Who do you think would be a good President?

[MorkandMindy]

I really don't know a whole bunch about the candidates, and watching the Primary debates was a waste of time because again it was orchestrated by the top authorities, Nancy P and the top DNC authorities, which explains why all the candidates were fall guys who let nearly-dead Joe win for senate again, or so he believes.

On the basis of the little I know I'd say we have an unsuitable candidate provided by each party to choose between, so I'll ask about a couple of those who stepped aside to let Joe through and maybe there will be some other suggestions.

Bernie Sanders - well-respected, experienced with a good track record and more honest than 98% of the other politicians. Most would agree the US has been too far to the left for decades and needs more emphasis on the public and less catering to the very rich.

Elizabeth Warren - allegedly more intelligent than most and not evil like Hillary is, but her plan to spend more on US health care when it is already twice the cost of most countries' systems seems to indicate she's not all that bright. Any comments on this concern would be welcome.

Many Thanks

 

[MorkandMindy]

I'm not suggesting a third party, but since neither provided candidate is any good, that we should get agreement on a suitable candidate to either run independently or force the Democratic Party to accept as their candidate, perhaps if Joe has another major health problem in the near future.

Something to consider is that more of the electorate stayed at home in the 2016 election than voted for either candidate, many of those were disaffected Democrats who simply could not support the Democratic candidate, and there is a risk that will happen again.

In that plurality of the disaffected there are enough potential votes to elect someone good, and we will go out and vote if there is anyone better than the two parties are offering, which will not be difficult to find.

The big issue is focus. We have to debate and then all agree on one Presidential candidate and support them.

 

[rambot]

I think one thing that everyone acknowledges about Bernie is that he's been quite consistent in his messaging, bill drafting and legislation, and voting. He has said very few things I disagree with.

I really liked how Warren was responding during the banking crisis on 08. While not totally convinced either way, I do think her native american background provides bad optics. But I can't think of any legitimate reason why I would not support her.

 

[MorkandMindy]

Well lets get them both.

Bernie seemed on occasion to stutter which is perfectly fine, and some think on occasion he isn't convinced that he is totally right and that is also fine. Think of the strong Presidents we have had and they have produced the biggest disasters, very confidently, but very wrong, and we have another one right now.

 

[ZNP]

On the basis of the little I know I'd say we have an unsuitable candidate provided by each party to choose between, so I'll ask about a couple of those who stepped aside to let Joe through and maybe there will be some other suggestions.

agreed

Bernie Sanders...Elizabeth Warren...

Andrew Cuomo

 

[Lost4words]

Kermit maybe?

 

[MorkandMindy]

agreed

Andrew Cuomo

might be too far to the Right for the stage of the Industrial Revolution we are entering?

Kermit maybe?

for the job of President I think he is still a bit green

 

[Gene2memE]

Elizabeth Warren - allegedly more intelligent than most and not evil like Hillary is, but her plan to spend more on US health care when it is already twice the cost of most countries' systems seems to indicate she's not all that bright. Any comments on this concern would be welcome.

I don't thing you understood Warren's health care plan.

Here's the costings for it:

https://assets.ctfassets.net/4ubxbg...re_for_All_Cost_Letter___Appendices_FINAL.pdf

Long story short, Warren's Medicare-for-All plan was projected to drop total US healthcare costs by about ~$350 billion per year (against annual spending of $52 trillion), while expanding coverage by about 12% and utilisation by about 20% (ie, more people would use the system more frequently, but at a very slightly lower cost).

Here's how it would have been paid for:

https://assets.ctfassets.net/4ubxbg...edicare_for_All_Revenue_Letter___Appendix.pdf

Long story short, it required USD20.5 trillion in new federal revenue over a 10 year period. The majority of this would have come from changes to the way employee contributions are made, taxes on the top 2% of wealth holders and some reforms on the way corporations are taxed (mostly changing the laws concerning offshoring profits to tax havens).

 

[.Mikha'el.]

I've spent the last 4+ years wishing the man at the bottom of the last winning presidential ticket were actually at the top.

 

[public hermit]

I'll go with "some other suggestions." I'm thinking Bill Murray. We dont need a President. We certainly don't need one who does anything. Presidents who do things haven't been working out so well. Bill Murray is loved and can just be himself. He can delegate all important decisions to the usual power players. The system will click along, and one individual won't function as a determining factor. Besides, if the office is going to be a joke, it might as well be a good one.

 

[MorkandMindy]

... We don't need a President. We certainly don't need one who does anything. Presidents who do things haven't been working out so well...

It certainly is true that mover and shaker Presidents who get big things done work for the 'movers and shakers' of this World - the multi billionaires who don't care if they bankrupt the US as long as they can fill their own pockets and go live wherever in the World they want to park their huge yachts.

 

[FenderTL5]

Kermit maybe?

A Green Party candidate can never win.

 

[MorkandMindy]

I've spent the last 4+ years wishing the man at the bottom of the last winning presidential ticket were actually at the top.

Would that be Bernie or someone else?

 

[Yttrium]

Warren and Sanders are too far to the left for my tastes. Biden is fine, as far as I'm concerned. He's prone to gaffes, but he has plenty of qualifications and experience. I like what I've seen from Andrew Cuomo, and I like Amy Klobuchar.

 

[MorkandMindy]

Warren and Sanders are too far to the left for my tastes. Biden is fine, as far as I'm concerned. He's prone to gaffes, but he has plenty of qualifications and experience. I like what I've seen from Andrew Cuomo, and I like Amy Klobuchar.

If we continue on the present course we may go bankrupt.

At present we lose about 500 billion a year in our trade balance to the rest of the World, we are living beyond our means.

 

[MorkandMindy]

I don't thing you understood Warren's health care plan.

Here's the costings for it:

https://assets.ctfassets.net/4ubxbg...re_for_All_Cost_Letter___Appendices_FINAL.pdf

Long story short, Warren's Medicare-for-All plan was projected to drop total US healthcare costs by about ~$350 billion per year (against annual spending of $52 trillion), while expanding coverage by about 12% and utilisation by about 20% (ie, more people would use the system more frequently, but at a very slightly lower cost).

Here's how it would have been paid for:

https://assets.ctfassets.net/4ubxbg...edicare_for_All_Revenue_Letter___Appendix.pdf

Long story short, it required USD20.5 trillion in new federal revenue over a 10 year period. The majority of this would have come from changes to the way employee contributions are made, taxes on the top 2% of wealth holders and some reforms on the way corporations are taxed (mostly changing the laws concerning offshoring profits to tax havens).

I'll have to take your word for it.

There's something about where she's planning to get the new expenditure from, but it does state her plan will be less than the pretty crazy figure they gave for National Health Expenditure over the next 10 years, but I'm not sure how it compares in the table:

 

[SarahsKnight]

for the job of President I think he is still a bit green

 

[yougottabekidding]

The current one.

 

[MorkandMindy]

Donald Trump seemed to know what needed to be fixed and mentioned the workers who lost their jobs to other countries, and nothing pleases low value people like myself as much as being mentioned, but there has been very little follow-through

the problem with paying attention only to the very rich and the middle class and rendering those of us farther down the system unemployed or underemployed is the country as a whole ends up losing money.

People say they saved money by buying things cheaper from another country but overall they sent money out of this country and ran up our trade debt and destroyed manufacturing jobs in the US.

 

[Yttrium]

If we continue on the present course we may go bankrupt.

At present we lose about 500 billion a year in our trade balance to the rest of the World, we are living beyond our means.

Our present course is dealing with COVID-19. Our former economic plans are out the window, and we have to come up with new ideas.