[arista]

[Democratic senator Elizabeth Warren has announced she is formally preparing
to campaign for president in 2020.
Mrs Warren, 69, released a video on Monday
saying she was establishing a presidential campaign
exploratory committee - typically the first step in a US presidential candidate's bid.]


The Fight is on.




https://news.sky.com/story/elizabeth...l-bid-11595675


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elizabeth_Warren

[Tom4784]

This will be the Democrats' election to lose.

Trump only has his base left, the swing voters that fell for the bull**** the first time around won't likely fall for it again having experienced Trump's presidency, the only way he'll win is if the Democrats choose another flawed candidate who can be blown up though fake news as readily as Clinton was.

I've heard of Warren before and after looking her up, she seems like she'd be pretty decent (anyone is better than Trump though, let's be real) but honestly, the US needs Bernie Sanders.

[Oliver_W]

Awh, bless Fauxcohontas going for it

[Alf]

The only thing that can stop Trump winning again is if he doesn't get that wall built, that was his biggest promise.

[Tom4784]

Originally Posted by Alf

The only thing that can stop Trump winning again is if he doesn't get that wall built, that was his biggest promise.

Just goes to show how warped his base is, they don't mind him shutting down the government and forcing so many people to work unpaid, they don't mind him pissing all over them with his bull**** tax promises and they don't mind all the times he's laid to them but as long as he pretends he is going to build an ineffective wall that will ultimately be a multi billion dollar testament to his ego then everything's a-okay.

[Firewire]

Not sure if there's a specific thread for her, but I've been following a lot of her stuff online and she has really blown me away.

[Nicky91]

Originally Posted by Firewire

Not sure if there's a specific thread for her, but I've been following a lot of her stuff online and she has really blown me away.

same, what i heard about her on the daily show, they do profiles on each of democratic candidates

and i find Elizabeth really great, from ordinary normal teacher to now becoming a candidate for the 2020 election race


i think out of all democratic candidates i like her, and pete buttigieg and bernie sanders the most

[GiRTh]

Warren and Bernie are splitting the Progressive vote .

Biden doesnt look so impressive without Obama standing next to him and when the debates come and people see how awful his voting reecord is then I dont think he's gonna be anointed in the same way HRC was four years ago. Which is very much a good thing

Yang is by far the most interesting, for me. Another of these Jordan Pietersen type peudo-intellectual but his ideas are interesting and out there. I think many people on the right will like Yangs ideas when he finally gets some good airtime

[Nicky91]

some of Liz her plans in her 2020 election campaign

[LeatherTrumpet]

Its pretty inconsequential who they put up tbh

if the economy stays on point they have not got a hope in hell

[Nicky91]

Youtube video

Liz and Kamala on the way up in the polls

Youtube video

what Fox has to say on Elizabeth Warren

[Tom4784]

Originally Posted by LeatherTrumpet

Its pretty inconsequential who they put up tbh

if the economy stays on point they have not got a hope in hell

I'd say the concentration camps and the human rights abuse could very well count against Trump but that's just me...

[Nicky91]

Youtube video

[Oliver_W]

Originally Posted by Dezzy

I'd say the concentration camps and the human rights abuse could very well count against Trump but that's just me...

You can object to the detention facilities all you like, they're still not concentration camps.

We decided to take a closer look at whether historians believe the label "concentration camp" can be reasonably applied to the migrant detention camps now being operated in the United States.

Historians we contacted said it was possible to make a case that the term "concentration camp" is a more general term than just referring to camps in Nazi Germany. However, these historians said Ocasio-Cortez glosses over some important differences.

They also said that the strong, longstanding association of the term "concentration camps" with Nazi Germany likely overwhelms any technical similarities the two types of camps may have. We won’t rate this item on our Truth-O-Meter for that reason.

-

Immigrant rights advocates have long warned about poor standards and the mistreatment of detainees at some detention facilities. Generally, information about detention facilities can be difficult to obtain, inconsistent and outdated, and overall lacking in transparency.

-

Overall, experts described the U.S. detention facilities as being far different from those of the earliest concentration camps, or from the Nazi camps — even from the ones that weren’t "death camps."

"The original purpose of concentration camps was to remove the populace from areas that were controlled or contested by guerrillas and thus deny the guerrillas popular support in its tangible forms — food, shelter, information, recruits, and so on," said Texas A&M University historian Brian McAllister Linn. "This is not the purpose of the detention facilities in the Southwest."

Janda — who emphasized that he is unhappy with the current U.S. detention policy — nonetheless drew a distinction based on intent.

"What we’re doing is just not the same as what the Nazis or the Soviets did, and it’s a disservice to people suffering under dictatorships around the world to act like it is," Janda said. "We’re not rounding up legal citizens, or going after specific minority groups and holding them indefinitely to squash dissent."

Richard Breitman, an American University historian, was among several experts who said they would have avoided the term "concentration camp."

While the term "does show where abuse and dehumanization might lead," he said, "it confuses more than it explains."

There are two things the holding facilities are not :
1) Nice
2) Concentration camps

[Nicky91]

i guess when democrats come into power, the whole refugee camp crisis thing can be sorted out too

this is trump's mess and they gotta undo that same way trump did to Obama care

[Tom4784]

Originally Posted by Oliver_W

You can object to the detention facilities all you like, they're still not concentration camps.



There are two things the holding facilities are not :
1) Nice
2) Concentration camps

Again, if you're more offended by people calling these concentration camps what they are then by what goes on in them.

[LeatherTrumpet]

Originally Posted by Oliver_W

You can object to the detention facilities all you like, they're still not concentration camps.



There are two things the holding facilities are not :
1) Nice
2) Concentration camps

Yep it's just scoring political points on the backs of children. Vile

[Tom4784]

Originally Posted by LeatherTrumpet

Yep it's just scoring political points on the backs of children. Vile

And you are content to let the debate of what to call these camps override the abuses going on in this place. Don't try to take the moral highground when you are attempting to minimise human rights abuse and the deaths of children by trying to make their suffering into a point scoring exercise.

[Oliver_W]

Originally Posted by Dezzy

Again, if you're more offended by people calling these concentration camps what they are then by what goes on in them.

I am capable of thinking two different thingsat once, thank you. I don't agree with what's going on in the facilities, but I also don't think what the people within are going through should be weaponised, especially with emotive and spurious language like "concentration camps"

[Nicky91]

Youtube video

a interview she had

[Tom4784]

Originally Posted by Oliver_W

I am capable of thinking two different thingsat once, thank you. I don't agree with what's going on in the facilities, but I also don't think what the people within are going through should be weaponised, especially with emotive and spurious language like "concentration camps"

Ergo you are more offended by the term then the practices going on there because you've got this incorrect narrative that people can't highlight human rights abuse without it being 'weaponised'.

You can say you don't agree and that you oppose what's going on but you are more offended by these concentration camps being called what they are because they make people you are politically aligned with look bad and thus, you look bad and so any attempt to highlight what's going on for what it is, is considered an attack by you, not on human rights but on your political leaning. That is the truth of things. You're being defensive because you're playing the party lines when this is a case of blatant human rights abuse by the current administration that both sides of the aisle should be up in arms about.

This isn't a partisan issue, Oliver. It's human rights abuse and calling the camps by a nicer name doesn't change that, it merely attempts to minimise and hide what is going on within them. So by all means, take issue with the name used while not speaking out against the abuse, but know you are on the wrong side of history.

[Twosugars]

Originally Posted by LeatherTrumpet

Yep it's just scoring political points on the backs of children. Vile

This line of argument is immoral.

Calling out oppression is scoring points on the back of oppression? What demagoguery

I guess then that calling for end of apartheid was scoring points on the back of blacks?

Dont do wrong and then you won't be called on it!