• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Maine's Senate Primary Could Be Interesting

jpn

Retired Navy Commander
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 3, 2014
Messages
21,569
Reaction score
25,475
Location
Pacific NW
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) on Saturday endorsed political newcomer Graham Platner’s Maine Senate bid, amid Democratic leadership’s push to recruit Gov. Janet Mills to run against GOP Sen. Susan Collins.

I don't know much about either Democrat, but I sure like this speech by Platner:

 
I don't know much about either Democrat, but I sure like this speech by Platner:

I mean, I like what he's saying but how much longer are we seriously going to be baited by this "but duh lobbyists" peasant populism? There have been dozens of people like this guy (including Trump, I might add) who have varying levels of wealth and autonomy and no matter what, these people are almost always either completely stifled by the bureaucracy or completely absorbed into it via bribery and deal making.

If this kind of change is good, I'm increasingly skeptical that populism will be able to deliver it.
 
This is interesting, because Maine has the oldest population in the country, and Platner supports medicare for all, support for which is highest among young voters and decreases with age.
 

That's his platform, and reading it you can really see why democrats are doomed. Consider the section on the housing crisis:

  • The housing crisis is existential. The American dream of owning a home is wilting, as private equity firms and hedge funds buy up housing stock to enrich wealthy investors. We used to provide serious federal support for housing creation, and no longer do. We need to bring back serious federal support for building housing.

So how much do they own? It ain't much:

II. Findings:
  • Private equity firms owned an estimated 239,018 rental single-family homes across the country as of June 2022 (see Table 1).[1] Private equity buyers accounted for about two-thirds of the institutional investors that owned rental homes (which includes publicly traded firms like Invitation Homes and American Homes for Rent).[2] Nationwide, private equity owns about 1 out of 60 rental homes (1.6 percent).[3]

His "solution" of course is to subsidize demand, just like every establishment democrat:

  • The VA home loan program has provided a critical lifeline to many Americans. These home loans should be available to far more Americans, providing a critical lifeline.

And that's it. One of the biggest problems in America and his solution is to blame rich people and subsidize demand.
 
common ‘wet’ dreams;

Leave it to Sanders to **** up another messy state’s primary, and this for a job he has; some ‘leader’, by division.

FEC numbers are cool, as well as candidate’s web sites.

Pritzker was just as pathetic endorsing his Lt. Governor for Senate over two sitting Dem Congressmen, no doubt worried about Raja’s 💰

Mitch McConnell in 2014 swept out nine Democratic seats by picking ‘his’ candidates.
Bernie and JB are no Mitch’s.

GOPs ****ed us again in the Senate last year, ten years after.
They’ve stolen the century, starting with the 5-4 in 2000 and then REDMAP 2010.
Dems have no clue what’s coming in ads from the ‘oligarchy’ on trans-, crime, illegals, you guess …
 

That's his platform, and reading it you can really see why democrats are doomed. Consider the section on the housing crisis:



So how much do they own? It ain't much:



His "solution" of course is to subsidize demand, just like every establishment democrat:



And that's it. One of the biggest problems in America and his solution is to blame rich people and subsidize demand.
Ouch, it's always embarrassing when a supposed "conservative" doesn't even bother to read their own link.

This nationwide figure conceals much higher ownership levels in many places.[4] Institutional investors, including PE firms, have become dominant players in a number of metropolitan areas. In 2020, institutional investors owned 1 in 9 rental homes in Charlotte, 1 in 10 in Tampa, and 1 in 12 in Atlanta.[5] In some neighborhoods in Atlanta, institutional investors own one-fifth of all the houses.[6]

In some markets, investors have been buying a far greater share of homes that come up for sale. In Memphis, Atlanta, and Lubbock and McAllen, Texas, investors bought more than 30 percent of the single-family homes in the second quarter of 2021 (see Figure 1).
[7]
 
Ouch, it's always embarrassing when a supposed "conservative" doesn't even bother to read their own link.

This nationwide figure conceals much higher ownership levels in many places.[4] Institutional investors, including PE firms, have become dominant players in a number of metropolitan areas. In 2020, institutional investors owned 1 in 9 rental homes in Charlotte, 1 in 10 in Tampa, and 1 in 12 in Atlanta.[5] In some neighborhoods in Atlanta, institutional investors own one-fifth of all the houses.[6]

In some markets, investors have been buying a far greater share of homes that come up for sale. In Memphis, Atlanta, and Lubbock and McAllen, Texas, investors bought more than 30 percent of the single-family homes in the second quarter of 2021 (see Figure 1).
[7]

So what? Nationwide it's still under 2%.

Furthermore, the only reason housing has turned into an investment is because the supply is being drastically and artificially restricted by state and local governments.
 
Dems have no clue what’s coming in ads from the ‘oligarchy’ on trans-, crime, illegals, you guess …

The party is moving left and "oligarchy" is apparently what they care about.
 
I mean, I like what he's saying but how much longer are we seriously going to be baited by this "but duh lobbyists" peasant populism? There have been dozens of people like this guy (including Trump, I might add) who have varying levels of wealth and autonomy and no matter what, these people are almost always either completely stifled by the bureaucracy or completely absorbed into it via bribery and deal making.

If this kind of change is good, I'm increasingly skeptical that populism will be able to deliver it.
Well, are you suggesting reasoned, good-faith, well-informed give and take discussions about public policy is the way to go?

Have you been paying any attention at all to today's American voter?
 
The party is moving left and "oligarchy" is apparently what they care about.
Have you not noticed how your party is turning fascist? You don't really need to answer that. We know.
 
Well, are you suggesting reasoned, good-faith, well-informed give and take discussions about public policy is the way to go?

Have you been paying any attention at all to today's American voter?

Oh not at all. Democracy has clearly failed us on this matter.

I'm going to be honest: I don't think there's any way out of this trap without significant centralized state intervention, meaning intervention on the level of a quasi-dictatorship not dissimilar to WW2-era Roosevelt. I'm actually not Roosevelt's biggest fan, but I'm using his administration as a reasonable example of how the government can centralize executive power in emergency situations and then return to a normal state of the Republic after a crisis is resolved.

I'm skeptical because leftists seem completely married to some abstract ideal of how Democratic government is supposed to work and right wingers seem set on picking authoritarians who are either mentally retarded or want to turn society into a TOOL music video. Neither are ready to offer tough, but coherent solutions to our current parasitic elite class.
 
Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) on Saturday endorsed political newcomer Graham Platner’s Maine Senate bid, amid Democratic leadership’s push to recruit Gov. Janet Mills to run against GOP Sen. Susan Collins.

I don't know much about either Democrat, but I sure like this speech by Platner:


This is one of two seats the democrats have a real good chance of picking up. The other is North Carolina. All the rest of currently held republican seats in the senate look safe or solid. Then there’s the other side of the coin, Michigan and Georgia are two currently held democratic seats that the GOP could gain. With a 53-47 republican edge in the senate, it’s not going to change control. It looks like the final results will be between 51-49 to 55-45 republican senate after next years midterms.
 
This is one of two seats the democrats have a real good chance of picking up. The other is North Carolina. All the rest of currently held republican seats in the senate look safe or solid. Then there’s the other side of the coin, Michigan and Georgia are two currently held democratic seats that the GOP could gain. With a 53-47 republican edge in the senate, it’s not going to change control. It looks like the final results will be between 51-49 to 55-45 republican senate after next years midterms.

Don’t sleep on Paxton winning the Republican Primary in Texas.
 



(The guy looks and sounds like my damn brother in law. My brother in law is a clammer though, not an oyster man 😂)
 
Oh not at all. Democracy has clearly failed us on this matter.

I'm going to be honest: I don't think there's any way out of this trap without significant centralized state intervention, meaning intervention on the level of a quasi-dictatorship not dissimilar to WW2-era Roosevelt. I'm actually not Roosevelt's biggest fan, but I'm using his administration as a reasonable example of how the government can centralize executive power in emergency situations and then return to a normal state of the Republic after a crisis is resolved.

I'm skeptical because leftists seem completely married to some abstract ideal of how Democratic government is supposed to work and right wingers seem set on picking authoritarians who are either mentally retarded or want to turn society into a TOOL music video. Neither are ready to offer tough, but coherent solutions to our current parasitic elite class.
If history is a guide, as bad as things might be today for some of our citizens, liberal democracy and free markets are unbeatable.
 
If history is a guide, as bad as things might be today for some of our citizens, liberal democracy and free markets are unbeatable.

What you’re describing has never truly been a thing, nor is there evidence that this would extricate us from our current predicament even if it were.

We’re kind of beyond economic theory. There’s going to need to be a political solution.
 
What you’re describing has never truly been a thing, nor is there evidence that this would extricate us from our current predicament even if it were.
We’re kind of beyond economic theory. There’s going to need to be a political solution.
Well, yeah. If you're suggesting that democracy and free markets are imperfect, that's not exactly a newsflash. But what, exactly, is your alternative? It sounds like you're suggesting a more authoritarian form of government. How would that work, exactly? How would citizens still retain the right to boot the person or persons out of they don't like them?

One thing is for sure, our system was not built to withstand an insane, ignorant huckster being elected:

 
Most of his platform sounds decent. Maine is exactly the type of state where an idiosyncratic, anti-establishment guy can probably do pretty well.

I think he's right to play up the "billionaire tax", Republican efforts to ban abortion, the stuff about social security and Medicare, and the Maine-specific stuff about waterfronts and shipbuilding. That's the kind of stuff that Democrats should talk about!

I think the worst plank of his platform is the housing policy. This needs A LOT of improvement:
Decisive action on the housing crisis
  • The housing crisis is existential. The American dream of owning a home is wilting, as private equity firms and hedge funds buy up housing stock to enrich wealthy investors. We used to provide serious federal support for housing creation, and no longer do. We need to bring back serious federal support for building housing.
  • The VA home loan program has provided a critical lifeline to many Americans. These home loans should be available to far more Americans, providing a critical lifeline.
On the merits, that's a bad answer. He probably knows Maine politics better than I do, so if blaming hedge funds instead of NIMBYism is what you need to do to get elected in Maine, fine. But it would be a terrible policy and I question if it would even help him get elected. If he genuinely supports bad housing policies, I'd suggest he just drop the plank entirely.

Also, Maine isn't a super-woke state, so I'm worried about the possible dog-whistle here:
Equality for ALL
  • I am tired of seeing politicians using small groups of people as a punching bag – be it race, or gender identity, or sexual orientation.
  • Sadly, we have even Democrats trying to pander to what they think Trump voters want by peddling soft bigotry. (Doesn’t work, never has.)
If this is code for "more puberty blockers for little kids, and more burly men in women's boxing events", then that's disqualifying. I hope that isn't what he's saying, but with a vague plank like that which doesn't spell out what he's saying, he's going to get some questions about it, so he needs to have a good answer.

Overall he sounds like a decent candidate from what I've seen so far, but I'd want to see some polling. I also don't really have anything against Janet Mills as a candidate, other than the fact that she's old. Hopefully we can see how they both poll against Susan Collins, before Maine picks one in the primary.
 
Last edited:
We’re kind of beyond economic theory. There’s going to need to be a political solution.

All we've had are political "solutions" and all they have done is to make everything worse.
 
Most of his platform sounds decent. Maine is exactly the type of state where an idiosyncratic, anti-establishment guy can probably do pretty well.

Maine has the oldest population of any state. I doubt they want anti-establishment anything.

I think the worst plank of his platform is the housing policy.

Agreed, but the last thing the old folks in Maine want is affordable housing to be built in their town.

Also, Maine isn't a super-woke state, so I'm worried about the possible dog-whistle here:

If this is code for "more puberty blockers for little kids, and more burly men in women's boxing events", then that's disqualifying. I hope that isn't what he's saying, but with a vague plank like that which doesn't spell out what he's saying, he's going to get some questions about it, so he needs to have a good answer.

He sounds pretty woke to me:

 
Back
Top Bottom