in 2016, that somehow he thinks they won’t do it to him again.

Tulsi Gabbard is a progressive that has crossover appeal. A lot of republicans actually like her, and even Ron Paul is endorsing her due to being against endless wars fought for no reason. She quit the DNC after being told Hillary was going to be the nominee. She went on to endorse Bernie, and mainstream democrats STILL hate her for that four years later! (Samantha Bee is one famous example: Bee won’t even make fun of Tulsi on her show “Full Frontal”, just puts an X over her and says, “nope”)

Bernie should’ ve been grooming Tulsi Gabbard or perhaps Nina Turner, an Ohio State senator who has been involved with Bernie and his campaign for quite some time)

Delaney is the safe choice.

dogisbadob > vondon302 10/17/2019 at 12:33

1

This x1000

It actually used to be like that in the very early days of the US.

For Sweden > dogisbadob 10/17/2019 at 12:35

2

It’s still like that in Canada, and they elected a Dark Makeup Enthusiast .

facw > For Sweden 10/17/2019 at 12:37

3

Every other developed country in the world has universal health care. It’s not liberal to say we should have it. The US is hyper-conservative on this front.

On immigration, he wants to bring in cheap labor for businesses, which was GOP orthodoxy forever up until Trump. His immigration policy is basically indistinguishable from W’s.

Carbon tax is a market based solution to very real problem of global warming. The GOP claims to like market based solutions. Their refusal to acknowledge the existence of global warming despite overwhelming evidence is outside the mainstream (even in the US, but certainly globally).

Support for public education is liberal? It’s practically universal. Conservatives may prefer vouchers or charter schools (as Delaney does) but support for education is not a far left idea.

Removing tariffs has long been the GOP’s stance. Traditionally it is the left who has been protectionist.

The fact there is a radical moron in the White House does not mean moderate, conservative positions suddenly have become lefty nonsense. The GOP has gone hard right, while there has been much less change on the left.

For Sweden > facw 10/17/2019 at 12:44

1

Lots of liberal places have universal healthcare with private insurance options. Germany is one notable example.

Increasing immigration is good! It was one of W’s good policies.

Carbon taxes are good. Dump that money into carbon sequestration plants.

Public education is a foundation of liberalism, yes.

GOP currently loves tariffs. Free trade is critical to the liberal world order. Protectionists should just admit they hate foreigners.

There’s nothing liberal about lefty nonsense.

facw > dogisbadob 10/17/2019 at 12:44

1

Ugh, there’s even more to dislike about Gabbard than Delaney.

Also those voters in the middle don’t matter if you can’t mobilize Democrats, and Delaney obviously can’t.

dogisbadob > facw 10/17/2019 at 13:05

0

Why do you hate Gabbard so much? She is progressive, against useless military spending, and can get both sides to vote for her.

Democrats will vote against Trump no matter what. California will remain a blue state, and the democrat will win no matter what. Trump will win the south no matter what. But the midwest is up for grabs. Ohio, Michigan, Wisconsin.

Is it really too much to ask for someone under 70?

Who do you like the most?

gmporschenut also a fan of hondas > vondon302 10/17/2019 at 13:14

3

I think it would help for All primary voting on one day instead of the  bs marathon

facw > dogisbadob 10/17/2019 at 13:21

1

Her relentless support of horrible dictators (it’s one thing to have a policy of non-intervention, it’s wholly another to treat them as friends and call their opponents terrorists)

Her anti-Muslim stances

Her anti-gay history (she has renounced this, and I hope she’s sincere, but what was there was vile)

She has an anti-choice history as well

Her anti-trade stance

Her support for charter schools

And probably some things I’m forgetting. Of the people on the stage on Tuesday, she’s almost certainly the last I’d vote for.

I support Warren. Obviously she’s probably to the left of everyone but Bernie, but I think in general she’s identifying the right problems, has good solutions to solve them, and can make that case to moderate voters while energizing the Democratic base. I’m also less freaked out about beating Trump, because I feel like anyone (except Hillary who is a moderate Democr at like Delany) should beat Trump (and most, though not all polling seems to support that).

dogisbadob > facw 10/17/2019 at 13:35

0

Most of the demcorats running have that anti-trade stance. In fact, Delaney is the only democrat who supports the TPP. (Bill Weld is the only republican who supports it)

Tulsi’s voting record in congress renders her renunciation of old anti-gay stances sincere.

NARAL gives her a grade of 100%

Her dictator stance is similar to Obama’s stance in 2008. Check out this thread. She is also not anti-Islam.

Warren isn’ t so bad. She has all the things people like about Bernie but with stronger foreign policy credentials and she’s not as old. I will happily vote for her if she gets the nomination.

camarov6rs > For Sweden 10/17/2019 at 13:50

1

Seems as good a place as any to ask. Can someone please explain who actually likes their private medical insurance? I may not have the best insurance, last I checked I’m about 10-11k out of pocket each year to receive full benefits for a family of 4. To me I’d gladly pay 4-5k in taxes a year to the government and get all the benefits of paying 10-11k to a for profit insurance company. My insurance is work provided so the actual cost is higher due to the unknown portion my employer provides.

I understand that for some people the actual costs will increase but I have a hard time believing enough people will actually see the increase that it would be a net loss for us in general. Again just trying to understand where some of the candidates are coming from when they say there are many people who like their current private insurance. I mean sure if your union represented and they fought hard for many years to negotiate employers subsidize 95% then I can see them not wanting to lose it, but if I remember right most Americans aren’t union represented.

For Sweden > camarov6rs 10/17/2019 at 13:54

1

Considering millions of people in a fully nationalized system like the UK buy private health insurance, it’s can’t be completely terrible.

camarov6rs > For Sweden 10/17/2019 at 14:09

1

Is that for medical or prescription or both? I mean keeping private insurance around to supplement doesn’t seem bad. As well doesn’t the U.K. negotiate some of their costs? It’d be much more tolerable to split my coverage between a national and private system if the cost that was split was lower than what we do now.

facw > dogisbadob 10/17/2019 at 14:13

1

I agree trade is a problem for some democrats.

She’s apparently said as recently as 2015 that she is still personally against homosexuality and abortion, but she doesn’t think policing those is government’s role.

“I will talk with anyone, even horrible dictators” is a fine stance, but Gabbard seems way, way more invested than that. She’s got a lot more of that “I will support horrible dictators, even against our allies” thing that Trump has going on.

She seems pretty iffy on Islam to me.

If you aren’t bothered by these things, so be it, but it all makes me a bit uncomfortable about her.

I think of the 12 in the last debate, I’d rank them like :

Warren

Sanders

Booker

Yang

Castro

Harris

O’Rourke

Buttigieg

Steye r

Klobuchar

Biden

Gabbard

Obviously those rankings could float around a bit, especially as you move towards the bottom. In a related aside, I think we’d be much better off with ranked choice voting (even though that might make Warren less likely)

MasterMario - Keeper of the V8s > dogisbadob 10/17/2019 at 14:20

2

Because the swing voters who matter the most will NOT want socialism or someone too old!

Because that worked out well with Hillary...the poster gal for centrist corporate Democrats. Lately elections are being decided by motivating the base...centrists don’t do that.

For one example, Trump won Wisconsin with less votes than Romney lost it.

Distraxi's idea of perfection is a Jagroen > For Sweden 10/17/2019 at 14:20

2

About here:

For Sweden > camarov6rs 10/17/2019 at 14:26

1

Both

gmporschenut also a fan of hondas > camarov6rs 10/17/2019 at 14:49

1

@10. % have private so 5-6 million  of 65mil total pop. 

dogisbadob > MasterMario - Keeper of the V8s 10/17/2019 at 14:53

1

Hillary doesn’t actually have any political views, and people just DO NOT like her! And also the DNC’s meddling shit and Debbie Wasserman Schultz was caught rigging it for Hillary and then bragging about it when exposed.

A lot of disgruntled Bernie bros ended up voting for Trump for that reason.

Gary Johnson took much more from Trump than Stein took from Hillary. If it wasn’t for them, Trump would’ve actually won the popular vote.

A lot of Hillary’s 2016 staff is now involved with Kamala Harris. I think the DNC is trying to push Biden and Harris

MrSnrub > dogisbadob 10/17/2019 at 14:58

2

I’m sorry, but the idea that Delaney has the best chance against Trump is absurd. The most favorable primary polling puts him at 1%. There are literally a dozen other people in front of him. Trump’s victory in 2016 was enabled as much as anything else by low Democratic turnout - he didn’t even beat Obama’s 2012 totals in 4 of the 6 states that flipped to him. If someone is polling at 0-1% in the primary that tells me they are not a good bet to turn that ship around.

dogisbadob > MrSnrub 10/17/2019 at 15:01

1

Not measuring the same thing.

Yeah, Delaney is 1% against far-left democrats by members of the party who lean towards socialism.

I’m talking about Delaney vs Trump
Bernie vs Trump
Yang vs Trump
Biden vs Trump
etc

This time, people will still turn out no matter what because they just want Trump *out*

For Sweden > gmporschenut also a fan of hondas 10/17/2019 at 15:05

1

Yes

MrSnrub > camarov6rs 10/17/2019 at 15:06

2

Nobody really likes their private health insurance. It’s deliberate misinformation when a candidate says something like that. People do like their providers, i.e. doctors. One of the benefits of a single-payer system is that people aren’t restricted to one limited insurance network , and can choose from anyone that is licensed to practice.

MrSnrub > dogisbadob 10/17/2019 at 15:36

1

Joe Biden is a far leftist who leans toward socialism?

To the extent that it even indicates anything this far out, t he candidates who have done the best against Trump in general election polling are Biden, Warren and Sanders . One centrist, one solidly left-wing, and one who can plausibly be called “far left”.

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2020/president/National.html

I could only find a handful of polls for Delaney vs Trump , all of which on FiveThirtyEight show him losing, and the one on RealClearPolitics putting him in a tie . None where he wins.

MasterMario - Keeper of the V8s > dogisbadob 10/17/2019 at 15:52

1

Gary Johnson took much more from Trump than Stein took from Hillary. If it wasn’t for them, Trump would’ve actually won the popular vote.  

I don’t know about that. I bet most of the Gary Johnson votes were “Never Trumpers”

camarov6rs > MrSnrub 10/17/2019 at 15:58

2

I’m a bit uninformed but to me it sounds like  anyone who is saying people like their current insurance is pandering to the health insurance company donors.

Textured Soy Protein > dogisbadob 10/17/2019 at 17:11

2

Uhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh. No. That’s not how elections work in a 2-party system. You can’t assume that everyone from one party will turn out to vote for any candidate from that party, for no reason other than party affiliation.

There are all sorts of different constituencies in the Democratic party that are not card-carrying members of the party who turn out all the time to every election. Candidates need to work to turn them out. 

Sure, you need to get more people than a party’s base to turn out in an election, but picking a candidate because they might appeal to people from the other party is not a good strategy. This is especially the case the more polarized a country becomes, and we’re pretty damn polarized.

If you want a moderate candidate, that’s fine, but if you believe everyone who’s at the top of the polling in the Democratic race is a far-left socialist, you’re less of a centrist than you think.

Textured Soy Protein > vondon302 10/17/2019 at 17:12

1

Candidates who are very far to the left or right tend to get elected in jurisdictions that are heavy majorities for one party or the other.

In national races the candidates tend to be less far to one side or the other.

Textured Soy Protein > Grindintosecond 10/17/2019 at 17:14

1

No, Johnson was a Democrat and Grant was a Republican. The Democrats declined to re-nominate Johnson after his impeachment, and instead nominated Horatio Seymour, who got walloped by Grant. 

Textured Soy Protein > dogisbadob 10/17/2019 at 17:15

2

Actually, s wing voters don’t matter the most.

dogisbadob > Textured Soy Protein 10/17/2019 at 17:27

0

I know Biden isn’t far let, but he is still too old and might have dementia