PLease DON'T fall for phony Beto!

[Greenbeard]

Well as I understand it progressives dont like his voting record. He votes too often with Trump and the GOP.

Votes with them on what?

He also takes a lot of PAC money from the oil and gas industries. Now as I said if you are a moderate or republican thats not a bad thing. But progressives hate that. They would likely prefer a Warren or Sanders or Ojeda.

Per Open Secrets, the PAC component of his career fundraising is virtually nil (and in fact was even lower in his recent prominent statewide campaign):

He's a big recipient of individual donations from people who self-identify as working in the oil and gas industry. But given that he's in Texas, I wouldn't find it surprising that many of his constituents work in that industry.

So what's the real source of the angst?

 

[haymarket]

Agree anybody should be able to beat Trump. But it could do long term damage. Nobody was going to vote for another republican after GW but it didnt take long for them to start winning again. Politics is a yo yo and voters have short memories.

Very true.

 

[pilot16]

Votes with them on what?



Per Open Secrets, the PAC component of his career fundraising is virtually nil (and in fact was even lower in his recent prominent statewide campaign):

He's a big recipient of individual donations from people who self-identify as working in the oil and gas industry. But given that he's in Texas, I wouldn't find it surprising that many of his constituents work in that industry.

So what's the real source of the angst?

Well I am not a progressive so I can only tell you what I have seen. If you go to the left wing sites they really are doing a number on him. The "Bernie Bros" are claiming he is phony and terrible. So I guess their angst would be they are attempting to run a purity campaign again.

 

[Mason66]

I also am seeing some discontent expressed by progressives that Biden is sort of being pushed as the "one" who can beat Trump. Feinstein said so yesterday about him being the savior or something like that. I think while its a certain improvement, there are risks. First being, what happens to the democratic platform if all the right leaning NeverTrumpers come over? Certainly they want a Beto or Biden. Not an Ojeda or Gabbard or Harris. So that does pull the party further right. That is certain to grow anger from the progressive wing. Second, I saw yesterday a Politico article that mocked Alexandria Ocasio Cortez and said "she has lost everything so far since the establishment wall is crushing her." It makes it out to be this Pelosi vs progressive thing. All I have to say is if the anger and populism is still there in 2020, all bets are off. People wont want the establishment again.

https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2019/01/03/pelosi-ocasio-cortez-congress-223690

Whoever runs with Biden will be very important because it is unlikely Biden will survive the full term.

 

[Greenbeard]

Well I am not a progressive so I can only tell you what I have seen. If you go to the left wing sites they really are doing a number on him. The "Bernie Bros" are claiming he is phony and terrible. So I guess their angst would be they are attempting to run a purity campaign again.

Ah. I suspect Beto would peel off a pretty good chunk of Sanders 2016 voters, particularly among millennials, so I understand the preemptive bashing from that camp.

 

[pilot16]

Whoever runs with Biden will be very important because it is unlikely Biden will survive the full term.

Thats another thing, can Biden win the primary? I think he can in many states but CA? NY? TX? He likely wont win NH or MA either with Warren and maybe Sanders in the game. Its a bit risky for him. Kind of tragic that the VP who could have won in 2016 didnt run but when he did in 2020 he lost?

 

[pilot16]

Ah. I suspect Beto would peel off a pretty good chunk of Sanders 2016 voters, particularly among millennials, so I understand the preemptive bashing from that camp.

I think there is still a populist vibe out there. Some are still angry at the status quo and establishment. They want UHC, and other things. They dont want it on the back burner or just to get the ACA put back in force. So I assume they will fight for those issues that they feel are needed and now.

 

[Mr Person]

I definitely have not made up my mind on Beto, but you do realize that the same things were said about Obama right?

And Obama did flub a whole lot. In some surprising ways, he acted more like a neocon than the neocons did. Remember, he oversaw an NSA that greatly expanded spying operations, including domestic spying operations while misrepresenting/downplaying was going on. Hence, somewhere in 2013, I had occasion to see the NYT declare in an editorial's headline "Obama has now lost all credibility" (they later edited-in "on the NSA" or "about the NSA" at the end).

As attractive as it can be to have some new outsider, or just someone new with barely any experience, I think I'd rather have someone with meaningful experience this time...

 

[Praxas]

And Obama did flub a whole lot. In some surprising ways, he acted more like a neocon than the neocons did. Remember, he oversaw an NSA that greatly expanded spying operations, including domestic spying operations while misrepresenting/downplaying was going on. Hence, somewhere in 2013, I had occasion to see the NYT declare in an editorial's headline "Obama has now lost all credibility" (they later edited-in "on the NSA" or "about the NSA" at the end).

As attractive as it can be to have some new outsider, or just someone new with barely any experience, I think I'd rather have someone with meaningful experience this time...

Ok so who do you think should run that would beat trump?

 

[Mr Person]

Ok so who do you think should run that would beat trump?

Not a clue.

Look, I'll take him over Trump any day. I'd take a dead cow over Trump.

But as between an intelligent/articulate person with no experience, and an intelligent/articulate person with it, I'd prefer the latter. Now, maybe the things Obama did that I didn't like or did in a way I didn't like were not down to a lack of experience. I don't know. But despite the danger of a politician being corrupted by time in office, I really do think things tend to work better with someone who already has a decent sense of what they're doing in the hot seat. Not always, mind you. But in general.

 

[justabubba]

No thanks. Beto holds a lot of the same views that Trump does.

please share a list of issues in which they dovetail

 

[justabubba]

That is a well done political ad.

i disagree
there is not one proposal within those minutes other than elect richard ojeda
retired a major after a quarter century in the service. significant, but not enough to qualify someone for the white house

 

[justabubba]

Agree anybody should be able to beat Trump. But it could do long term damage. Nobody was going to vote for another republican after GW but it didnt take long for them to start winning again. Politics is a yo yo and voters have short memories.

anyone else remember hearing that said over and over, again in 2016?

 

[justabubba]

Thats another thing, can Biden win the primary? I think he can in many states but CA? NY? TX? He likely wont win NH or MA either with Warren and maybe Sanders in the game. Its a bit risky for him. Kind of tragic that the VP who could have won in 2016 didnt run but when he did in 2020 he lost?

unfortunately, Biden is a walking gaffe machine
he is someone who takes orders, not someone who gives them
his opportunity for center stage has long passed
an emotional pick but not a smart one

 

[Skeptic Bob]

i disagree
there is not one proposal within those minutes other than elect richard ojeda
retired a major after a quarter century in the service. significant, but not enough to qualify someone for the white house

True, but facts and policies aren’t what make good political ads. It is about making the average viewer like the person. If you start talking policies you are going to lose people. I’m not saying that is a good thing, just that it is the reality of the situation in modern America.

 

[JustHanging]

That is basically how Trump emerged during the 2016 republicant primary - there were loads of establishment republicants who shared that portion of the primary vote among themselves and one rather odd populist (Trump) to accept the rest of the "oh no, not one of them again" primary vote.

Nonsense.

Trump teamed up with Steve Bannon, one of the leaders of the "alt-right" movement (read rebranding of White Supremacists), and they went after the racist vote. Trump of course had the racist chops, not only does he have a long and well documented history as a racist, but he was also leader of the racist birther movement.

And as Bannon surmised, turns out there are a lot of racists in the USA, and they were going to support the blatant racist...Trump. Trump of course rewarded their loyalty when he publicly supported the KKK and Neo Nazis after Charlottesville.

 

[JustHanging]

[/COLOR]

anyone else remember hearing that said over and over, again in 2016?

Agreed.

AFAIK, the racist vote is still 100% behind Trump, and they will come out to vote for someone like Trump who publicly supports them.

 

[justabubba]

True, but facts and policies aren’t what make good political ads. It is about making the average viewer like the person. If you start talking policies you are going to lose people. I’m not saying that is a good thing, just that it is the reality of the situation in modern America.

how did you manage to carve our time managing faux news to share that insight with us
because your methodology is certainly aligned with the faux news approach of feeding the audience meaningless bull**** because they are too dumb to comprehend policy discussions

 

[veritas1]

I didn't think we'd see a lighter lightweight than Obama this soon but the Dems have outdone themselves. And a guy with a DWI arrest to boot. Bravo.

 

[markjs]

My big beef is about taking big oil donations after saying he wouldn't. The last thing we need is more donor owned Dems. I don't have any specific problem with Beto personally, but I want money out of politics. Going centrist or trying to appeal to right leaning voters also rarely works out well for Democrats.

 

[SonOfDaedalus]

SonofDaedalus said:

No way Trump can beat Beto because Beto almost beat Cruz.

But Trump trounced Cruz in a national election.

Wow, you're so smart. How can I possibly answer? Oh yeah, Curz beat Trump in Texas. I was talking about Texas. If Trump loses Texas it would be a landslide.

I'm not saying that Trump would lose Texas. I'm saying Beto has a better chance than anyone to steal Texas and that's a good sign of his overall appeal.

 

[Bucky]

Wow, you're so smart. How can I possibly answer? Oh yeah, Curz beat Trump in Texas. I was talking about Texas. If Trump loses Texas it would be a landslide.

I'm not saying that Trump would lose Texas. I'm saying Beto has a better chance than anyone to steal Texas and that's a good sign of his overall appeal.

Texas is Trump country. It is a very diverse area. Safe to say Cruz would have lost if Trump didn't stump for him in Texas.

 

[Surrealistik]

Oh I agree as well. If he runs, Beto will win no doubt. He has that Bill Clinton/Obama likeability. However, consider what happened under both of those leaders. The dem party shifted right. Now if you are a moderate or not a Trump fan republican thats great news. But if you are a progressive or a millennial you might not be happy. Because both of those presidents lost a lot of seats in Congress and throughout the states when they were leaders. The progressive agenda was sidelined. Its a sort of short term gain but a huge long term loss. I guess what I am trying to say is whether you like Beto or not depends on where you sit on the political spectrum. If politics like this continue, moderates and blue dogs could take over the democratic party.

I would call this take somewhere between naive and outright delusional.

I mean, Beto will win without a doubt? Moderates and blue dogs could take over the Democratic Party? First of all there isn't a single poll that suggests a doubtless Beto win, so I'm not sure where on earth you're getting that; this seems more a reflection of a profound internal bias than anything else. Second, 'Moderates' have already taken over the party since at least the early 90s, and probably the 80s; go check out the Third Way/New Dem movement. The only difference now is that the FDR wing is actually fighting back for once since then. Moreover the progressive agenda has been sidelined since the nomination win and election of Obama/Clinton, and they were both reflections of the rightward shift in the party since that time as shining stars of the New Dems, not points of contrast.

Votes with them on what?

He's a big recipient of individual donations from people who self-identify as working in the oil and gas industry. But given that he's in Texas, I wouldn't find it surprising that many of his constituents work in that industry.

So what's the real source of the angst?

Reposting since you asked:

https://www.currentaffairs.org/2018/12/what-does-beto-orourke-actually-stand-for

https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2018/12/21/18150359/beto-orourke-voting-record

https://www.chicagotribune.com/news...t-progressive-enough-1207-20181206-story.html

https://www.huffingtonpost.ca/entry...4e4b08aaf7a91035a?ec_carp=2343902744936884964

Ah. I suspect Beto would peel off a pretty good chunk of Sanders 2016 voters, particularly among millennials, so I understand the preemptive bashing from that camp.

I think there is a risk that they might misconstrue the man as being a progressive he's not (and certainly has made overtures of pretending to be) which is naturally a concern to us as obvious parallels with a deceptive 2008 Obama can be drawn in this regard. This 'bashing' you're talking about, is really more a sober illustration of the man's actual voting record, ties and policy, which is, on the whole, at odds with the progressive agenda.

i disagree
there is not one proposal within those minutes other than elect richard ojeda
retired a major after a quarter century in the service. significant, but not enough to qualify someone for the white house

Virtually every political ad, particularly introductory political ads, are exactly like this, aiming to make a splash and get the candidate himself to resonate with the viewer, whether Ojeda, Beto, Obama, or otherwise. When policy is mentioned in such ads they're typically in the form of hollow soundbites and platitudes that really don't have much on offer. I mean, I'd like to see more substance in these sorts of ads, but that is the game as it is currently played.

If you want to get a sense of his policies, they're abundantly available, and on the whole agreeable.

 

[justabubba]

I would call this take somewhere between naive and outright delusional.

I mean, Beto will win without a doubt? Moderates and blue dogs could take over the Democratic Party? First of all there isn't a single poll that suggests a doubtless Beto win, so I'm not sure where on earth you're getting that; this seems more a reflection of a profound internal bias than anything else. Second, 'Moderates' have already taken over the party since at least the early 90s, and probably the 80s; go check out the Third Way/New Dem movement. The only difference now is that the FDR wing is actually fighting back for once since then. Moreover the progressive agenda has been sidelined since the nomination win and election of Obama/Clinton, and they were both reflections of the rightward shift in the party since that time as shining stars of the New Dems, not points of contrast.



Reposting since you asked:

https://www.currentaffairs.org/2018/12/what-does-beto-orourke-actually-stand-for

https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2018/12/21/18150359/beto-orourke-voting-record

https://www.chicagotribune.com/news...t-progressive-enough-1207-20181206-story.html

https://www.huffingtonpost.ca/entry...4e4b08aaf7a91035a?ec_carp=2343902744936884964



I think there is a risk that they might misconstrue the man as being a progressive he's not (and certainly has made overtures of pretending to be) which is naturally a concern to us as obvious parallels with a deceptive 2008 Obama can be drawn in this regard. This 'bashing' you're talking about, is really more a sober illustration of the man's actual voting record, ties and policy, which is, on the whole, at odds with the progressive agenda.



Virtually every political ad, particularly introductory political ads, are exactly like this, aiming to make a splash and get the candidate himself to resonate with the viewer, whether Ojeda, Beto, Obama, or otherwise. When policy is mentioned in such ads they're typically in the form of hollow soundbites and platitudes that really don't have much on offer. I mean, I'd like to see more substance in these sorts of ads, but that is the game as it is currently played.

If you want to get a sense of his policies, they're abundantly available, and on the whole agreeable.

Then what are those policies and how do they differ from those espoused by Beto?

 

[pilot16]

I feel the mainstream dems and the media desire a candidate like Beto and will try to make it happen. It really isnt hard these days with social media and 24/7 news. He is the darling and they will go out of their way to give him favorable coverage if he wins.