Democratic Primary Season 2020

[mbonder]

Representative Eric Swalwell from California is officially in the race

[mbonder]

obviously your argument stands, but i think the D voting bloc will respond differently to such claims.

I doubt it, these voting blocs are all the same, regardless of what you hear on the news. Dems, Rep, they all end up acting very similarly, circumstance just dictates who is doing what in any given moment.

[mrsleeve]

Ftfy

bite me biden suffers a fatal disease
white, old, heterosexual male

[gwb72tii]

Bite me Biden suffers a fatal disease
White, old, heterosexual

[decay]

I think it's a bunch of noise though, not like he whipped out his cock in front of female staffers. It certainly hurts Biden, but not in a permanent way, just like how Trump was recorded talking about grabbing waffleswaffleswaffleswaffleswaffles, it didn't permanently hurt his chances of winning the election.

obviously your argument stands, but i think the D voting bloc will respond differently to such claims.

[mbonder]

I think it's a bunch of noise though, not like he whipped out his cock in front of female staffers. It certainly hurts Biden, but not in a permanent way, just like how Trump was recorded talking about grabbing waffleswaffleswaffleswaffleswaffles, it didn't permanently hurt his chances of winning the election.

[decay]

Joe Biden (despite his handsy nature I still think he's in at some point)

i can report that the far left does not have a positive impression of him because of that.

[mbonder]

I thought we were done with adding candidates beside maybe Joe Biden (despite his handsy nature I still think he's in at some point), but Tim Ryan, Representative from Ohio has also entered the race for the Democratic nomination.

[mbonder]

^Not denying any of that. But sometimes you have to break a few eggs to make an omelet. If jobs were lost at those government contractor companies, I am assuming it would be skilled labor or educated individuals, it should not be difficult for them to find another job with similar pay. Based on the lobbying spending from the big 3 in aviation... it looks like they could probably retain everyone if they just stopped the spending on lobbyists.

https://www.opensecrets.org/lobby/in...=D01&year=2018

I completely agree, but it's difficult to tell anyone that they're going to be out of a job, or let's not even go that far, just that their salary/income is going to be reduced (for instance if farm subsidies were to be reduced). I'm looking at it more from the political perspective. The politicians won't ever vote for reductions because if those reductions affect their constituency then they risk not getting reelected.

Just another reason why term limits for Congress are an awesome idea, that way the politicians are relatively shielded from the blowback of these decisions, especially if they are serving the last term of their political careers.

Anyway, it'll be curious where something like Defense spending fits into the embryonic proposals of the Dem hopefuls. I doubt you'll hear much given the political grenade that it is, but man would it be fun to watch them squirm over being asked to comment.

[decay]

oft cited yet totally false

and you've failed to provide any counter-evidence at any time, expecting me to just accept your answer of "false" as gospel truth completely without supporting evidence, or even argument

doesn't work that way, sunshine

(i swear i'm just waiting for sleeve to start an anti-vaxxer thread)

[mrsleeve]

your proximity to the issue creates bias so i still don't care what you think.

Again the facts of the matter dont support your position, my proximity to the issue has nothing to do with your oft cited yet totally false claim.

[decay]

Just because you keep saying it does not make it any less incorrect, than it was the last time you tried to fuck this particular chicken.

your proximity to the issue creates bias so i still don't care what you think.

[phillipj]

I think the one thing that people often don't mention when it comes to Defense Spending is that the largest benefactors from Defense Spending are the individual workers that would be out of a job if the Defense budget were to be cut. Defense spending is in a way another subsidy to a contingent of American citizenry. Often those Defense contractors are located in states where there isn't much in the way of other industry. Look at Alabama, how screwed would that state be if companies like Boeing, Lockheed Martin, BAE, Northrop Grumman, Airbus, Raytheon, General Dynamics, etc were to start slashing jobs because they didn't have the same money coming in from the DoD?

Traditionally, Republicans have called themselves job creators and have been able to prove successful in that capacity because they get into government and then immediately increase DoD spending, thus creating jobs. Look at what Trump did when he got into the Presidency, he immediately lowered taxes and increased DoD spending. Job creation 101, and the reason why the Defense budget will never shrink. Only President who effectively reduced the Defense budget in the last century was Eisenhower, because who would ever argue military spending with a 5 star general and the guy that saved the world from the Nazis?

x1000 facepalms -- The reason why the Defense Budget is so huge has almost nothing to do with "Job Creation" for "individual workers"... I suppose the reason the Farm Bill is so damn bloated every year is to maintain all the jobs of the little farmers all across the country, too.

[Schnitzer318is]

I think the one thing that people often don't mention when it comes to Defense Spending is that the largest benefactors from Defense Spending are the individual workers that would be out of a job if the Defense budget were to be cut. Defense spending is in a way another subsidy to a contingent of American citizenry. Often those Defense contractors are located in states where there isn't much in the way of other industry. Look at Alabama, how screwed would that state be if companies like Boeing, Lockheed Martin, BAE, Northrop Grumman, Airbus, Raytheon, General Dynamics, etc were to start slashing jobs because they didn't have the same money coming in from the DoD?

Traditionally, Republicans have called themselves job creators and have been able to prove successful in that capacity because they get into government and then immediately increase DoD spending, thus creating jobs. Look at what Trump did when he got into the Presidency, he immediately lowered taxes and increased DoD spending. Job creation 101, and the reason why the Defense budget will never shrink. Only President who effectively reduced the Defense budget in the last century was Eisenhower, because who would ever argue military spending with a 5 star general and the guy that saved the world from the Nazis?

^Not denying any of that. But sometimes you have to break a few eggs to make an omelet. If jobs were lost at those government contractor companies, I am assuming it would be skilled labor or educated individuals, it should not be difficult for them to find another job with similar pay. Based on the lobbying spending from the big 3 in aviation... it looks like they could probably retain everyone if they just stopped the spending on lobbyists.

https://www.opensecrets.org/lobby/in...=D01&year=2018

[z31maniac]

I think the one thing that people often don't mention when it comes to Defense Spending is that the largest benefactors from Defense Spending are the individual workers that would be out of a job if the Defense budget were to be cut. Defense spending is in a way another subsidy to a contingent of American citizenry. Often those Defense contractors are located in states where there isn't much in the way of other industry. Look at Alabama, how screwed would that state be if companies like Boeing, Lockheed Martin, BAE, Northrop Grumman, Airbus, Raytheon, General Dynamics, etc were to start slashing jobs because they didn't have the same money coming in from the DoD?

Traditionally, Republicans have called themselves job creators and have been able to prove successful in that capacity because they get into government and then immediately increase DoD spending, thus creating jobs. Look at what Trump did when he got into the Presidency, he immediately lowered taxes and increased DoD spending. Job creation 101, and the reason why the Defense budget will never shrink. Only President who effectively reduced the Defense budget in the last century was Eisenhower, because who would ever argue military spending with a 5 star general and the guy that saved the world from the Nazis?

That's an interesting point, but as someone who has worked for one of the largest defense contractors in the country, it's a HORRIFICALLY expensive way to create middle-class jobs.

It's like the old saying, "How you do end up with a million dollars in racing? Start with $10 million."

The waste and inefficiency are part of the exorbitant costs. The levels of bureaucracy. It's insane.