Displaying 1 - 10 of 285 Forum Posts1 2 3 4 5 Next
  • Jul 15, 2019 06:19 PM
    Last: 1d
    Wow, I didn't know that was even a thing. This is a great way to bypass the electoral college system altogether. I'm not a fan of the electoral college, so I am all for this. 15 states, that's really good momentum for this. Interesting. Do you know when they all started doing this?
  • Jul 03, 2019 11:22 AM
    Last: 6d

    Good info. I'll contribute by providing the link to your local Social Security office:

    Social Security Office Locator

    Online is the easiest way to apply but sometimes it helps to talk to someone in person. All you have to do from that link is provide your zip code and it'll show you all the offices in your area, with phone numbers and addresses.

  • Jul 01, 2019 12:47 PM
    Last: 6d

    One thing I expect to see from this is each side catering to these changes in demographics. For example, the Democrats will double down on Hispanic support while the Republicans very likely will pivot their overall messaging to be more inclusive.

    Of course perception could still take a long time to set in. So you're right, it is possible for a traditionally red state to turn blue in the short to medium term.

    At least when it comes to the presidential election, as 48/50 states award electoral college points based on the popular vote in the state. For other elections that are done by districts, it will become a very contentious issue of where the lines are drawn.

  • May 14, 2019 11:48 AM
    Last: 6d

    We do have our first candidate of the top 20 to officially drop out - Eric Swalwell.

    Eric Swalwell drops out of 2020 presidential race, becoming first prominent Democrat to do so

  • Jun 25, 2019 04:38 PM
    Last: 14d

    I am a fan of Andrew Yang's idea of giving everyone a baseline of $1000/month that's 18 or older, minus any money they are already receiving from the govt. The Freedom Dividend. I think he has a fairly sound idea of coming up with the funds in order to make it happen (VAT tax, could be a better idea but its sound enough).

    And I also buy into the idea of a 'trickle up' situation if we were to do that.

    But Yang didn't impress in his first showing to the public and I unfortunately think that will result in his campaign being over.

    Interestingly though, Kamala Harris' idea of a tax break on the middle class is something like a universal basic income, though not, as Vox points out. Here's the gist:

    The latest volley in the competition is the LIFT the Middle Class Act from Harris. As the Atlantic’s Annie Lowrey explains, the bill would offer a sizable cash payment to most middle-class households. Single people would get $250 per month or $3,000 a year, married couples would get $500 per month or $6,000 a year, and it would phase out for singles without kids making $50,000 or more, and for married couples or single people with kids making $100,000 or more. It costs about $200 billion in the first year or $2 trillion over 10, roughly in the range of the price tag for the 2017 tax cuts.

    Vox points out, I think correctly, the issue with it not being a perfect plan is who it excludes - the poorest and children.

    Also I am unclear on how it will be funded. Anyone know?

    Contrast that with Elizabeth Warren's idea - Accountable Capitalism Act. This would redistribute the wealth generated from the biggest corporations, funneling a good amount back into the workers hands. I am not super familiar but on the face of it, I like the idea.

    So they both have legislation proposed. Broad strokes I think Warren is getting to the root of the issue far better. Yet to be seen how realistic either of their proposals are though.

  • Jun 24, 2019 05:56 AM
    Last: 18d

    I wan't nearly as engaged during the first night of debates as I was the second. I haven't really been a fan of Kamala Harris to this point, but I have to say she was the strongest of the bunch. And I can honestly see her being one of the strongest candidates to take on Trump in the general. I expect her polling to rise in the coming days.

    Otherwise Pete Buttigieg did pretty well. As did Bernie. Though nothing really great from either of them. Biden seemed way off to me, anyone else get that feeling?

    Benet did well but I don't see him rising in the polls. I expect everyone else to fall off really quickly for the next debate. I really wanted to see Yang rise to the challenge but I feel like he did not and his campaign is unfortunately not going anywhere. Maybe next time...

    Can watch the full part 2 of debate 1 there. Who did you think 'won' either of the first two nights so far? I would say Kamala Harris and a 3 way tie for Warren/Gabbard/Castro in the first night.

  • Jun 24, 2019 05:56 AM
    Last: 18d

    1st Democratic Debate (1/2)

    You can watch the full first debate there for the first 10 of 20 candidates. Also includes the full transcript which is handy.

    I thought the first debate was kind of a mess. Hard to follow with so many people on the stage. Should have saw that coming. Lesser candidates kind of ignored over giving higher polling ones the most air time.

    That said, I personally liked Tulsi Gabbard and Elizabeth Warren the best. And remain disappointed in Beto.

  • Jun 20, 2019 05:12 PM
    Last: 14d
    RealClearPolitics is showing the avg of two different California polls right there. Has it Biden then Sanders, Harris, Warren and Buttigieg in that order. Should get interesting the week after the first debates. Bout to find out how much pull California has.
  • Jun 24, 2019 05:56 AM
    Last: 18d

    I expect the polls to remain pretty much the same for the top 4 or 5 polling for the first round. I think the ones most effected by the June debates are the names most aren't familiar with - Yang, Klobuchar, Castro, Ryan, Gabbard, Delaney, Bennet.. really all of them oustide of maybe Bill de Blasio. Those people need to make themselves known, poll well, or just drop out.

    20 will turn into 5-10 quickly. I wonder if it'll happen before July debates. I don't think so though. Most campaigns should have enough funding and base support to outlast a month of unchanged polls. But shortly after July, yeah, it'll be 5-10 for sure.

  • Jun 20, 2019 05:12 PM
    Last: 14d

    Reading this LA Times article about the impact of California on the 2020 elections and this part in particular stuck out to me:

    For it is the trademark issues and values of California — immigration, healthcare, trade and the environment — that to a large extent will drive this presidential contest.

    The notion of a national race being a referendum on one state’s values — or, in another conception, a struggle between the worldview of California and the worldview of President Trump — could only emerge in a political environment where urgent economic and foreign policy issues won’t dominate as they ordinarily do.

    To the extent that economic issues are in play, they are poverty, globalization and income inequality, all central to the California zeitgeist.

    It's no real secret California will go blue in the 2020 Presidential elections. So this conversation isn't really a question of 'can Trump win CA electoral points?'. Think the answer to that is no.

    The California State Senate race is more interesting. Currently CA's State Senate consists of 53 Republicans to 45 Democrats and 2 independents as of the 2018 elections. So if the 2020 elections are a referendum on Trump, Democrats will have to take back at least 3 State Senate seats of the 33 on the 2020 ballot to regain majority control.

    2020 elections won't include Senate races for California, so Dianne Fienstein and Kamala Harris will remain (unless Harris wins the presidency of course).

    Zoomed out, the point is California is really on the exact opposite extreme to Donald Trump on many of the key issues that will be talked about ad nauseum between now and even beyond the 2020 elections. You could say, and the article above clearly does, that California is front and center representation of the entire Democratic party. Or at least the biggest player.

    Makes sense. Population wise they are enormous. They award by far the most electoral college points (55). And now that California is a early primary state, Democratic presidential candidates will absolutely have to take a stance and campaign on issues central to the concern of Californians. Especially early on.

    California does have 2 local candidates running for President in Senator Kamala Harris and Rep. Eric Swalwell. Harris having the much higher chance to make it deep into the run.

    So clearly Californians will have a massive megaphone in the form of the Democratic party going into the 2020 presidential race. With either a homegrown candidate for POTUS or one that the most populated state in the union feels represents them the best.

    And if all the 2020 elections really come down to Trump vs California worldviews, I would expect the State Senate to flip blue as well. Watch out for who California picks in the Dem primaries. Might be the best indication of who will be the next president elect.