I suppose Trump is the embodiment of getting mad at a company for playing by the rules. Instead of trying to change the tax code to make the likes of Amazon pay more, he threatens retributions -- even while running interference against other countries that want to tax them. While we should be focusing on improving tax rules instead of trying to bully a company for obeying the law, I still think it is helpful to get mad. A lot of our tax code including the Trump tax cut is the result of powerful lobbying from powerful corporations working in the interest of shareholders. Amazon is as guilty as the rest of this corporate community for setting tax law to favor them, so they've earned the popular wrath. When these companies set their advocacy strategies, they should do so with some trepidation that they will anger customers and citizens. But, they probably won't unless legislators also fear the wrath of voters. It'll be too easy for them to do nothing and take big campaign contributions from Amazon lobbyists if their constituents aren't showing them they care about this issue. Change the rules by being mad.
I am a registered democrat from long before Obama's second term... I attended a party function or two as well when I was a believer during the Bush era. I actually largely favored them before they basically congealed with the Republicans. My apathy has largely prevented me from changing that.
Just watched a 50 minute clip of Yang doing an event in New Hampshire a couple weeks back. Lot of his standard stump speech but a lot of great riffing, and Q&A. Like him more and more.
I think Kamala Harris is best for Biden -- she's west coast while he's east coast, a younger generation, and covers for his white maleness and may allay minority concerns with Biden's record. I think Yang would be good for Warren. The both like policy stuff and claim to be capitalists of a sort. Again, he's west coast while she's east coast, and he's a younger generation. Warren probably can't pick a female VP and subject her campaign to twice the misogyny she's otherwise exposed to. Some of the middle-aged, mid-Continent males (Beto, Pete, Castro, Bullock, Bennett) might also serve, and I bet Booker gets consideration by just about anyone. I don't think Yang is a good pairing for Sanders -- he might help balance the ticket a bit, but they are both ideologues, and they don't necessarily agree.
What is wrong with his white maleness? Pretty damn screwed up you would bash a man for his skin color and sex.
Kamala has no great constituency to draw from, she is not particularly liked in the West or among minorities. Stacy Abarams would fill that void.
Don’t get triggered so easily. There was no “bash.” There was demographic strategery in his post. Pretty normal, bland stuff for presidential campaigns. Like pairing a supposed evangelical Christian w a vulgarian from Queens, both white to appeal to an overwhelmingly white base. Yawn
If the Democrats want their ticket to represent the diversity and the many different experiences of our nation, then two white males wouldn't represent that as well. I see you still aren't able to take your own advice about moving forward and getting on with your life rather than spending your time and effort complaining about the injustices heaped time and again on the poor white males of our once-great nation.
Nothing wrong with his whiteness or maleness, traits I share with him. But, to select another white male as a running mate needlessly duplicates on that perspective. The corporate world has already figured out that diversity of perspectives is valuable, and the Dems embrace this concept as well. For the sake of the performance of his team, it'd be smart to pick someone coming with a different life experience than him -- in theory, if the VP did anything, which they don't -- provided that there were high-performing candidates, which there are. But, I was just talking in the very Machiavellian way we do about 'balancing the ticket' to be more appealing to certain states or demographics where a candidate is weaker, a practice both parties have engaged in since forever (look at Pence, giving Trump evangelical cover). Nothing real controversial there. Abrams could be fine too. He needs someone a generation younger that is a concession to more progressive types either on racial justice or on economic justice, and hopefully someone to blunt the Creepy Joe image.
Joe would be a good VP to shore up some of the Midwest but he’s done that before and is a bit stall. Speaking of which, why is he a front runner ? Probably won’t last.
As usual he killed that town hall. Lol at Harris. Didn't even bother with the other candidates, they did better than harris?
the Onion has been having a field day with him, quite harshly and hilariously. They used to have a "Diamond Joe" series, with him polishing his T-Bird and reveling in velvet paintings, etc, but now it's all about his dementia. Biden gives unsolicited massage to coat rack.
I picture Yang as much more east coast than west, despite his ties to Silicon Valley. He was raised on the east coast, went to school there, and still lives there as far as I know.
Dude, this is the kind of post that gets you killed around here. You know Juan Valdez is one of the most articulate and even handed posters in D&D, and it's clear why he posted what he did.
@dachuda86 and I have an unspoken arrangement -- he pitches me floaters to give me more opportunity to hear myself talk.
