Warren exposed for doing fancy wine fundraiser, which she used against Pete

[kupo 201]

She's hardly been exposed. 

Warren used to do plenty of this kind of fundraising, and her pledge not to is a recent development, though very much in line with an ideological transformation she's been undergoing for decades. Her point still stands, and she's still the one who has cut off that privileged point of access for the wealthy whereas Pete has not. Full stop.

That article is especially rich quoting an Obama associate defending Pete by saying that Warren is playing into Republicans' hands, given that Pete has become hellbent on torpedoing M4A by straight up regurgitating Republican framings on that issue. 

That said, as others in this thread have pointed out, Bernie's held this position for a long ass time and remains the candidate with the best policy and the most integrity. Also, outside of Biden (god help us all) he remains the best match up for Trump in a general.

This ain't a hard decision, is what I'm saying.

[dit 46,738]

This is why Bernie is the only answer 

[RAMROD 117,983]

Lots of people have wrong approach by taking rich people as enemy.  We don't have to. Taxing the wealthy is another matter and need to be done but there is just so much billionaires out there. They are called 1% for a reason. Even after all those taxes, trust me it won't still be enough to fund all these ridiculous socialist plans, many of those stuffs are not realistic cos it is needing way much more money than you think it is. People can hope, but you also need to know what really can be done. One need to know when a promise is too good to be true. Be realistic so to make sure these politicians are not only talk the talk, but can also walk the walk once elected.

Just so you know, the better a promise sounds to you, the harder that will come to realization, whoever the politician is. Even if they have the mean to do it. Government is complicated thing, and passing a plan is not that simple. There are lots of people involved and need to give it approval before it can happen. Except, ofc, you want your next President also do what Trump does by ignoring all those protocols, and just do things as he pleases, no permissions  needed.

 

[Guillaume Hamon 7,046]

3 hours ago, RAMROD said:

Just so you know, the better a promise sounds to you, the harder that will come to realization, whoever the politician is. Even if they have the mean to do it. Government is complicated thing, and passing a plan is not that simple. 

Don't worry people already know it well. They saw that there's no president who ever did all the things in his program.

They take a program as an IDEAL project and a "plan" done to show the positions of a candidate on pretty much every subjects even if he clearly will not treat all subjects in one ( or even two ) terms.

3 hours ago, RAMROD said:

Even after all those taxes, trust me it won't still be enough to fund all these ridiculous socialist plans, many of those stuffs are not realistic cos it is needing way much more money than you think it is.

Well let's take this money and then see how many of the plans can be done no?  

These wealth taxes would bring a lot of money and the cost of corruption is also huge so reducing it efficiently could be a big source of income as well. Add the removal of all the loopholes used by companies to avoid taxes and it will be one more significant source...

Even if after all that only one major of these plans could be financed that would already be a major change.

Also if you think about helping people to take care of their health ( for example ) you don't only have to spend a lot to refund individuals. A damn lot could be done just by fighting against the cost of drugs in the first place.

[PunkTheFunk 125,733]

6 hours ago, voidfigure said:

Where is this gif coming from? 

It's from episode 6 of the VH1 show Charm School 

[giskardsb 12,565]

Why does everyone seem to believe the GOP never did exactly the same thing lol. 

[pachinko 10,765]

Who cares. Stop sabatoging her. 

[SKANK 14,288]

 

On 12/22/2019 at 8:20 AM, kupo said:

She's hardly been exposed. 

Warren used to do plenty of this kind of fundraising, and her pledge not to is a recent development, though very much in line with an ideological transformation she's been undergoing for decades. Her point still stands, and she's still the one who has cut off that privileged point of access for the wealthy whereas Pete has not. Full stop.

That article is especially rich quoting an Obama associate defending Pete by saying that Warren is playing into Republicans' hands, given that Pete has become hellbent on torpedoing M4A by straight up regurgitating Republican framings on that issue. 

That said, as others in this thread have pointed out, Bernie's held this position for a long ass time and remains the candidate with the best policy and the most integrity. Also, outside of Biden (god help us all) he remains the best match up for Trump in a general.

This ain't a hard decision, is what I'm saying.

 

 

Pete and Warren's Presidential campaigns are both currently funded in part by elite private fundraising events. Full stop.

Warren rolled millions of dollars into her Presidential campaign which was raised last year for her Senatorial campaign, from events where guests were charged 120$ for a cheese steak, or were treated to a private concert by a rock star.

Warren's recent "development" on this issue may be genuine, but she is still currently reaping the rewards for having raised big money in private events a year earlier, while criticizing Pete for doing the same thing now. It's plainly hypocritical.

 

Welcome back by the way. I haven't seen you post in ages.