Serious question... do you live in Texas? I find it crazy when I’m around friends here in Texas (Houston especially) that don’t speak at least a little Spanish and interact with Latinos quite often who are ESL. I get it if people thought Beto launching his responses in Spanish was over the top but if you are someone who thinks simply being an American and speaking Spanish is divisive, you either live in Russia, a white utopia state like Kansas, or a bubble city like Friendswood. That is one opinion I have no idea where it would come from but I guess that’s par for the course and probably a good indicator that you are not personally exposed to the culture we embrace down here. Even my most right wing friends and family (while they b**** about Mexicans and talk tough) on a daily basis actually embrace the multicultural experience we have. Even most of them speak a little espanol.
Why you all up in my mentions bruh? It aint that deep. You mad beto **** the bed or something. Huh, huh?
She is extremely smart and bright. But the last DEM presidential candidate wasn't so shabby in that area. What she has is a good balance of energy, toughness and authenticity, so that put her way above many candidate. Her weakness is her narrow street - corruption corruption big corp big corp and more corruption and with that she's going to be unsettling to many independent and moderates. But that they are against us, we are victim, it’s not fair, and anti corruption is what attract Dem, especially the younger one. They see her as truly fighting for them. In a way, similar to how republican see trump. She also appears physically shaky and sound shaky, and because she is a women the imagery to some is that of someone that is weak. Just simply winning the Dem primary would probably settle this perception. I also noticed she moved more center on gun, or at least seems to realize the danger there. I’m probably underestimating her.
I noticed her answer about firearms also. Anti-gun activism from the left can sometimes be cringy. It's an issue I've been moving center right on for a while now. We need universal background checks even amongst private sales but I don't believe than banning any type of firearms given the already massive circulation of them will accomplish much besides pissing off people. I'm glad Warren acknowledged that there are people who view firearms as a hobby and a right, something none of the other candidates up on that stage acknowledged. She also didn't fall into a trap to just blurt out a haphazard plan Instead she suggested that we need more research to see what the actual solution was.
Speaking Spanish isn't dividing anything. It does show some has had the dilligence to learn two languages, have multiple frames of reference to draw upon in problem solving and communicating well.
pretty accurate description of what went on: It wasn’t supposed to be like this. After the debacle that was the 2016 election, when the Democratic Party eased its anointed envoy Hillary Clinton into a presidential nomination she promptly flubbed, the powers that be swore they’d learned their lesson.Things would be different next time. The party would refrain from playing an outsize role in the nomination process. No scion chosen in advance: It was anyone’s game, and the only people who decided would be the people. It’s too early to tell whether that game plan has failed. But if Wednesday’s debate was any indication, the Democrats might meet their fate in 2020 on precisely the road they took to avoid it: ending up with the more or less default candidate—Joe Biden, this time around—not because they discouraged other candidates from challenging him, but because there are too many similar contenders. In theory, Wednesday’s debate should have been engaging. But it played out as a slog, with each candidate struggling to find an issue—any issue!—on which to stake out some unique ground among the pack. You want to know who won? Well, OK: For the first 30 minutes, it was the Elizabeth Warren show. Going into the evening, few of the other participants were known quantities with substantial support, so they all had to try to shoehorn their elevator pitches into their response to whatever question the moderators first gave them, which meant each came out of the gate looking sort of foolish and irritatingly slick. Warren didn’t have to bother with that nonsense, so she had the luxury to just answer the questions directly and seize the mantle of policy-focused straight shooter—exactly the role she wants to own—early on. Once everyone on stage had settled in, however, Warren quickly faded into the background. As a matter of fact, the impression one got from then on was that the debate was all background—a pile of relatively unknown politicians with relatively similar perspectives on pretty much everything straining every nerve to convince the audience that their particular brand of progressivism was what the country really needs. The thing didn’t resemble a political debate so much as an expo for office suppliers: At the end of the day, I doubt I’m going to be that much happier with your glossy paper than I would with the other guy’s, and I know I’m not going to be, like, excited about it. more at the link https://thebulwark.com/meet-the-carbon-copy-candidates/
I think it’s pandering. But dividing? That’s funny and show an amazing sensitivity.... just simply hearing someone speak Spanish is seen as an attack on their values tells you a lot.
It absolutely is divisive but that says a lot about the people that it bothers. It is also pandering, especially when they work it in in awkward moments.
All the candidates more or less took up Bernie 2016 positions except for Kobuchar who takes pride only supporting small changes and Delaney who more or less said he is a businessman moderate. It was like the cautious politics of the Obama and the Clintons were from a distant century. I think Biden will fade fast or have to do an about face so fast it will look totally phony..
Liking Warren more and more if she continues to adopt this “save capitalism” approach instead of “unabashed socialism” like Bernie.
The format was bad, but with 10 candidates on stage, it was going to be very difficult for any format to work well within a 2 hour timeframe. After tonight, I hope this is the last time Chuck Todd moderates a debate. Dude likes attention way too much. Warren did not need to do much more than just tread water...and that's exactly what she did. I mean, she was the only candidate on that stage with a halfway decent shot at the nomination, and she knows it. If she gets to be on the same stage as Biden, Bernie, etc...in the 2nd debate...then I expect her to be more aggressive. Beto is done, and I'm not surprised he did poorly. The shine had worn off of him awhile back. He didn't just look bad...he looked utterly overmatched out there compared to almost every other candidate out there on stage. The #1 loser, easily. Beto just feels like an empty suit on drugs to me. Castro, de Blasio, etc probably noticed that too and saw him as an easy mark. Beto needs to drop out soon and focus on unseating Cornyn in the Senate (and Beto will likely lose there, too). Castro helped himself the most, in a "who the hell is this guy" way. He came across pretty decent on immigration. But, I think his popularity boost will be short-lived. He may have a shot at VP or some cabinet position. Klobuchar came across as down-to-earth and realistic (as expected), and I personally like that. But that mindset will come across as bland and boring to much of the Dem primary electorate. It's probably not a winning approach these days, due to many people feeling angry and/or afraid with the current direction of the country, and wanting sweeping change. Booker...meh. A pretender. I like Tulsi far more than the other 9 candidates in the first debate (and far more than all of the candidates aside from Yang). But she was poor in the first half of the debate. Nervous and robotic. She got better in the 2nd half and had a really strong moment in her absolute destruction of Tim Ryan on the 9/11 question. She's much better in a more long-form, low-key setting, such as her appearance on Joe Rogan last month. De Blasio is a joke and seems like an *******. I can see why many New Yorkers despise the guy. Probably best for him to just go away quietly into the mist. The remaining 3 (Ryan, Delaney, Inslee) are nobodies and should fade away into the abyss. Ryan looked more like a triggered football coach than a presidential candidate.
