I'm open to basically anything on gun control. But something major needs to be done because the status quo is unacceptable. If Beto's threat of confiscation helps the Overton Window on gun control I'd call it a success.
You are not wrong either. Ban on assault weapons like the AR-15 or AK-47 is pretty popular and currently polling at 60%+. A bui back program is popular as well. Give it a couple of years and confiscation may be over 50 % as well, specially when (not even if) we have a few more mass shootings. I am totally fine with owning a hand gun or a shot gun for hunting purposes, but what the f**** someone needs a AR 15 for?
I missed the debate, but caught a few recaps and read a few things here. My thoughts: 1 - I'm absolutely fine with student loan forgiveness. There are many people who have high amounts of debt because that is a must for getting their degree in a non-Wall Street job. Off the top of my head, I think public defenders, social workers, and teachers. I'm sure there are plenty of others, but getting a degree is expensive and the trade-off is difficulty in purchasing a home or saving for retirement, in addition to what John (I think) said. Beyond that, there are current forgiveness programs, but as we have seen in areas like education and the Department of Education, they can be waived with the stroke of a pen. As for those who paid off their students loans...good for them. But it doesn't mean that those who haven't are not doing what they can to fulfill their responsibilities. 2 - I don't think Beto is electable as a President, but he is on the right side of the gun debate. Eventually he will suggest repealing the 2nd, but as of right now, his required by back program is good. Still, it doesn't address the issues with handguns and suicides. I'd like him to speak more about that aspect of gun control. 3 - The impression I got on the reviews of Harris was that she had an exceptionally poor night, and still has not made a good explanation of her times as a prosecutor. It also seemed like she was doing some attention-seeking in a way that none of the other candidates were. 4 - I have listened to Castro's remark, and if the audience had not reacted, it would have been more of akin to "do you really know what you are talking about?" But I think that it matters because everybody is thinking about the elephant in the room, and the audience was like "Oh, snap! You went there." When it was said, it came across to me as if Castro was saying Biden was contradicting himself, but because of the age and many issues with Biden, it is being taken as mean. The problem I have with the post-debate response is that Castro's remark is roughly accurate and that Biden is having memory issues. 5 - Biden needs to go away. 6 - Yang's thing with $1000. The issue from the debate seems to be that he is saying it is coming from his campaign, not his personal funds. He has already done a trial of that, and it really made a difference (I forget where I came across the follow up to the results). As for his overall plan, I really don't have a huge issue with it other than it should be limited to some measurement of COL. IOW, somebody/household making above x percentage of the area COL should not be part of the program. But the base idea is that, shown not just with Yang's efforts, but actual research, is that cash is a better way to go than some restrictive program like SNAP. 7 - I get the feeling that if Warren gets the nomination, she will modify her position on healthcare. Right now, she is very similar to Sanders, but in a general election, I think she'll read the tea leaves and modify. I really have no evidence for that, but it is something I think will happen. 8 - Oh, and what the ******** was that question about not eating meat given to Booker? Seriously, I heard that and wanted Booker to give him a good verbal smackdown.
No it was not accurate. Castro got it wrong and was just being a jerk. He tried as wellthis cheap stunt the first debate on Beto. That smacks of desperation. As noted in the NY Mag, Biden was clear about his plan. Castro is the one who should go away. The implication was clear, but Castro was wrong. Two minutes prior, Biden said that under his health-care plan, “every single person who is diagnosed with cancer or any other disease can automatically become part of this plan.” And about ten minutes prior to that, Biden said it more plainly: “Anyone who can’t afford it gets automatically enrolled in the Medicare-type option we have.” http://nymag.com/intelligencer/2019/09/castro-attacks-biden-debate.html
Here is some food for thought on body language. https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2019/09/13/democratic-debate-body-language-228103
Read a few things in the past day which clarify things, and show that Castro was wrong. I'm fine with that. It still does remove the issue with Biden's memory or perspective. And regardless of Castro being right or wrong, Biden still needs to go away. He will be made a meal of in the general, in part of his expectations are higher than Individual One's are.
I have no idea how much to weigh the 538 before/after debate polling stuff -- but for the second time, the number of people who *dislike* Warren shrank. Last time around, she was the only candidate out of 20 to do that. This time, it was just her and Beto. https://t.co/5q0C5YhMaO pic.twitter.com/bz8WpAAQLO— Langston Taylor (@langstonitaylor) September 13, 2019 Interesting data point
I find those comments just presumptuous to say the least. Biden is leading in the polls and has kept his lead despite those constant attacks from the "purity" left. If Warren, Sanders or any other candidate, can win the nomination overt him, more power to them. For now though, why should he go away? Because some dudes on Twitter or online want him to do so? WTF? Good thing , It does not work that way....
I have actually said he should not run since before he got in the race. He is old, that that was always a concern, and really is for the front runners. But my concern is that he can get unclear and unfocused, muddle his words and thoughts unlike the other two do, and more inline with the current President. Do we really want a second president, back to back with the first, who has issues relating to accuracy of fact? Not like anything Bush II or Obama said, but somebody who though that MLK Jr. was assassinated about a decade before he got married, and somebody who talks about radio and record players as if that is normal, everyday things kids listen to. I have also considered that Biden ran twice for the nomination before and lost. The first was in 1988, then 20 years later, then 12 years after that. I am not impressed that he first ran 32 years ago. Keep in mind, if he is the nominee, I am voting for him. But it will be with the same enthusiam as I did for Clinton - both will be to prevent Individual One from being in the White House.
I wonder what happens if the current trend of Biden, Warren, and Sanders continues and crystallizes into a late game of Biden at 35-40% while Warren and Sanders get up to around 30%. How many winner-take-all states are there? Would Biden be able to get to a majority of the delegates at a steady national pace of 40% if Warren and Sanders are both also clearing the marks to receive delegates?
I am not sure what was their polling population, but in the same article they had charts of all candidates vs Trump, Biden was ahead by a big margin over the other candidates.
Castro just lost one of his three congressional endorsements. Texas Lawmaker Pulls Endorsement from Castro Rep. Vicente Gonzalez (D-TX) “flipped his support from Julián Castro to Joe Biden for the Democratic presidential nomination, saying now is the time to narrow the 2020 field and unite as Democrats,” CNN reports. “The switch of support comes days after Castro sharply criticized Biden — with an apparent jab at the former vice president’s memory — in a contentious moment dubbed ‘personal’ and ‘not cool’ by other candidates, but Gonzalez said that debate moment was not the reason behind his decision.”
In NZ you can still actually own a semi-auto .22 magnum with small magazine for hunting The reality is the idiots don't buy that gun, even though it can do a lot of damage
That's all he is really doing. The Dems will get pounded on the issue anyway, so you might as well have someone goes full muppet
I think you are being overly dramatic. NZ just did this. It's called a buyback and the same thing happened in Australia and the UK It requires legislation. There is no way Beto can do this via executive fiat, even if he was POTUS. Indeed even if congress were to legislate a compulsory buyback, it would be challenged in the Courts. So if such a thing ever happened, we can be sure it legally tested and backed by Congress.
Who the hell cares about Joe Biden's age? You have kids in cages. You have 10 years left to confront climate change. Millions who can't see a doctor. Nearly 40,000 gun deaths a year. A lawless president. We have to talk about the big things people in this country care about. https://t.co/03LKnAaYEj— Beto O'Rourke (@BetoORourke) September 15, 2019
Beto doesn't have too many f**** to give anymore. The dude has really earned my respect lately. He tells it like it is.
I am a fan of this multi-character approach Beto is not winning the presidency, but he can walk point on a bunch of issues
How is the program working out though? The most recent article (PBS) I saw from September 3rd states that less than 10% of the banned weapons have been turned in so far. Granted we have a limited time frame to extract data from but less than 10% doesn't seem to show a great response from gun owners.
Bit too early to say as the programme runs to December. I am actually just going home to help my Dad turn in his weapons. He is 75 so its all a bit too hard for him. He is sour about it, but from the family perspective we are OK with it, as at least this way we get $$ for them. NZ is a bit different as we are highly regulated so the local police are already full aware he has a major arsenal. Indeed the police were just around to inspect his storage in 2018 and made him split out all the bolts into separate locked storage which was a major pain in the arse. To be honest he doesn't use them anymore. The last time we went to the range was 5 years ago. I don't think he has been actively shooting since then
I disagree strongly with Beto here. Confusing the primary for the general election and closing ranks prematurely is not a good strategy. In many ways, the primary is a dress rehearsal for the general! We should question Biden about his age/mental fitness, because the Republicans/Trump definitely (disingenuously) will. Not asking the hard questions in the primary is absolutely a recipe for disaster in the general, and does the eventual nominee zero favours.