Overall I probably prefer Warren in that I feel she is legitimately progressive at least in the area of finances. Kamala is very similar to Warren in her frequently changing her positions when she thinks it is to her advantage although Warren is more clever at this. It is the reason why Bernie ate them both up among progressives, including people of color. One thing to be said for Kamala , is that she was determined enough to sleep her way to the top and that type of determination and toughness might be helpful. Stacey is ridiculously inexperienced and shamefully pandering for the position, merely losing in Georgia is not a great qualification and who the hell is Demings? I suppose just another "black face in high places"? We have tried that many times and it isn't enough.
yeah the people gambling on police chiefs, mayors, state politicians, etc are nuts. Biden will pick a Senator or Governor; case closed.
Harris has plenty of baggage and I don't know how you disqualify Demmings and not disqualify Harris who had a much broader impact by being the AG. I don't think either is a good VP candidate.
If Trump was a true leader, he'd also show up to back up his words and show that political lines don't matter. It would help him a ton for those looking for empathy from him...which means it won't happen, even if he was invited.
https://reason.com/2020/06/02/joe-b...t-all-along-cops-shouldnt-have-military-gear/ excerpt: Biden is, as Reason Editor at Large Matt Welch has observed, something of a rusty weather vane for the Democratic Party consensus. When the party was gung-ho about locking up criminal and throwing away the key, Biden was there to write the bills that President Bill Clinton signed. Now that the Democratic constituency is finally paying attention to criminal justice reform and police accountability, he's trying to undo some of the very measures he once drafted. But it's still better to look like a hypocrite than to continue being wrong. Biden's evolution from a drug warrior who approved of arming cops with military gear to a critic of the drug war who wants to end abusive policing is perhaps a silver lining to this week's awfulness. He's a presidential candidate who is the embodiment of the Overton window, and it appears he has been shifted.
In December 2001 an airstrike carried out by a B-52 bomber inadvertently targeted a position held by US special operations troops and Afghan militiamen in Urozgan Province. Numerous men were wounded in the incident, but Mattis repeatedly refused to dispatch helicopters from the nearby Camp Rhino to recover them, citing operational safety concerns. Instead an Air Force helicopter flew from Uzbekistan to ferry the men to the Marine Corps base where helicopters sat readily available but unauthorized to fly. Captain Jason Amerine blamed the delay caused by Mattis's refusal to order a rescue operation for the deaths of several men. Amerine wrote, "Every element in Afghanistan tried to help us except the closest friendly unit, commanded by Mattis," though he also wrote that "none of that was assessed properly because the [5th Special Forces Group] chose not to call for a formal investigation".[41][42] In May 2004 Mattis ordered the 3 a.m. bombing of what he alleged was a suspected enemy safe house near the Syrian border, but was in fact a wedding party and resulted in the deaths of 42 civilians, including 11 women and 14 children. Mattis said it had taken him 30 seconds to decide whether to bomb the location. Describing the wedding as implausible, he said, "How many people go to the middle of the desert to hold a wedding 80 miles (130 km) from the nearest civilization? These were more than two dozen military-age males. Let's not be naive."[47] The occurrence of a wedding was disputed by military officials, but the Associated Press obtained video footage showing a wedding party and a video the next day showed musical instruments and party decoration among the remains.[48] When asked by the press about footage on Arabic television of a child's body being lowered into a grave, he replied: "I have not seen the pictures but bad things happen in wars. I don't have to apologise for the conduct of my men."[49]
"Joe Biden Would Use Federal Power To Require Face Masks In Public If Elected: ‘These Masks Make A Gigantic Difference’": https://pittsburgh.cbslocal.com/2020/06/25/joe-biden-talks-face-masks-coronavirus-and-rallies/ excerpt: The Biden campaign invited KDKA to Lancaster for a brief interview with the presumptive Democratic nominee. After he wrapped up a campaign event, we came no closer than 8 feet apart and wore masks. Biden says we need to see more of that. “I would go back to making sure that everybody had masks, that you had PPE lined up, making sure we stockpile all the things that we need and we don’t have now. The one thing we do know, these masks make a gigantic difference. I would insist that everybody in public be wearing that mask. Anyone to reopen, it would have to make sure that they walked into a business that had masks.” Rice: Couldn’t you use your federal leverage to mandate that? Biden: Yes. Rice: Would you? Biden: Yes, I would from an executive standpoint, yes I would. Rice: So you would, in effect, mandate the wearing of masks? Biden: I would do everything possible to make it required the people had to wear masks in public.”
Nothing wrong with it. It's the ignorant people who are claiming that their rights are being treaded upon who are the problem. You know, the same ones that touted their initial numbers of low virus, most likely because they lived in less population dense states with less mass transit. It's those same people who now refuse to acknowledge that those states have a real problem on their hands. Look, if we'd have had a true, hard "unconstitutional" shutdown for say 8 weeks, we'd have potentially eradicated this virus months ago. The economy AND the health of the American People would have been much better for it. Poor leadership and ignorant constituents are the main part of the problem.
Well, he said he would do everything possible to make it required. Many towns (including in Texas) have enforced a policy that imposes fines if you're not wearing one in public. I supposed a little federal pressure on state and local level agencies (done creatively) may be able to accomplish this, in large part. In reality, you probably can't get it done. You're relying on people to do this themselves, and as proven already, people are ignorant, and refuse, which is why these numbers will continue to get worse. As I said before, if we had enacted a harder lockdown, with better leadership, we'd have gotten through this mess quicker, with much less damage. Instead, people want to play politics and "rights." Hell, there were even politicians openly talking of sacrificing the elderly for the economy. That was never a necessity, and it's crazy talk. They have rights too. Well, you have no rights when you're dead. Lastly, I pose the question, does federal authority even matter anymore? Apparently, we just issue hollow EOs just based on how the wind blows...
trump supporting mask use, calling for all Americans to wear masks, would provide the necessary cover for states and local governments to enact mask laws. But instead, his seeming indifference if not outright opposition to mask wearing for himself and those around him have red state governors to avoid such laws... and here we are.
of course it does. and you have just hit the nail exactly on the head about the problem with executive orders.
It's funny, the people that are refusing to wear masks because it treads on their rights. These are the same people that try to invalidate science and scientists when they come out with studies and statistics on Covid. They're also the people that will be begging for the lab created vaccines to come as quickly as possible.
