You know who I would much rather have in office during a crisis like this?

[astonmartin708]

Hillary Clinton. People seemed to forget in 2016 that presidents don't just deal with tax cuts and geopolitics. I think she would have been much stronger in response to this crisis. (and wouldn't have been telling her base that it was just another version of the flu)

She might be unlikable (and maybe even corrupt), but she knows how to keep the machine running. Donnie doesn't know how to deal when things start failing on him, besides running up debt and using bankruptcy law to his advantage.

 

[lawpoke87]

I have mixed emotions regarding Hillary and this crisis. i have no doubt she would be able to organize a better government effort than what we've seen to date. I don't think she would have brought in the private sector to the extent we've seen as far as testing, etc... Trump needs to get out of the way and let the experts do their thing. I like the private / corporate partnership where each side utilizes it's strengths.

Let's be honest. there's not a politician in the US who is willing to do what needs to be done to significantly limit the spread.

 

[URedskin54]

I think every president would have downplayed the risk at the beginning, but agreed that she would have done a better job to date.

 

[astonmartin708]

It's times like this when I support a stronger federal presence. We need a more cohesive and definitive plan / message / guidance from a central authority, rather than just suggestions and state aid. Probably 8 out of 10 industries are feeling a crunch from the economic impacts of this slowdown and will continue to feel them until they can recoup their losses after we get back to business as usual.

Many industries are asking for handouts from the government when just a few months ago they were advocating for fiscal deregulation. I think it is situations like this where it becomes evident that our sometimes a government is required to do more than just promote the free market or defend our civil liberties. People will be all in favor of smaller government right up until the point where the doctors tell them that the patient down the hall needs the respirator more than their sick family member, and that the hospital just doesn't have the necessary supplies to deal with the outbreak.

Of course any society will struggle to deal with events like this, but some seem to be better prepared than others. The best ones so far seem to be the ones with extreme senses of duty to community like Japan / Korea.

 

[Watu3]

Mitt Romney would have been solid. He is a seasoned executive and governor. He stepped in and turned around the struggling Utah Winter Olympics and established the precursor of Obama care as Governor of Massachusetts. His senate vote showed he can make tough decisions regardless of the political fall out.

By and large most governors have done a spectacular job compared to the president ....and still are.

 

[Clong83a]

Mitt Romney would have been solid. He is a seasoned executive and governor. He stepped in and turned around the struggling Utah Winter Olympics and established the precursor of Obama care as Governor of Massachusetts. His senate vote showed he can make tough decisions regardless of the political fall out.

By and large most governors have done a spectacular job compared to the president ....and still are.

I considered voting for Mitt in the general. And he would have been a fine president. We had two good options in 2012. I disagree with him on some issues, but agree with him on others (like nuclear). But he was competent and that was clear. I’ll vote for someone competent and serious that I disagree with on some issues over someone I agree with more frequently if that person is less competent and capable.

Unfortunately for Mitt, he ran against an incumbent Barack Obama, who was also a proven, serious, and competent executive, and one I happened to like.

 

[lawpoke87]

Should we be concerned that it's a certainty our next President won't be able to string together two coherent thoughts?

 

[astonmartin708]

Should we be concerned that it's a certainty our next President won't be able to string together two coherent thoughts?

You could have gone with Beto, he's young enough to not have alzheimers.

 

[URedskin54]

You could have gone with Beto, he's young enough to not have alzheimers.

Would have been our first furry president. Historic

 

[Watu3]

Should we be concerned that it's a certainty our next President won't be able to string together two coherent thoughts?

Apparently many are not concerned. We have been living with that situation for 3 plus years.

 

[lawpoke87]

Apparently many are not concerned. We have been living with that situation for 3 plus years.

Agree. Odd that those complaining the most our about to nominate someone just as bad. I asked this last election cycle and will ask again this one. Is this the best we can do? Maybe it's time to change the way we elect Presidents.

 

[astonmartin708]

Agree. Odd that those complaining the most our about to nominate someone just as bad. I asked this last election cycle and will ask again this one. Is this the best we can do? Maybe it's time to change the way we elect Presidents.

"Just as bad" I would say Biden might be just as incoherent, but I would say he's much less malevolent and hateful than Trump is.

 

[lawpoke87]

"Just as bad" I would say Biden might be just as incoherent, but I would say he's much less malevolent and hateful than Trump is.

I was speaking of being incoherent.

 

[eastcane]

Have some good news. In a little over two weeks, the worst will be over, and the economy is going to really pop.

 

[URedskin54]

I was speaking of being incoherent.

Definitely needs to pick a good VP.

 

[aTUfan]

You could have gone with Beto, he's young enough to not have alzheimers.

Mitt would be good. He is not political.

Beto would just take our guns and tell us that will make us better.

 

[astonmartin708]

Mitt would be good. He is not political.

Beto would just take our guns and tell us that will make us better.

To be fair to Beto, his constituency had just gone through a terrible act of racist terrorism linked to Trump. I'm sure that event shaped Beto's stance a bit.

 

[lawpoke87]

Have some good news. In a little over two weeks, the worst will be over, and the economy is going to really pop.

View embedded media

I pray the American people listen to the remarks of our officials better than you.

 

[aTUfan]

To be fair to Beto, his constituency had just gone through a terrible act of racist terrorism linked to Trump. I'm sure that event shaped Beto's stance a bit.

what event?

 

[Clong83a]

what event?

The El Paso WalMart shooting was in his district/hometown. And it happened during the beginning of his campaign. I think all Aston is saying is that while Beto took a hard line stance on guns, it may not be too surprising coming from a guy that just faced a tragedy in his hometown. I don't think Aston was necessarily agreeing with Beto's stance, but I will let him speak to it if he so wishes.

 

[Clong83a]

"Just as bad" I would say Biden might be just as incoherent, but I would say he's much less malevolent and hateful than Trump is.

As goofy as they both can be with their public speaking, I will say the two duelling press conferences on the Corona virus response last week were night and day between them. Even if Biden is faltering mentally, he at least knows enough to stay on script and trust his advisors. That's more than I can say for Trump.

While I won't completely dismiss concerns about Biden's mental health, I will say that I am less concerned about it than I am Trump's. Mostly because Biden has always been that way. He had a speech impediment as a kid and he has always struggled with public speaking. So using weird verbal missteps (especially in off-the-cuff moments) as a guide is less reliable an indicator for his mental state than it would otherwise be.

 

[URedskin54]

Beto tried to capitalize on a mass shooting to restart his presidential campaign. It was pretty gross.

 

[lawpoke87]

As goofy as they both can be with their public speaking, I will say the two duelling press conferences on the Corona virus response last week were night and day between them. Even if Biden is faltering mentally, he at least knows enough to stay on script and trust his advisors. That's more than I can say for Trump.

While I won't completely dismiss concerns about Biden's mental health, I will say that I am less concerned about it than I am Trump's. Mostly because Biden has always been that way. He had a speech impediment as a kid and he has always struggled with public speaking. So using weird verbal missteps (especially in off-the-cuff moments) as a guide is less reliable an indicator for his mental state than it would otherwise be.

Trump needs to make a scripted opening statement and allow the others to speak from that point. Pence actually does a nice job at the mic. Fauci is very impressive and will come out of this as a national celebrity.

 

[astonmartin708]

Beto tried to capitalize on a mass shooting to restart his presidential campaign. It was pretty gross.

You know what's pretty gross? People needlessly shooting and killing other people.

 

[URedskin54]

You know what's pretty gross? People needlessly shooting and killing other people.

Yeah we should have a law against that. You know what, quit responding to me. I say something about the insincerity of the most insincere man I've ever met, Beto O'Rourke, and your response is to imply that I don't care about people getting killed? Take that somewhere else.

 

[astonmartin708]

Yeah we should have a law against that. You know what, quit responding to me. I say something about the insincerity of the most insincere man I've ever met, Beto O'Rourke, and your response is to imply that I don't care about people getting killed? Take that somewhere else.

We have laws against speeding, but that doesn't stop people from speeding. You know what stops people who are safety risks from speeding? Taking their licenses away and impounding their cars.

You dwell more on the sincerity of the guy bringing up the issue than the validity of the issue itself.

 

[URedskin54]

We have laws against speeding, but that doesn't stop people from speeding. You know what stops people who are safety risks from speeding? Taking their licenses away and impounding their cars.

Yes we should have a law the takes guns away from people if they use guns to harm people. Again, please talk to someone else about this.

 

[astonmartin708]

Yes we should have a law the takes guns away from people if they use guns to harm people. Again, please talk to someone else about this.

But we have comparatively few laws requiring licenses for ownership / use, laws mandating registration, laws governing the revocation of privileges for irresponsible use, laws mandating liability insurance related incidents, laws governing the safety features of the property itself etc...

We have all of that for cars, but next to none of that for firearms, and they're essentially equally as dangerous when used by the wrong person.

I would call you sincere in your beliefs, it's just that your beliefs tend to allow people to get hurt. I would say the same if you were an advocate against drivers' licenses, driver's registrations, DUI revocations, car insurance mandates, and air bags.

 

[astonmartin708]

In the meantime: Elizabeth Warren's requirements for government bailouts:

1. Companies must maintain their payrolls and use funds to keep people working or on payroll.

2. Companies must provide a $15 minimum wage within one year of the national emergency declaration ending.

3. Companies are permanently prohibited from engaging in share repurchases.

4. Companies are prohibited from paying out dividends or executive bonuses while they are receiving any relief and for three years thereafter.

5. Companies must set aside at least one seat – but potentially two or more, as the amount of relief increases – on the board of directors for representatives elected by workers.

6. Collective bargaining agreements should remain in place and should not be reopened or renegotiated pursuant to this relief program.

7. Corporations must obtain shareholder and board approval for all political expenditures.

8. CEOs must be required to personally certify a company is in compliance and face criminal penalties for false certifications.

9. Congress must set up an oversight body, modeled on the Congressional Oversight Panel and the SIGTARP program for the bank bailout, but with real funding & subpoena power. We need real accountability to make sure these conditions are met.


Don't agree with it all, but I certainly agree with some of it. Specifically the part about giving board seats to the workers. If you are expecting the public to support your company financially, you should be expected to have more input form the public (common worker) on how their investment is utilized.

 

[URedskin54]

1,2,5, and 7 are idiotic. The rest are fine.

 

[lawpoke87]

Can we hold our elected representatives who all are paid by federal funds to similar standards. How about programs such as social security, Medicare, etc and those in charge of the same?

I have no idea how an Senator can be so brain dead not to realize what a $15 hour minimum wage would do to small businesses across Oklahoma (especially rural areas) and how the same would allow the large retailers to drive those people out of business.

 

[astonmartin708]

1,2,5, and 7 are idiotic. The rest are fine.

I get your distaste for 2 and maybe even 7. But why 1 and 5?

 

[astonmartin708]

Can we hold our elected representatives who all are paid by federal funds to similar standards. How about programs such as social security, Medicare, etc and those in charge of the same?

I have no idea how an Senator can be so brain dead not to realize what a $15 hour minimum wage would do to small businesses across Oklahoma (especially rural areas) and how the same would allow the large retailers to drive those people out of business.

I would broadly be for that. Also, I don't think she's talking about small business. Small businesses don't typically have shareholders or boards, or collective bargaining agreements.

 

[Clong83a]

I get your distaste for 2 and maybe even 7. But why 1 and 5?

Actually 7 is the only one I don't see... What's wrong with 7? I can understand objections to 1,2, and 5. But if you are getting money from the government and benefiting from it, it would seem to make sense that you can't pump that money back to any party or politician. That is otherwise known as a kickback, or at least the appearance of one.

 

[astonmartin708]

For the record, I don't like 2 or 7 because of the difficulty of implementation and the long term results. I also don't like 4 because of the 'permanent' language. Maybe temporarily.

 

[lawpoke87]

I would broadly be for that. Also, I don't think she's talking about small business. Small businesses don't typically have shareholders or boards, or collective bargaining agreements.

I have seen no size or geographical exception for her $15 minimum wage policy. There’s a reason she finished 3rd in her home states primary

 

[astonmartin708]

Actually 7 is the only one I don't see... What's wrong with 7? I can understand objections to 1,2, and 5. But if you are getting money from the government and benefiting from it, it would seem to make sense that you can't pump that money back to any party or politician. That is otherwise known as a kickback, or at least the appearance of one.

I just don't necessarily like shareholders being able to determine the political leanings of a company and I think it would be hard to determine what a political expenditure is. Also, these companies probably have so many political expenditures that voting with the board + shareholders on each one would be unrealistic.

 

[astonmartin708]

I have seen no size or geographical exception for her $15 minimum wage policy. There’s a reason she finished 3rd in her home states primary

Oh I know. She was trying to get that implemented nationally. But I think this specific set of proposals would be specific to big business (banks, airlines, etc...)

 

[URedskin54]

Actually 7 is the only one I don't see... What's wrong with 7? I can understand objections to 1,2, and 5. But if you are getting money from the government and benefiting from it, it would seem to make sense that you can't pump that money back to any party or politician. That is otherwise known as a kickback, or at least the appearance of one.

I can see saying “you can’t donate the bailout money to a politician or political cause” because I don’t really see a problem with there being strings attached to the money. But there are constitutional implications with restricting a corporation’s ability to donate in general. It’s tricky of course because money can be moved around.

 

[lawpoke87]

I can see saying “you can’t donate the bailout money to a politician or political cause” because I don’t really see a problem with there being strings attached to the money. But there are constitutional implications with restricting a corporation’s ability to donate in general. It’s tricky of course because money can be moved around.

Do you take that a step further and decree that union members who receive bailout funds from their employer can’t contribute any part of that money for union dues which are then used for political purposes ? Basically...unions aren’t allowed to take union dues from those wages.