Continuing to Discuss the [2020 Primary] and Not Other Stuff

iTunesIsEvil

I'm just going to blatantly steal Jeffe's OP from the last thread:

Hi, here is a thread to talk about the Democratic primary. Don't fuck it up, please.

enlightenedbum

Bernie's 4th quarter fundraising was $34.5 million. Almost certainly going to be top in the field.

Also Trump's was kind of weak for an incumbent, especially a Republican. Only 46 million, which is going to be something like half to a third of what the Democratic field raises. Obviously he doesn't have to spend it.

Mazzyx

Castro has dropped out

I am a bit sad by this but he hasn't made the last two debates and really hasn't been a force since the summer. But he had some good ideas and was a decent candidate.

Ladai

Warren has released her plan for protecting and expanding the rights of people with disabilities.

https://twitter.com/ewarren/status/1212765606648406017

People with disabilities are still fighting for economic security, equal opportunity, and inclusion—and they’re not fighting alone. As president, I'll partner with the disability community to combat ableism and fight for justice across all aspects of life.

It is...extensive. I'm at work right now and can't really go through all of it at the moment. Some things that jumped out at me while on my lunch break:

Eliminating the SSDI benefit and Medicare waiting periods. For nearly half of beneficiaries, SSDI makes up 90% or more of their monthly income. Currently, federal law requires a 5 month waiting period before getting benefits after receiving an SSDI eligibility determination. It also requires a 24 month waiting period before accessing Medicare. Any waiting period is too long when it comes to accessing health care and crucial financial support. My plan will eliminate the benefit and Medicare waiting periods altogether.

Fixing the SSDI return-to-work benefit cliff. Under current law, returning to work requires SSDI-eligible workers to risk their economic security, because they lose all benefits when their earnings go one dollar above the earnings threshold: $2,110 for blind individuals and $1,260 for non-blind individuals in 2020. People with disabilities should not be penalized for trying to get back in the workforce, and I’ll continue to fight to ensure they’re not being penalized. My plan would set the threshold at $2,110 for all individuals and index it to inflation and create an offset of $1 for every $2 earned above the threshold so that benefits gradually zero out.

Improving the SSI program. SSI provides crucial financial support for basic living expenses to 8.1 million people who have little to no income — children with severe disabilities that limit caretakers’ ability to work, adults with disabilities, and low-income seniors. In 2019, the maximum monthly SSI benefit was $771 for individuals — far below the federal poverty line. More than half of SSI recipients have no working earnings and rely on SSI as their primary form of income. As President, I’ll fight to increase the SSI federal benefit rate to match the federal poverty line. And I’ll establish a hold harmless provision so that recipients don’t lose access to other critical programs from the benefit rate increase. But I won’t stop there. I’ll fight to revise woefully outdated and punitive eligibility and income rules, like increasing the unearned income disregard from $20 to $123 and the earned income disregard from $65 to $399, and repeal the in-kind support and maintenance, transfer, and marriage penalties. I will eliminate the asset limit and update the deeming rule to break down barriers to saving, financial independence, and marriage, and I’ll set the earnings eligibility threshold at $2,110 to match SSDI. I'll fight to end the loss of benefits for individuals that are admitted to medical facilities or emergency homeless shelters for longer periods of time. Finally, I will fight to expand SSI benefits to citizens in territories like Puerto Rico to establish equal rights to SSI for all Americans.

Establish a federal standard on use-of-force and increase funding for police training. A federal standard for law enforcement use of force that incorporates proven approaches and strategies like de-escalation can help protect individuals with disabilities. I’ll provide tools and resources to ensure that best practices on law enforcement training are available across America, giving local police what they need to meet federal training requirements, including training on implicit bias and the scientific and psychological roots of discrimination, cultural competency, and engaging individuals with cognitive or other disabilities.

Stop criminalizing homelessness. A Warren administration will commit federal funds to the goal of ending homelessness in our country, but we must also address laws that penalize people who are homeless and draw them into the justice system instead of giving them access to the services they need. These laws disproportionately impact people with disabilities. My Department of Justice will not fund efforts to criminalize homelessness and will deny grant money to police departments who are arresting residents for living outside.

Decriminalize mental health crises. Police officers are the de facto first mental health providers in our country. Instead of relying on a system that is not meant to meet their needs, we should invest in preventing people from reaching those crisis points in the first place. In addition to investing in Medicare for All to provide critical mental health services, I’ll increase funding for “co-responder” initiatives that connect law enforcement to mental health care providers and experts. And my administration will pilot evidence-based crisis response efforts to provide needed services to individuals with mental illness.

Decriminalize poverty. Facing a greater risk of economic insecurity due to poverty and fixed incomes, people with disabilities are particularly vulnerable to the fines and fees levied by our legal system. These fees criminalize poverty, leaving low-income individuals entangled in the legal system with no means of getting out. That’s why I’ve committed to ending cash bail, restricting fines and fees levied before adjudication, capping the assessment of fines and fees, and eliminating fees for necessary services like phone calls.

Enforce the ADA in the legal system and in access to counsel. People with disabilities face barriers in the legal system at all levels of involvement — as jurors, criminal defendants, litigants, attorneys and court employees. I’ve committed to strengthening public defenders and expanding access to counsel by providing funding for language and cultural competency training, including on treatment of individuals with disabilities, so that public defenders are best able to serve their clients. And I’ll expand training and technical assistance for law enforcement, prosecutors, judges, and victim services providers, ensuring that all participants in the legal system are able to work with people with disabilities who are witnesses, jurors, victims of crimes, or defendants.

And a lot more. The whole thing is here: https://elizabethwarren.com/plans/disability-rights-and-equality?source=soc-WB-ew-tw-rollout-20200102

Cog

Mazzyx wrote: »

Castro has dropped out

I am a bit sad by this but he hasn't made the last two debates and really hasn't been a force since the summer. But he had some good ideas and was a decent candidate.

Feels like name recognition has driven the ability to be a top tier candidate, and money has driven the ability to stay in the race at all.

shryke

Cog wrote: »

Mazzyx wrote: »

Castro has dropped out

I am a bit sad by this but he hasn't made the last two debates and really hasn't been a force since the summer. But he had some good ideas and was a decent candidate.

Feels like name recognition has driven the ability to be a top tier candidate, and money has driven the ability to stay in the race at all.

Yup. The primary race has become almost completely national and so the biggest driver is name recognition. The ability for small-time candidates to push themselves into the top tier playing local politics in early states has basically vanished.

A lot of the candidates have been kind of shocked by the change it seems and so have gone nowhere.

If Biden easily sails to victory in the primary, this will only demonstrate this issue even more.

Athenor

Woah. Addressing disability concerns with regards to police, the justice system, ADA, poverty, and mental illness?

I am still a Warren supporter, but I hope that if anyone else gets the nod, they just go "yup, we're using her plans."

Smrtnik

Ladai wrote: »

Warren has released her plan for protecting and expanding the rights of people with disabilities.

https://twitter.com/ewarren/status/1212765606648406017

People with disabilities are still fighting for economic security, equal opportunity, and inclusion—and they’re not fighting alone. As president, I'll partner with the disability community to combat ableism and fight for justice across all aspects of life.

It is...extensive. I'm at work right now and can't really go through all of it at the moment. Some things that jumped out at me while on my lunch break:

Eliminating the SSDI benefit and Medicare waiting periods. For nearly half of beneficiaries, SSDI makes up 90% or more of their monthly income. Currently, federal law requires a 5 month waiting period before getting benefits after receiving an SSDI eligibility determination. It also requires a 24 month waiting period before accessing Medicare. Any waiting period is too long when it comes to accessing health care and crucial financial support. My plan will eliminate the benefit and Medicare waiting periods altogether.

Fixing the SSDI return-to-work benefit cliff. Under current law, returning to work requires SSDI-eligible workers to risk their economic security, because they lose all benefits when their earnings go one dollar above the earnings threshold: $2,110 for blind individuals and $1,260 for non-blind individuals in 2020. People with disabilities should not be penalized for trying to get back in the workforce, and I’ll continue to fight to ensure they’re not being penalized. My plan would set the threshold at $2,110 for all individuals and index it to inflation and create an offset of $1 for every $2 earned above the threshold so that benefits gradually zero out.

Improving the SSI program. SSI provides crucial financial support for basic living expenses to 8.1 million people who have little to no income — children with severe disabilities that limit caretakers’ ability to work, adults with disabilities, and low-income seniors. In 2019, the maximum monthly SSI benefit was $771 for individuals — far below the federal poverty line. More than half of SSI recipients have no working earnings and rely on SSI as their primary form of income. As President, I’ll fight to increase the SSI federal benefit rate to match the federal poverty line. And I’ll establish a hold harmless provision so that recipients don’t lose access to other critical programs from the benefit rate increase. But I won’t stop there. I’ll fight to revise woefully outdated and punitive eligibility and income rules, like increasing the unearned income disregard from $20 to $123 and the earned income disregard from $65 to $399, and repeal the in-kind support and maintenance, transfer, and marriage penalties. I will eliminate the asset limit and update the deeming rule to break down barriers to saving, financial independence, and marriage, and I’ll set the earnings eligibility threshold at $2,110 to match SSDI. I'll fight to end the loss of benefits for individuals that are admitted to medical facilities or emergency homeless shelters for longer periods of time. Finally, I will fight to expand SSI benefits to citizens in territories like Puerto Rico to establish equal rights to SSI for all Americans.

Establish a federal standard on use-of-force and increase funding for police training. A federal standard for law enforcement use of force that incorporates proven approaches and strategies like de-escalation can help protect individuals with disabilities. I’ll provide tools and resources to ensure that best practices on law enforcement training are available across America, giving local police what they need to meet federal training requirements, including training on implicit bias and the scientific and psychological roots of discrimination, cultural competency, and engaging individuals with cognitive or other disabilities.

Stop criminalizing homelessness. A Warren administration will commit federal funds to the goal of ending homelessness in our country, but we must also address laws that penalize people who are homeless and draw them into the justice system instead of giving them access to the services they need. These laws disproportionately impact people with disabilities. My Department of Justice will not fund efforts to criminalize homelessness and will deny grant money to police departments who are arresting residents for living outside.

Decriminalize mental health crises. Police officers are the de facto first mental health providers in our country. Instead of relying on a system that is not meant to meet their needs, we should invest in preventing people from reaching those crisis points in the first place. In addition to investing in Medicare for All to provide critical mental health services, I’ll increase funding for “co-responder” initiatives that connect law enforcement to mental health care providers and experts. And my administration will pilot evidence-based crisis response efforts to provide needed services to individuals with mental illness.

Decriminalize poverty. Facing a greater risk of economic insecurity due to poverty and fixed incomes, people with disabilities are particularly vulnerable to the fines and fees levied by our legal system. These fees criminalize poverty, leaving low-income individuals entangled in the legal system with no means of getting out. That’s why I’ve committed to ending cash bail, restricting fines and fees levied before adjudication, capping the assessment of fines and fees, and eliminating fees for necessary services like phone calls.

Enforce the ADA in the legal system and in access to counsel. People with disabilities face barriers in the legal system at all levels of involvement — as jurors, criminal defendants, litigants, attorneys and court employees. I’ve committed to strengthening public defenders and expanding access to counsel by providing funding for language and cultural competency training, including on treatment of individuals with disabilities, so that public defenders are best able to serve their clients. And I’ll expand training and technical assistance for law enforcement, prosecutors, judges, and victim services providers, ensuring that all participants in the legal system are able to work with people with disabilities who are witnesses, jurors, victims of crimes, or defendants.

And a lot more. The whole thing is here: https://elizabethwarren.com/plans/disability-rights-and-equality?source=soc-WB-ew-tw-rollout-20200102

It's a real shame she won't be president (hot take i know). She's gone the most from "i don't like her" to "she's the smartest and most prepared person for the presidency in my living memory ever" for me. I don't mean this one specific plan. All i knew if her before the primary is when she got her current seat she was on a stage and got introduced a then there is silence and someone goes "that would be you to speak now" to her (I'm paraphrasing) and she goes oh Duval can. And i was like, who is this empty suit?

Then over the course of the probably i realized she was just an academic that didn't understand how political speeches work. Her being a dork it's not a huge positive for me, especially after 3 years in White House and 9 years in Congress if the "know nothings" bring in charge.


I'm guessing we get Biden v Trump in general though. Sad.

Athenor

Only if people give into those who claim that outcome is inevitable.

spool32

A Biden / Warren ticket would be good for Dem unity.

Athenor

spool32 wrote: »

A Biden / Warren ticket would be good for Dem unity.

While I'd prefer her at the top of the ticket, I think this would be an amazing outcome too, because she might be able to pull off some of the billionaire influence that is trying to latch onto Biden.

Styrofoam Sammich

The VP office would pretty effectively neuter any kind of legislative agenda Warren has. If she cant win the WH she should stay in the Senate.

Athenor

Styrofoam Sammich wrote: »

The VP office would pretty effectively neuter any kind of legislative agenda Warren has. If she cant win the WH she should stay in the Senate.

I dunno. The role of VP can vary quite heavily based on the President. Say, for instance, Warren took up the "Dark Sith" role that Chaney did as VP. I'd be quite okay with that.

Styrofoam Sammich

Athenor wrote: »

Styrofoam Sammich wrote: »

The VP office would pretty effectively neuter any kind of legislative agenda Warren has. If she cant win the WH she should stay in the Senate.

I dunno. The role of VP can vary quite heavily based on the President. Say, for instance, Warren took up the "Dark Sith" role that Chaney did as VP. I'd be quite okay with that.

If she's VP under Biden she's going to be spending a lot of time pushing his Make Children Respectful To Seniors Act of 2020 than any kind of real progressive legislation, especially compared to a prominate role in the Senate.

VP isnt going to get to act meaningfully to the left of the President.

Marathon

I wouldn’t mind a Biden/Warren ticket, except I think Warren would be better in the Senate and I’m pretty sure the two of them legit dislike each other.

Athenor

Understood. I was just entertaining the hypothetical Spool put forward. Doesn't change my preference. It feels like the "common wisdom" is that we need a unity ticket to muster a defense against Trump, and that's what Biden is selling himself as - IE electibility. Personally, I'd like to elect someone who makes me excited to be an American again, and Warren checks many of those boxes. But I've also grown up around strong women like that, so I might be skewed.

PantsB

shryke wrote: »

Cog wrote: »

Mazzyx wrote: »

Castro has dropped out

I am a bit sad by this but he hasn't made the last two debates and really hasn't been a force since the summer. But he had some good ideas and was a decent candidate.

Feels like name recognition has driven the ability to be a top tier candidate, and money has driven the ability to stay in the race at all.

Yup. The primary race has become almost completely national and so the biggest driver is name recognition. The ability for small-time candidates to push themselves into the top tier playing local politics in early states has basically vanished.

A lot of the candidates have been kind of shocked by the change it seems and so have gone nowhere.

If Biden easily sails to victory in the primary, this will only demonstrate this issue even more.

The emphasis on donations to qualify for debates and the emphasis on having huge debates also probably choked out any one who wasn't already a big name. With a debate stage that has the former VP, the 2nd place finisher from last cycle, and one of the most prominent and respected Senators (and frequent Trump target) there's already a limited amount of oxygen. Spread it out over 10 other candidates who don't differ that radically on policy and it's hard to stand out.

No-Quarter

Joe also may very well have to step down or even die before his term is up. Having Warren as the fallback neuters a lot of my concern if Joe cant go the distance.

Styrofoam Sammich

enlightenedbum wrote: »

Bernie's 4th quarter fundraising was $34.5 million. Almost certainly going to be top in the field.

Also Trump's was kind of weak for an incumbent, especially a Republican. Only 46 million, which is going to be something like half to a third of what the Democratic field raises. Obviously he doesn't have to spend it.

Most common Q4 donor profession for Sanders is given as Teacher and most common employers are Target, Walmart, and USPS.

Its a pretty big deal.

joshofalltrades

I think there’s going to have to be a fundamental shift in this race for anybody but Biden to win. Somebody is going to have to drop out and endorse someone else or another major thing shakes it up. Nobody is drinking Joe’s milkshake to the point that he’s in danger. Yeah there haven’t been any votes cast yet but I can read a poll.

Styrofoam Sammich

joshofalltrades wrote: »

I think there’s going to have to be a fundamental shift in this race for anybody but Biden to win. Somebody is going to have to drop out and endorse someone else or another major thing shakes it up. Nobody is drinking Joe’s milkshake to the point that he’s in danger. Yeah there haven’t been any votes cast yet but I can read a poll.

Depends on early primaries. Theyre hardly on lock for Biden and if Sanders or Pete do well that could be the game.

Athenor

So far, none of the primary debates have been on network TV, right?

I still have this gut feeling (IE completely made up) that the majority of the electorate is riding on name recognition still, and hasn't actually looked at the candidates.

Unknown

This content has been removed.

Captain Inertia

Athenor wrote: »

So far, none of the primary debates have been on network TV, right?

I still have this gut feeling (IE completely made up) that the majority of the electorate is riding on name recognition still, and hasn't actually looked at the candidates.

the impeachment sucked the wind out of the sails of the primary, which is fine

this story will take over again once people start voting

PantsB

Ladai wrote: »

Warren has released her plan for protecting and expanding the rights of people with disabilities.

https://twitter.com/ewarren/status/1212765606648406017

People with disabilities are still fighting for economic security, equal opportunity, and inclusion—and they’re not fighting alone. As president, I'll partner with the disability community to combat ableism and fight for justice across all aspects of life.

It is...extensive. I'm at work right now and can't really go through all of it at the moment. Some things that jumped out at me while on my lunch break:

Eliminating the SSDI benefit and Medicare waiting periods. For nearly half of beneficiaries, SSDI makes up 90% or more of their monthly income. Currently, federal law requires a 5 month waiting period before getting benefits after receiving an SSDI eligibility determination. It also requires a 24 month waiting period before accessing Medicare. Any waiting period is too long when it comes to accessing health care and crucial financial support. My plan will eliminate the benefit and Medicare waiting periods altogether.

Fixing the SSDI return-to-work benefit cliff. Under current law, returning to work requires SSDI-eligible workers to risk their economic security, because they lose all benefits when their earnings go one dollar above the earnings threshold: $2,110 for blind individuals and $1,260 for non-blind individuals in 2020. People with disabilities should not be penalized for trying to get back in the workforce, and I’ll continue to fight to ensure they’re not being penalized. My plan would set the threshold at $2,110 for all individuals and index it to inflation and create an offset of $1 for every $2 earned above the threshold so that benefits gradually zero out.

Improving the SSI program. SSI provides crucial financial support for basic living expenses to 8.1 million people who have little to no income — children with severe disabilities that limit caretakers’ ability to work, adults with disabilities, and low-income seniors. In 2019, the maximum monthly SSI benefit was $771 for individuals — far below the federal poverty line. More than half of SSI recipients have no working earnings and rely on SSI as their primary form of income. As President, I’ll fight to increase the SSI federal benefit rate to match the federal poverty line. And I’ll establish a hold harmless provision so that recipients don’t lose access to other critical programs from the benefit rate increase. But I won’t stop there. I’ll fight to revise woefully outdated and punitive eligibility and income rules, like increasing the unearned income disregard from $20 to $123 and the earned income disregard from $65 to $399, and repeal the in-kind support and maintenance, transfer, and marriage penalties. I will eliminate the asset limit and update the deeming rule to break down barriers to saving, financial independence, and marriage, and I’ll set the earnings eligibility threshold at $2,110 to match SSDI. I'll fight to end the loss of benefits for individuals that are admitted to medical facilities or emergency homeless shelters for longer periods of time. Finally, I will fight to expand SSI benefits to citizens in territories like Puerto Rico to establish equal rights to SSI for all Americans.

Establish a federal standard on use-of-force and increase funding for police training. A federal standard for law enforcement use of force that incorporates proven approaches and strategies like de-escalation can help protect individuals with disabilities. I’ll provide tools and resources to ensure that best practices on law enforcement training are available across America, giving local police what they need to meet federal training requirements, including training on implicit bias and the scientific and psychological roots of discrimination, cultural competency, and engaging individuals with cognitive or other disabilities.

Stop criminalizing homelessness. A Warren administration will commit federal funds to the goal of ending homelessness in our country, but we must also address laws that penalize people who are homeless and draw them into the justice system instead of giving them access to the services they need. These laws disproportionately impact people with disabilities. My Department of Justice will not fund efforts to criminalize homelessness and will deny grant money to police departments who are arresting residents for living outside.

Decriminalize mental health crises. Police officers are the de facto first mental health providers in our country. Instead of relying on a system that is not meant to meet their needs, we should invest in preventing people from reaching those crisis points in the first place. In addition to investing in Medicare for All to provide critical mental health services, I’ll increase funding for “co-responder” initiatives that connect law enforcement to mental health care providers and experts. And my administration will pilot evidence-based crisis response efforts to provide needed services to individuals with mental illness.

Decriminalize poverty. Facing a greater risk of economic insecurity due to poverty and fixed incomes, people with disabilities are particularly vulnerable to the fines and fees levied by our legal system. These fees criminalize poverty, leaving low-income individuals entangled in the legal system with no means of getting out. That’s why I’ve committed to ending cash bail, restricting fines and fees levied before adjudication, capping the assessment of fines and fees, and eliminating fees for necessary services like phone calls.

Enforce the ADA in the legal system and in access to counsel. People with disabilities face barriers in the legal system at all levels of involvement — as jurors, criminal defendants, litigants, attorneys and court employees. I’ve committed to strengthening public defenders and expanding access to counsel by providing funding for language and cultural competency training, including on treatment of individuals with disabilities, so that public defenders are best able to serve their clients. And I’ll expand training and technical assistance for law enforcement, prosecutors, judges, and victim services providers, ensuring that all participants in the legal system are able to work with people with disabilities who are witnesses, jurors, victims of crimes, or defendants.

And a lot more. The whole thing is here: https://elizabethwarren.com/plans/disability-rights-and-equality?source=soc-WB-ew-tw-rollout-20200102

I'm going through it now. I think one of things about Warren plans - and you can see this as negative or positive - is she liberally takes from other candidates.

For instance the Warren plan starts (with specific policies bolded)

Building economic security for people with disabilities means rewriting the rules of the economy to foster inclusivity, value their labor, and end labor market discrimination and exploitation. The first step is ensuring workers with disabilities get a fair wage: I’m committed to fighting for a minimum wage of $15 an hour for all workers, ending the shameful subminimum wage. I’ll push to pass the Transformation to Competitive Employment Act to help transition individuals with disabilities and business models from subminimum wage to competitive employment. My administration will fight discrimination in the labor market and the workplace by increasing funding for civil rights enforcement at the EEOC and the Department of Justice. I will also ensure that the Department of Labor is enforcing section 503 of the Rehabiliation Act and protecing disabled veterans against work discrimination. And my plan for national paid family and medical leave will ensure that workers get the time off they need to care for themselves - or for family members with disabilities - without risking their financial security.

Take the start of the Harris equivalent plan released six months ago. (Her family leave part is in a different paragraph).

She’ll pass the Transformation to Competitive Employment Act, which will establish a grant program for states to help redesign business models and strategies to increase employment of people with disabilities in competitive integrated employment.

People with disabilities are both more likely to work in low wage fields as well as be paid less than the minimum wage. That’s why she’ll pass the Raise the Wage Act, which will not only raise the minimum wage to $15 an hour but will also phase out the “subminimum” wage.
...
Federal civil rights laws, including the Americans with Disabilities Act, Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, and Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act already require that our transportation systems and housing projects be fully accessible.

To a certain extent this is inevitable because they work up consensus in dem circles and then that's also their platform positions. But Warren does it really well and has managed to project a reputation that she is the one with the Plans.

Later Castro came out with his plan, also from the first paragraph including actual policy:

Beyond raising the minimum wage to at least $15 dollars and connecting future increases to the cost of living, we will eliminate the subminimum wage repealing Section 14c of the Fair Labor Standards Act, an unjust loophole that allows workers with disabilities to be paid mere pennies every hour. Building on President Obama’s leadership, the federal government will also recommit to being a model inclusive workplace by hiring more people with disabilities to reflect the diversity of America, enforcing Section 501 and 503 of the Rehabilitation Act, and using the procurement process to support entrepreneurs with disabilities.

This is a difference not in Harris's

Fixing the SSDI return-to-work benefit cliff. Under current law, returning to work requires SSDI-eligible workers to risk their economic security, because they lose all benefits when their earnings go one dollar above the earnings threshold: $2,110 for blind individuals and $1,260 for non-blind individuals in 2020. People with disabilities should not be penalized for trying to get back in the workforce, and I’ll continue to fight to ensure they’re not being penalized. My plan would set the threshold at $2,110 for all individuals and index it to inflation and create an offset of $1 for every $2 earned above the threshold so that benefits gradually zero out.

Doing research this has been proposed broadly for 20+ years and I don't really see why it hasn't been passed. So was this something original to the Presidential campaign first introduced to the debate by Warren? Not really. It was in Castro's plan from Nov and also Buttigieg's plan released in November which also coincidentally or not took most of Harris's key points as well.

Ultimately Warren has a good platform here but not that much that wasn't previously proposed by Warren and Castro (and Pete I guess but fuck Pete). Warren emphasizes ADA compliance for schools, Castro for public housing and Harris for transportation and public housing but there's very little to separate them on almost all of the core issues. Issues that touch on the rights of the disabled - variations on paid leave, healthcare plans, and her universal child care for instance - differ on specifics but not that much and on many of the less flashy policy areas her plans are actually later and not really more detailed than earlier plans.

Is being arguably derivative bad? I don't really think so, good policy is good policy (if perhaps it would be better to credit it in an ideal world, but this isn't an ideal world). But somehow Warren became the candidate with PLANS while very little other policy is even referenced. I am not positive how she did that, but it has served her well, because every time she releases a plan people notice.

edit
And on credit I should say Warren does credit others once they are out of the race I don't really blame her for not crediting when they are still rivals

override367

JusticeforPluto wrote: »

Yeah, in order for Warren or Sanders to win I think one or the other would have to drop out. But they are so close I dont see either doing so.

Plus Biden might actually GAIN supporters.

Someone can educate on me on this if I'm wrong, but I'm pretty sure if one of them drops out before the convention and endorses the other, they can get their delegates right?

I'm assuming we won't end up in a situation where 60% of the delegates are for Sanders or Warren but all the superdelegates coronate Biden anyway

PantsB

override367 wrote: »

JusticeforPluto wrote: »

Yeah, in order for Warren or Sanders to win I think one or the other would have to drop out. But they are so close I dont see either doing so.

Plus Biden might actually GAIN supporters.

Someone can educate on me on this if I'm wrong, but I'm pretty sure if one of them drops out before the convention and endorses the other, they can get their delegates right?

I'm assuming we won't end up in a situation where 60% of the delegates are for Sanders or Warren but all the superdelegates coronate Biden anyway

I think it would be electoral suicide if the candidate who won the most delegates/voters was denied the nomination due to a deal between #2 and #3.

Butters

No-Quarter wrote: »

Joe also may very well have to step down or even die before his term is up. Having Warren as the fallback neuters a lot of my concern if Joe cant go the distance.

As a Warren supporter and donor, she's not exactly youthful representation being old enough to be Pete's mom.

enlightenedbum

override367 wrote: »

JusticeforPluto wrote: »

Yeah, in order for Warren or Sanders to win I think one or the other would have to drop out. But they are so close I dont see either doing so.

Plus Biden might actually GAIN supporters.

Someone can educate on me on this if I'm wrong, but I'm pretty sure if one of them drops out before the convention and endorses the other, they can get their delegates right?

I'm assuming we won't end up in a situation where 60% of the delegates are for Sanders or Warren but all the superdelegates coronate Biden anyway

Supers can't, on the first ballot. Majority of pledged = nomination.

PantsB

Butters wrote: »

No-Quarter wrote: »

Joe also may very well have to step down or even die before his term is up. Having Warren as the fallback neuters a lot of my concern if Joe cant go the distance.

As a Warren supporter and donor, she's not exactly youthful representation being old enough to be Pete's mom.

She would be the oldest President ever on inauguration by like 358 days (Trump).

Biden would be older on his inauguration than any President has been on his last day in office by like 80 days. Sanders is about a year older.

It's fucking batshit in terms of age that one of them is almost certainly going to be our nominee but it's where we are. We've nominated someone born in the early 1940s in 92, 00, 04 and 16 and now we're going to do it in 2020.

shryke

PantsB wrote: »

shryke wrote: »

Cog wrote: »

Mazzyx wrote: »

Castro has dropped out

I am a bit sad by this but he hasn't made the last two debates and really hasn't been a force since the summer. But he had some good ideas and was a decent candidate.

Feels like name recognition has driven the ability to be a top tier candidate, and money has driven the ability to stay in the race at all.

Yup. The primary race has become almost completely national and so the biggest driver is name recognition. The ability for small-time candidates to push themselves into the top tier playing local politics in early states has basically vanished.

A lot of the candidates have been kind of shocked by the change it seems and so have gone nowhere.

If Biden easily sails to victory in the primary, this will only demonstrate this issue even more.

The emphasis on donations to qualify for debates and the emphasis on having huge debates also probably choked out any one who wasn't already a big name. With a debate stage that has the former VP, the 2nd place finisher from last cycle, and one of the most prominent and respected Senators (and frequent Trump target) there's already a limited amount of oxygen. Spread it out over 10 other candidates who don't differ that radically on policy and it's hard to stand out.

The emphasis on donations has also caused a big shift in how money has been spent in this primary afaik. These candidates are pouring a ton of resources into meeting the qualifications for debates. Especially the ones not in the top 3 or 4.

PantsB

shryke wrote: »

PantsB wrote: »

shryke wrote: »

Cog wrote: »

Mazzyx wrote: »

Castro has dropped out

I am a bit sad by this but he hasn't made the last two debates and really hasn't been a force since the summer. But he had some good ideas and was a decent candidate.

Feels like name recognition has driven the ability to be a top tier candidate, and money has driven the ability to stay in the race at all.

Yup. The primary race has become almost completely national and so the biggest driver is name recognition. The ability for small-time candidates to push themselves into the top tier playing local politics in early states has basically vanished.

A lot of the candidates have been kind of shocked by the change it seems and so have gone nowhere.

If Biden easily sails to victory in the primary, this will only demonstrate this issue even more.

The emphasis on donations to qualify for debates and the emphasis on having huge debates also probably choked out any one who wasn't already a big name. With a debate stage that has the former VP, the 2nd place finisher from last cycle, and one of the most prominent and respected Senators (and frequent Trump target) there's already a limited amount of oxygen. Spread it out over 10 other candidates who don't differ that radically on policy and it's hard to stand out.

The emphasis on donations has also caused a big shift in how money has been spent in this primary afaik. These candidates are pouring a ton of resources into meeting the qualifications for debates. Especially the ones not in the top 3 or 4.

Huge win for consultants and fundraisers though I'm sure

shryke

PantsB wrote: »

override367 wrote: »

JusticeforPluto wrote: »

Yeah, in order for Warren or Sanders to win I think one or the other would have to drop out. But they are so close I dont see either doing so.

Plus Biden might actually GAIN supporters.

Someone can educate on me on this if I'm wrong, but I'm pretty sure if one of them drops out before the convention and endorses the other, they can get their delegates right?

I'm assuming we won't end up in a situation where 60% of the delegates are for Sanders or Warren but all the superdelegates coronate Biden anyway

I think it would be electoral suicide if the candidate who won the most delegates/voters was denied the nomination due to a deal between #2 and #3.

That only happens if the "winner" is under 50% of delegates anyway, in which case afaik deal-making is explicitly on the books because nothing gets decided in round 1.

Athenor

Butters wrote: »

No-Quarter wrote: »

Joe also may very well have to step down or even die before his term is up. Having Warren as the fallback neuters a lot of my concern if Joe cant go the distance.

As a Warren supporter and donor, she's not exactly youthful representation being old enough to be Pete's mom.

My mom just turned 70 and is often the smartest, most aware person in the room.

I get that we need some younger representation, but there is something to be said for experience and wisdom in the position.

shryke

Styrofoam Sammich wrote: »

joshofalltrades wrote: »

I think there’s going to have to be a fundamental shift in this race for anybody but Biden to win. Somebody is going to have to drop out and endorse someone else or another major thing shakes it up. Nobody is drinking Joe’s milkshake to the point that he’s in danger. Yeah there haven’t been any votes cast yet but I can read a poll.

Depends on early primaries. Theyre hardly on lock for Biden and if Sanders or Pete do well that could be the game.

That's gonna be interesting to see. I really wonder how much the media narrative from those first few states can effect the race. I think it's entirely up in the air whether it matters or not anymore. We just don't know.

Styrofoam Sammich

shryke wrote: »

Styrofoam Sammich wrote: »

joshofalltrades wrote: »

I think there’s going to have to be a fundamental shift in this race for anybody but Biden to win. Somebody is going to have to drop out and endorse someone else or another major thing shakes it up. Nobody is drinking Joe’s milkshake to the point that he’s in danger. Yeah there haven’t been any votes cast yet but I can read a poll.

Depends on early primaries. Theyre hardly on lock for Biden and if Sanders or Pete do well that could be the game.

That's gonna be interesting to see. I really wonder how much the media narrative from those first few states can effect the race. I think it's entirely up in the air whether it matters or not anymore. We just don't know.

Gut instinct says Biden is holding mostly on name recognition and thats a soft foundation for a lead.

shryke

PantsB wrote: »

Butters wrote: »

No-Quarter wrote: »

Joe also may very well have to step down or even die before his term is up. Having Warren as the fallback neuters a lot of my concern if Joe cant go the distance.

As a Warren supporter and donor, she's not exactly youthful representation being old enough to be Pete's mom.

She would be the oldest President ever on inauguration by like 358 days (Trump).

Biden would be older on his inauguration than any President has been on his last day in office by like 80 days. Sanders is about a year older.

It's fucking batshit in terms of age that one of them is almost certainly going to be our nominee but it's where we are. We've nominated someone born in the early 1940s in 92, 00, 04 and 16 and now we're going to do it in 2020.

The crazy thing with this to me is that two of those 3 candidates way up at the top of the age bracket are the ones connecting with the youth vote in the primary the strongest.

Even fucking Babyface Buttigieg's youth polling sucks last I saw.

HamHamJ

PantsB wrote: »

override367 wrote: »

JusticeforPluto wrote: »

Yeah, in order for Warren or Sanders to win I think one or the other would have to drop out. But they are so close I dont see either doing so.

Plus Biden might actually GAIN supporters.

Someone can educate on me on this if I'm wrong, but I'm pretty sure if one of them drops out before the convention and endorses the other, they can get their delegates right?

I'm assuming we won't end up in a situation where 60% of the delegates are for Sanders or Warren but all the superdelegates coronate Biden anyway

I think it would be electoral suicide if the candidate who won the most delegates/voters was denied the nomination due to a deal between #2 and #3.

It shouldn't be. Over half of voters didn't want the "frontrunner" and if the people they chose to represent them agree more with each other than it is reasonable that they decide on a compromise between them

Mild Confusion

Styrofoam Sammich wrote: »

shryke wrote: »

Styrofoam Sammich wrote: »

joshofalltrades wrote: »

I think there’s going to have to be a fundamental shift in this race for anybody but Biden to win. Somebody is going to have to drop out and endorse someone else or another major thing shakes it up. Nobody is drinking Joe’s milkshake to the point that he’s in danger. Yeah there haven’t been any votes cast yet but I can read a poll.

Depends on early primaries. Theyre hardly on lock for Biden and if Sanders or Pete do well that could be the game.

That's gonna be interesting to see. I really wonder how much the media narrative from those first few states can effect the race. I think it's entirely up in the air whether it matters or not anymore. We just don't know.

Gut instinct says Biden is holding mostly on name recognition and thats a soft foundation for a lead.

Agreed.

I’m staving off my worry over Biden until after the first couple of states. If Biden is still doing well then, I guess I’ll deal with that if it happens.

But when part of your primary strategy is “electability” and you take a hit right in the first few primary states, that strategy starts to falter. Maybe it won’t be enough to stop Biden, but losing out the gate sure won’t help him either.

CelestialBadger

Styrofoam Sammich wrote: »

shryke wrote: »

Styrofoam Sammich wrote: »

joshofalltrades wrote: »

I think there’s going to have to be a fundamental shift in this race for anybody but Biden to win. Somebody is going to have to drop out and endorse someone else or another major thing shakes it up. Nobody is drinking Joe’s milkshake to the point that he’s in danger. Yeah there haven’t been any votes cast yet but I can read a poll.

Depends on early primaries. Theyre hardly on lock for Biden and if Sanders or Pete do well that could be the game.

That's gonna be interesting to see. I really wonder how much the media narrative from those first few states can effect the race. I think it's entirely up in the air whether it matters or not anymore. We just don't know.

Gut instinct says Biden is holding mostly on name recognition and thats a soft foundation for a lead.

I think that Democrats now know a fair bit about Warren, Sanders and Buttigeig and they seem to be sticking with Biden.

PantsB

HamHamJ wrote: »

PantsB wrote: »

override367 wrote: »

JusticeforPluto wrote: »

Yeah, in order for Warren or Sanders to win I think one or the other would have to drop out. But they are so close I dont see either doing so.

Plus Biden might actually GAIN supporters.

Someone can educate on me on this if I'm wrong, but I'm pretty sure if one of them drops out before the convention and endorses the other, they can get their delegates right?

I'm assuming we won't end up in a situation where 60% of the delegates are for Sanders or Warren but all the superdelegates coronate Biden anyway

I think it would be electoral suicide if the candidate who won the most delegates/voters was denied the nomination due to a deal between #2 and #3.

It shouldn't be. Over half of voters didn't want the "frontrunner" and if the people they chose to represent them agree more with each other than it is reasonable that they decide on a compromise between them

You don't choose someone to represent you, you choose a candidate. Party activists/delegates who go to the convention are not on the ballot and are often not even decided until well afterwards. For instance in Massachusetts the signups run over a month after the primary.

Especially the way the Democratic nomination process is set up, it's almost impossible to get a majority in a three+ person race. The primary loses its little-d democratic legitimacy if it bypasses a clear popular vote/delegate winner. One of the reasons the super delegates exist is that if that scenario happens barring extraordinary conditions (like Biden has a heart attack or something) they will rightfully push him over the line. Hell, imagine the case where Warren wins 40% but Biden and Buttigieg each have 30 and they make it a Biden-Buttigieg ticket. The only way something like that can appear just is if you rationalize it because you want the eventually winner.

It's not even clear that if Warren/Sanders dropped out the survivor would bypass Biden (I think the evidence is actually better that his lead would not be substantially cut) but it certainly wouldn't be just to presume that's the case after the primaries. Most candidates drop out once it's clear they aren't going to win because they don't want to waste political money and extend the acrimony in way that hurts the party for this very reason. Without ranked choice or something similar this is how it works.