Elizabeth Warren and Anti-Corruption

92tide

TideFans Legend
May 9, 2000
58,153
44,873
287
54
East Point, Ga, USA
I believe she would get murdered in the Fall campaign. In this election, we need someone who can stand up to a bully. A streetfighter.

Joe Biden is about the only one that fits that bill. Unafraid to slug back when he takes a punch. He may have a loose mouth, but many people(like me) like someone who is frank, and isn't just telling you what you want to hear.

It's not a sexist thing, either. I doubt that Jimmy Carter (a great man and statesman) would fare well against this horse's rear and his fanboys in the media.
biden sucks as a candidate though. he has royally flamed out any time he tried to run as president.
 

CharminTide

Hall of Fame
Oct 23, 2005
7,319
2,032
187
I believe she would get murdered in the Fall campaign. In this election, we need someone who can stand up to a bully. A streetfighter.

Joe Biden is about the only one that fits that bill. Unafraid to slug back when he takes a punch. He may have a loose mouth, but many people(like me) like someone who is frank, and isn't just telling you what you want to hear.

It's not a sexist thing, either. I doubt that Jimmy Carter (a great man and statesman) would fare well against this horse's rear and his fanboys in the media.
I think Joe Biden is a terrible choice, honestly. He's approaching 80 years old, and IMO 2016 was his last opportunity. He didn't take it.

Kamala Harris might be the kind of streetfighter that you're looking for, though. That said, I don't really agree that the Democratic candidate should get into a pig-wrassling match with Trump like we saw in the GOP primary. They simply need to have the rhetorical dexterity to let him stumble over his own childishness without falling into the muck with him. If candidates spend more time talking to Trump than to the voters, they're losing.

Hillary ran a bad campaign, yet still won the popular vote and probably would have edged out the EC with a few better decisions toward the end, and her "likeability" score started at -50. I'm not taking anything for granted, but I think we're overestimating Trump's presence in 2020. His 30% base of idiots will stick with him even if he's dragged out of Washington in handcuffs, but the biggest threat to any Democratic candidate will be lifelong the Republicans who throw their support behind him because they care about SCOTUS more than America.
 

UAH

All-American
Nov 27, 2017
3,595
4,130
187
biden sucks as a candidate though. he has royally flamed out any time he tried to run as president.
His two terms as Vice President may have mitigated some of that. The Dems have to bring along moderate and independent voters in the burbs and win Pennsylvania/Ohio to beat Drump. I don't see anyone on the horizon better than Biden to do that. Mix him in with someone like O'Rourke as VP and it could be an explosive combination.
 

92tide

TideFans Legend
May 9, 2000
58,153
44,873
287
54
East Point, Ga, USA
His two terms as Vice President may have mitigated some of that. The Dems have to bring along moderate and independent voters in the burbs and win Pennsylvania/Ohio to beat Drump. I don't see anyone on the horizon better than Biden to do that. Mix him in with someone like O'Rourke as VP and it could be an explosive combination.
i tend to agree with charmin's points above wrt biden.
 

92tide

TideFans Legend
May 9, 2000
58,153
44,873
287
54
East Point, Ga, USA
I think Joe Biden is a terrible choice, honestly. He's approaching 80 years old, and IMO 2016 was his last opportunity. He didn't take it.

Kamala Harris might be the kind of streetfighter that you're looking for, though. That said, I don't really agree that the Democratic candidate should get into a pig-wrassling match with Trump like we saw in the GOP primary. They simply need to have the rhetorical dexterity to let him stumble over his own childishness without falling into the muck with him. If candidates spend more time talking to Trump than to the voters, they're losing.

Hillary ran a bad campaign, yet still won the popular vote and probably would have edged out the EC with a few better decisions toward the end, and her "likeability" score started at -50. I'm not taking anything for granted, but I think we're overestimating Trump's presence in 2020. His 30% base of idiots will stick with him even if he's dragged out of Washington in handcuffs, but the biggest threat to any Democratic candidate will be lifelong the Republicans who throw their support behind him because they care about SCOTUS more than America.
in all of this discussion about how bad and un-popular that hillary was, we need to remember that a foreign power was inundating the "airwaves" with negative crap about her (targeted at conservatives as well as bernie/jill bros) that got magnified by our own media.
 

92tide

TideFans Legend
May 9, 2000
58,153
44,873
287
54
East Point, Ga, USA
Amazing how, after Bernie started winning states, their policies became “ more” similar. Hillary was the quintessential political chameleon; her positions changed, his never did.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
i think that this is sort of a desired trait when trying to bring together a diverse coalition under a big tent. but i may be biased
 

CharminTide

Hall of Fame
Oct 23, 2005
7,319
2,032
187
in all of this discussion about how bad and un-popular that hillary was, we need to remember that a foreign power was inundating the "airwaves" with negative crap about her (targeted at conservatives as well as bernie/jill bros) that got magnified by our own media.
Agreed. But they didn't start the negativity, they only amplified it. Hillary had 20 years of talk radio working against her from the start, and that alone is a difficult hill to climb. I think part of the reason Warren has announced her bid so early is so she can get on TV and control the narrative about her before the election cycle really gears up. And if she can get people talking about the ideas she brings rather than her as a person, it might even work.

Then again, maybe there's a video of Warren doing an awesome dance in college that the GOP could unearth.
 

Its On A Slab

All-SEC
Apr 18, 2018
1,290
1,721
182
Pyongyang, Democratic Republic of Korea
in all of this discussion about how bad and un-popular that hillary was, we need to remember that a foreign power was inundating the "airwaves" with negative crap about her (targeted at conservatives as well as bernie/jill bros) that got magnified by our own media.
The Russians didn't have to work too hard to dredge up the simmering embers of Hillary negativity.

I have never really liked her. I found her much similar to Al Gore: entitled, pompous, arrogant. These are qualities that don't sit well with most Americans.

I voted for her, but it was like voting for John Kerry(another in that category). You knew what not electing him meant.
 

92tide

TideFans Legend
May 9, 2000
58,153
44,873
287
54
East Point, Ga, USA
Agreed. But they didn't start the negativity, they only amplified it. Hillary had 20 years of talk radio working against her from the start, and that alone is a difficult hill to climb. I think part of the reason Warren has announced her bid so early is so she can get on TV and control the narrative about her before the election cycle really gears up. And if she can get people talking about the ideas she brings rather than her as a person, it might even work.

Then again, maybe there's a video of Warren doing an awesome dance in college that the GOP could unearth.
i agree completely. we have been heading to this point since rush started expelling rancid farts from his pie hole on am radio back in the late 80s. and probably since before that when fallwell and his ilk started spreading jesus' true message of white male supremacy as the gop platform.
 
Last edited:

92tide

TideFans Legend
May 9, 2000
58,153
44,873
287
54
East Point, Ga, USA
The Russians didn't have to work too hard to dredge up the simmering embers of Hillary negativity.

I have never really liked her. I found her much similar to Al Gore: entitled, pompous, arrogant. These are qualities that don't sit well with most Americans.

I voted for her, but it was like voting for John Kerry(another in that category). You knew what not electing him meant.
they just latched onto an established propoganda theme.

part of our problem is that we think of the presidency as a popularity contest, and you see where that gets us. the good thing is that the 25+ years of demonization has been pretty squarely directed at hillary, so they are going to have to start from scratch with all-new boogey men. based on their recent efforts, it's not going to take very well. their target audience is shrinking.
 

Its On A Slab

All-SEC
Apr 18, 2018
1,290
1,721
182
Pyongyang, Democratic Republic of Korea
they just latched onto an established propoganda theme.

part of our problem is that we think of the presidency as a popularity contest, and you see where that gets us. the good thing is that the 25+ years of demonization has been pretty squarely directed at hillary, so they are going to have to start from scratch with all-new boogey men. based on their recent efforts, it's not going to take very well. their target audience is shrinking.
I agree, but in reality, you really want to LIKE the candidate you are voting for. There has to be some enthusiasm about the candidacy. Human nature, I suppose.

Trump was able to garner some excitement. Many didn't realize the bad things they could be doing by voting to "shake up the system".

In many ways, an election is a popularity contest. Just the way it is. The one with the most energy and excitement wins. John Kerry came across as Lurch. Al Gore was a cartoon buffoon, listening to his advisers to much, looking insincere in his "Alpha Male" pose, etc. Hillary was just unlikable. That shrill, elitist tone. Cold. Bill Clinton could sell ice to eskimos. Hillary lacks all of that charm.
 

twofbyc

Hall of Fame
Oct 14, 2009
12,195
3,329
187
i think that this is sort of a desired trait when trying to bring together a diverse coalition under a big tent. but i may be biased
“May be”?????
Don’t dare give credit to the one whose original idea was what was moved toward. I despise “ political expediency”; either you are consistent in your beliefs or you’re not. I’ll side with consistency every.single.time.
When others don’t/won’t, you get Dump.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
 

twofbyc

Hall of Fame
Oct 14, 2009
12,195
3,329
187
Agreed. But they didn't start the negativity, they only amplified it. Hillary had 20 years of talk radio working against her from the start, and that alone is a difficult hill to climb. I think part of the reason Warren has announced her bid so early is so she can get on TV and control the narrative about her before the election cycle really gears up. And if she can get people talking about the ideas she brings rather than her as a person, it might even work.

Then again, maybe there's a video of Warren doing an awesome dance in college that the GOP could unearth.
Talk radio wasn’t even a “ thing” when Bill was governor; the negativity started where it all began.
I personally know people who have despised her long before they even knew who Rush was and never liked him.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
 

92tide

TideFans Legend
May 9, 2000
58,153
44,873
287
54
East Point, Ga, USA
I agree, but in reality, you really want to LIKE the candidate you are voting for. There has to be some enthusiasm about the candidacy. Human nature, I suppose.

Trump was able to garner some excitement. Many didn't realize the bad things they could be doing by voting to "shake up the system".

In many ways, an election is a popularity contest. Just the way it is. The one with the most energy and excitement wins. John Kerry came across as Lurch. Al Gore was a cartoon buffoon, listening to his advisers to much, looking insincere in his "Alpha Male" pose, etc. Hillary was just unlikable. That shrill, elitist tone. Cold. Bill Clinton could sell ice to eskimos. Hillary lacks all of that charm.
she wasn't that unlikable. she still won the popular vote by a very large margin and had the third highest number of votes cast for her (obama's wins in 2008 and 2012 were the most votes received for president, trump in 2016 and bush in 2004 were #s 4 and 5). the election was lost by a couple hundred thousands of votes in 2-3 mid-west states that were blanketed with a russian smear campaign that was working symbiotically with the gop puke funnel.

i still think the whole "unlikable" was in large part foisted upon her because she was outspoken (aka, shrill, cold, elitist). it followed her from arkansas and an entire industry/political party feasted off of it for 20+ years. it is a problem that pretty much all women face. many of the same things are said about pelosi (and will be ramped up again now that she is speaker)

mark it down, the exact same things will be said about warren/gillibran/harris as a reason they shouldn't run and should let the men handle things. i doubt it will gain as much traction this time, but we will be inundated with it.
 

92tide

TideFans Legend
May 9, 2000
58,153
44,873
287
54
East Point, Ga, USA
“May be”?????
Don’t dare give credit to the one whose original idea was what was moved toward. I despise “ political expediency”; either you are consistent in your beliefs or you’re not. I’ll side with consistency every.single.time.
When others don’t/won’t, you get Dump.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
"we got trump because we didn't support bernie"

purity pony nonsense.
 

92tide

TideFans Legend
May 9, 2000
58,153
44,873
287
54
East Point, Ga, USA
Talk radio wasn’t even a “ thing” when Bill was governor; the negativity started where it all began.
I personally know people who have despised her long before they even knew who Rush was and never liked him.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
all talk radio did was connect and amplify existing d-bags around the country.
 

uafanataum

All-American
Oct 18, 2014
2,917
1,366
182
Elizabeth Warren is really growing on me lately. While I've respected her fights against banks like Wells Fargo and her advocacy for greater consumer protection, she's not been my favorite rumored candidate for 2020. But if she actually builds a real platform aimed at tackling money and corruption in American politics, which I've long felt to be the most fundamental threat to our society, I will gladly reconsider. Bazz, this is what draining the swamp actually looks like.

Accountable Capitalism Act
- Corporations with over $1B revenue would be required to allow their workers to elect 40 percent of the membership of their board of directors.
- Corporate executives would be limited in their ability to sell shares of stock that they receive as pay; such shares be held for at least five years after they were received, and at least three years after a share buyback.
- Corporate political activity must be authorized by both 75% of shareholders and 75% of board members.

Anti-Corruption and Public Integrity Act
- Imposes a lifetime ban on lobbying for presidents, federal lawmakers, judges, and cabinet secretaries.
- Apply conflict of interest laws to presidents, vice presidents, senior government officials, and White House staff.
- Prohibits companies from immediately hiring or paying any senior government official from an agency/department/Congressional office recently lobbied by that company.
- Bans all lobbying on behalf of foreign governments.
- Mandates the release of tax returns for presidential candidates prior to their election and every year they hold office.
- Bans members of Congress, the White House staff, and federal judges from owning individual stocks, replacing them with managed investment accounts.
- Requires executive branch employees to recuse from all issues that might financially benefit themselves or a previous employer or client from the preceding 4 years.
While i like the second bill, I completely disagree with the first. Why should employers let employees tell them how to run their business? 5 years after receiving payment (stocks) for their services is too long to restrict someone from cashing in on what they earned. The Accountable Capitalism Act could be renamed the I hate capitalism act.
ETA : The one thing I like about that bill is requiring approval of 75% of shareholders and boars members for political activity.
 
Last edited:

CharminTide

Hall of Fame
Oct 23, 2005
7,319
2,032
187
While i like the second bill, I completely disagree with the first. Why should employers let employees tell them how to run their business? 5 years after receiving payment (stocks) for their services is too long to restrict someone from cashing in on what they earned. The Accountable Capitalism Act could be renamed the I hate capitalism act.
ETA : The one thing I like about that bill is requiring approval of 75% of shareholders and boars members for political activity.
Codetermination (the thing you don't like in the first bill) is pretty common outside the U.S. In Germany, for instance, most large companies have two boards: one executive board with the CEO and other senior executives. They also have a supervisory board that represents a 50/50 split between shareholder representatives and worker representatives. Data generally shows that this setup slightly lowers shareholder returns, but increases worker productivity and wages (LINK). Both this and the timed restriction on stock sales by outgoing executives are meant to limit the incentives for companies to bleed their workers for the benefit of stock price.
 

MattinBama

Hall of Fame
Jul 31, 2007
11,144
5,453
187
Both this and the timed restriction on stock sales by outgoing executives are meant to limit the incentives for companies to bleed their workers for the benefit of stock price.
Ah, ha! Gotcha my good sir! How exactly can you call it capitalism if you don't screw over the workers for the benefit of the rich!?!?!
 

uafanataum

All-American
Oct 18, 2014
2,917
1,366
182
Codetermination (the thing you don't like in the first bill) is pretty common outside the U.S. In Germany, for instance, most large companies have two boards: one executive board with the CEO and other senior executives. They also have a supervisory board that represents a 50/50 split between shareholder representatives and worker representatives. Data generally shows that this setup slightly lowers shareholder returns, but increases worker productivity and wages (LINK). Both this and the timed restriction on stock sales by outgoing executives are meant to limit the incentives for companies to bleed their workers for the benefit of stock price.
If you want a business that is partially run by the employees then start one. There is no need to step into a business that has been run a certain way for decades and tell them how to run it now.
 

Latest threads

TideFans.shop : 2024 Madness!

TideFans.shop - Get YOUR Bama Gear HERE!”></a>
<br />

<!--/ END TideFans.shop & item link \-->
<p style= Purchases made through our TideFans.shop and Amazon.com links may result in a commission being paid to TideFans.