POLITICS Democratic Nominee 2020 Lollapalooza

Eh, not sure I agree with this. He uses it as a defense against the ridiculous purity test he's being hit with nonstop. He's highlighting their inherent flaws. I can guarantee he's not overjoyed at their triple digit student debt.

 

right he’s saying that he’s purer and a better person because he’s poor

 

No, he's pointing out the stupidity/hypocrisy of demonizing wealthy people for engaging in politics by wealthy people engaged in politics. He's trashing the wealth purity tests by demonstrating he'd score better than anyone else on stage. Pete has never engaged in the purity tests.

 

no. this is how you take these things.

 

I completely disagree. He’s telling them to stop attacking him for accepting money from millionaires and billionaires when that is who they are.

They are trying to cast him as a disconnected liberal elite - he’s just saying hold the [uck fay] up, you are what you are accusing me of....and then railing against that purity test.

 

Sounds like a battle of purity tests the way y'all describe it.

 

Pete might be applying some somewhere but not here.

 

Pete's obviously my guy, but I do not believe he gets the Dem nod. That said, the attacks he's been getting (especially highlighted in the last debate) shows folks are concerned about him. I wonder if this is only due to his position in Iowa or if his competitors are seeing something bigger on the ground or in internal polling. He's fourth in pretty much every national poll so it was surprising to see him get almost every attack in the debate.

 

Pete only stands a chance if Biden is damaged irreparably by impeachment and ongoing investigations. But even then his Super Tuesday wall of southern and many black voters will be an incredibly steep hill to climb. He needs to win the late March primaries in addition to Iowa and NH to have a small hope.

 

Just guessing, but maybe he hasn't paid his party dues just yet, so to speak.

 

Yep. His campaign is mega audacious, but some of his competition is exhibiting jealousy born from a sense of entitlement. He does not have the traditional experience mix of a presidential candidate and I think many are pissed he's polling much higher than are they. Here's what these candidates, pundits and party folks are missing: when it comes to regular people on the ground it's about who resonates with them and who engenders trust. Experience is important, but there are different kinds of experience. Maybe his mix of administrative, private sector and military is good enough for voters. The party and pundits may not like it, but it's not about them. It's about us.

 

I’m honestly not sure beyond Pete which dem I would want to support of the four or five front-runners.

Biden is moderate enough but so damn old.

 

I'm really surprised with Booker's performance. I thought he'd do much better. He's smart, experienced and can be a really good communicator. Klob is okay, but she can be petty at times which is a turn off. I think it's going to be Biden, but he is old and he's slipping. If it's Bernie we're [uck fay]ed.

 

Warren’s energy policy has me disinterested.

 

Just bizarre. It's one lie or distortion after another.

 

too fast? I do think any policy regarding leasing needs to be graduated. Let companies transition and adapt. Hell, I'd rather price carbon. that could encourage innovation in how fuels are extracted and used.

 

Price carbon means? Just curious.

 

Carbon price is reasonably to be expected at this point - certainly something already faced internationally and in Canada. We’ll see it at some point.

I found her call to ban fracking (all fracking not just federal land) on day one to be quite amateur hour.

 

assign a value per ton of co2 emitted by fuels. right now the cost is socialized. GOP members have been proposing this as a way to conform to the current market system.

This is different from a carbon credit scheme, where you buy "offsets". people game that and it doesn't actually lead to much provable benefit in some instances.

 

Ah yes. How long have we been proposing these things? It seems like I remember this as a concept so long ago now. It's a little more appealing (to me) than using credits. Credits have always just seemed like green crony capitalism. I still prefer a more draconian system of low hard limits with heavy fines. I teeter on the edge of skepticism, but if we are going to regulate, we should regulate based on need rather than taking it easy on industry or creating another revenue stream for Washington.