Tulsi Gabbard

The Off-Topic forum for anything non-LDS related, such as sports or politics. Rated PG through PG-13.
Post Reply
_honorentheos
_Emeritus
Posts: 11104
Joined: Thu Feb 04, 2010 5:17 am

Re: Tulsi Gabbard

Post by _honorentheos »

Interesting that today's polls show a pretty big shake-up just a week before the Iowa Caucuses. According to RealClear, Warren has taken a pretty big hit since the episode behind the OP while Sanders is now in first in both Iowa and New Hampshire. The old saying that a candidate needs to win, place or show to have a future in the race looks bad for Warren.

Iowa -

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epoll ... -6731.html

Sander - 25
Biden - 22
Buttigieg - 17
Warren - 13.5

Bloomberg News is reporting this morning an even more recent poll has Klobuchar in the third place spot:

An Emerson University poll showed Sanders leading in Iowa with 30% while Joe Biden followed with 21%. Klobuchar was in third with 13% ahead of Elizabeth Warren and Pete Buttigieg who had 11% and 10%, respectively. The poll was conducted from Jan. 23-26 and has a margin of error of 4.6 percentage points.

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles ... ign-update

That said, the margin of error suggests third place is a three-way race. And a week is a long time...
The world is always full of the sound of waves..but who knows the heart of the sea, a hundred feet down? Who knows it's depth?
~ Eiji Yoshikawa
_EAllusion
_Emeritus
Posts: 18519
Joined: Tue Dec 04, 2007 12:39 pm

Re: Tulsi Gabbard

Post by _EAllusion »

Man, Bloomberg's continued rise is like a really expensive experiment to determine how much advertising matters in primary campaigns.
_DoubtingThomas
_Emeritus
Posts: 4551
Joined: Thu Sep 01, 2016 7:04 am

Re: Tulsi Gabbard

Post by _DoubtingThomas »

EAllusion wrote: You can save billions by upping the retirement age by one year..


Right, but America is under stress, and stress isn't good for your health.
_DoubtingThomas
_Emeritus
Posts: 4551
Joined: Thu Sep 01, 2016 7:04 am

Re: Tulsi Gabbard

Post by _DoubtingThomas »

EAllusion wrote:Why did you pick 80 as the age?


The life expectancy of a non-college-educated 65 year old is probably under 80. As I said the people that really need SS benefits probably don't make it to 80 years.

Image
_EAllusion
_Emeritus
Posts: 18519
Joined: Tue Dec 04, 2007 12:39 pm

Re: Tulsi Gabbard

Post by _EAllusion »

DoubtingThomas wrote:
EAllusion wrote:Why did you pick 80 as the age?


The life expectancy of a non-college-educated 65 year old is probably under 80. As I said the people that really need SS benefits probably don't make it to 80 years.

Image


How do you imagine this statement to be relevant to what I said?
_DoubtingThomas
_Emeritus
Posts: 4551
Joined: Thu Sep 01, 2016 7:04 am

Re: Tulsi Gabbard

Post by _DoubtingThomas »

EAllusion wrote:How do you imagine this statement to be relevant to what I said?


You said,
EAllusion wrote:You can save billions by upping the retirement age by one year. If I recall correctly, you can save billions by raising the age by two months.

The labor force expansion would also secondarily increase GDP growth which is both a good in of itself and would further help the federal budget.



I guess it is not relevant if you only care about saving billions of dollars.
_EAllusion
_Emeritus
Posts: 18519
Joined: Tue Dec 04, 2007 12:39 pm

Re: Tulsi Gabbard

Post by _EAllusion »

DoubtingThomas wrote:
EAllusion wrote:How do you imagine this statement to be relevant to what I said?


You said,
EAllusion wrote:You can save billions by upping the retirement age by one year. If I recall correctly, you can save billions by raising the age by two months.

The labor force expansion would also secondarily increase GDP growth which is both a good in of itself and would further help the federal budget.



I guess it is not relevant if you only care about saving billions of dollars.

You are not connecting the dots of your argument. Like, at all.
_DoubtingThomas
_Emeritus
Posts: 4551
Joined: Thu Sep 01, 2016 7:04 am

Re: Tulsi Gabbard

Post by _DoubtingThomas »

EAllusion wrote:You are not connecting the dots of your argument. Like, at all.


The retirement age is already too high EAllusion, but hopefully automation forces the government to lower the retirement age.
_EAllusion
_Emeritus
Posts: 18519
Joined: Tue Dec 04, 2007 12:39 pm

Re: Tulsi Gabbard

Post by _EAllusion »

DoubtingThomas wrote:
EAllusion wrote:You are not connecting the dots of your argument. Like, at all.


The retirement age is already too high EAllusion, but hopefully automation forces the government to lower the retirement age.


Well, that's an assertion.
_Gray Ghost
_Emeritus
Posts: 346
Joined: Thu Oct 16, 2014 5:43 pm

Re: Tulsi Gabbard

Post by _Gray Ghost »

DoubtingThomas wrote:According to the nypost,

Rep. Tulsi Gabbard has come to the defense of Sen. Bernie Sanders in his war of words with fellow Democratic presidential candidate Sen. Elizabeth Warren.

Gabbard, a Hawaii Democrat, shared a personal anecdote about a meeting she had with Sanders before declaring her own 2020 candidacy, saying the Democratic socialist from Vermont was nothing but supportive.

“We had a nice one-on-one conversation and I informed him that I would be running for President,” Gabbard tweeted Monday. “In that meeting, he showed me the greatest respect and encouragement, just as he always has.”

https://nypost.com/2020/01/14/tulsi-gab ... rren-feud/

CNN is just garbage. If the nypost report is accurate then it would only mean that CNN does't really care about objective journalism for not reporting it. CNN is destroying democracy. If Sanders doesn't win the nomination I will probably just stay home on election day.


Tulsi Gabbard is a garbage person.
Post Reply