The next JFK...

Discussion in 'Elections & Campaigns' started by Derideo_Te, Apr 21, 2019.

  1. Derideo_Te

    Derideo_Te Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 3, 2015
    Messages:
    50,653
    Likes Received:
    41,718
    Trophy Points:
    113
    A while back @Pollycy and I were discussing the merits of various potential 2020 candidates and he remarked that he was looking for another JFK. The reasons he gave were sound and one of them was that a modern JFK would appeal to Conservatives who have abandoned the GOP and become Independents and to former Dems like myself for have become disillusioned with the party.

    I also had 2016 post mortem discussions with @Statistikhengst and @perotista. In them the latter was adamant that neither Hillary nor the BLOTUS were likable candidates and he was correct in that respect albeit for different reasons. Harkening back to Ross Perot he was the canary in the coal mine that issued the warning about the offshoring of American jobs that proved to be right.

    Someone else whose positions I respect is @Seth Bullock who has always been a sound voice of reason and a deep thinker on what is best for our nation. I also want to include @JakeStarkey and @Meta777 for the same reasons and that they are concerned about wanting what is best for our nation.

    The Dems have a large and growing crowd of hopefuls vying to become their candidate and while some are Establishment there are a lot of Progressives and some fringe candidates who just want an opportunity to obtain some name recognition. 538 compiled a set of criteria for separating the wheat from the chaff and came up with a list of what they determined to be "major candidates" who will make it to the Dem Primaries. From that list there are about 17 names who appear to viable.

    https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/who-might-make-the-democratic-debate-stage/

    All but one of those candidates is spouting Dem talking points in order to appeal to one or other segment of the Dem base.

    One of them has a DIFFERENT message altogether. His campaign looks a lot like the original Tea Party supporters for Ron Paul before it was HIJACKED by the GOP. His message has the broadest appeal because it goes directly to the most serious problem that plagues the electorate ACROSS party lines.

    He is a successful entrepreneur who can see what lies ahead for hardworking Americans and he has a VISION for dealing with it. Furthermore he has done the MATH and figured out how to pay for it.

    He is genuinely the MOST INDEPENDENT candidate I have ever seen and by far the most viable. Even Nate Silver has endorsed him since he has clawed his way up the 538 rankings into 8th place on GRASS ROOTS alone.

    He is NOT beholden to the Establishment of either party!

    He is NOT owned by any PAC or Corporate interests!

    He is NOT someone who inherited his wealth!

    There are no scandals surrounding him that I have been able to discover!

    He seems to be GENUINELY interested in doing what is right for America!

    I believe that he could be our nation's next JFK!
     
  2. Derideo_Te

    Derideo_Te Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 3, 2015
    Messages:
    50,653
    Likes Received:
    41,718
    Trophy Points:
    113
    What I would like from each of the members that I named above is to please give some time to doing their own research into our next potential JFK. I don't expect any of you to take my word for it.

    Instead I would appreciate your own thoughts and feedback on him. What are his strengths and weaknesses? What do you like and dislike about him? Do you believe that he even has a chance to make it into the General Election? What if he runs as a 3rd Party candidate?

    The above and a lot more are all relevant questions to ask in order to determine if he measures up to what we need.

    The objective here is determine if we have an OPPORTUNITY to actually end up with a candidate who GENUINELY represents We the People rather than a party or an ideology.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andrew_Yang
     
  3. PrincipleInvestment

    PrincipleInvestment Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 12, 2016
    Messages:
    23,170
    Likes Received:
    16,477
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    A rich, white, Catholic JFK reincarnation would appeal to who? If your deluded machinations include fantasies about JFK's doctrine being embraced by socialist entitlements addicts I feel sorry for you. JFK wanted a level playing field and to give the disadvantaged a hand up, not a set of crutches. Reparations, universal basic income, sanctuary states, gun control all contradict JFK's doctrines. JFK was an NRA member, and JFK's legal immigration quota was 157K per year. JFK kept the DoD well funded despite deficit spending. If JFK wanted to become president in 2020, he'd have to run as a republican.
     
    usfan, BaghdadBob, vman12 and 5 others like this.
  4. Alan Ford

    Alan Ford Member

    Joined:
    Dec 10, 2018
    Messages:
    43
    Likes Received:
    25
    Trophy Points:
    8
    Bookmarked! for future reference. A modern day JFK would be a good thing, especially if s/he adheres to these words of wisdom ---->

    Let us not seek the Republican answer or the Democratic answer, but the right answer. -- President John Fitzgerald Kennedy
     
  5. modernpaladin

    modernpaladin Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Apr 23, 2017
    Messages:
    27,705
    Likes Received:
    21,104
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    I'll take a JFK in 2024.

    [​IMG]
    [​IMG]
     
    vman12, 10A, Injeun and 2 others like this.
  6. PatriotNews

    PatriotNews Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 20, 2008
    Messages:
    27,756
    Likes Received:
    3,715
    Trophy Points:
    113
    The JFK we know today is a portrait painted by sycophant historians who always seem to lean left when rewriting history.

    JFK was a selfish, sexist, politician who only cared about pleasing his father's goal of his son becoming President. JFK didn't help advance civil rights, he helped prolong the Jim Crow laws. He cheated on his wife and abused drugs. Then he was murdered, probably by LBJ, and made a hero in retrospect.
     
    Last edited: Apr 21, 2019
    Kathie Harine and Blaster3 like this.
  7. Derideo_Te

    Derideo_Te Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 3, 2015
    Messages:
    50,653
    Likes Received:
    41,718
    Trophy Points:
    113
    For the sake of CLARIFICATION the RELEVANT ATTRIBUTES of JFK are his VISION and LEADERSHIP which INSPIRED our nation to achieve great things.

    Rehashing JFK's history is off topic per the OP.

    We are looking for someone who has VISION and the LEADERSHIP to INSPIRE us to set our nation on the right course again.
     
  8. jay runner

    jay runner Banned

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2017
    Messages:
    16,319
    Likes Received:
    10,027
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    JFK had a foreign policy of assassinating foreign leaders. That should count. For something.
     
  9. Alan Ford

    Alan Ford Member

    Joined:
    Dec 10, 2018
    Messages:
    43
    Likes Received:
    25
    Trophy Points:
    8
    Hopefully the modern JFK likeness, whether s/he be male or female is beholden to the same core foreign-policy of President Kennedy: allowing 3rd world countries the right to seek self-determination, even if their nation possessed an abundance of natural resources, rather than making them colonies motivated by greed.
     
    JakeStarkey and Derideo_Te like this.
  10. Derideo_Te

    Derideo_Te Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 3, 2015
    Messages:
    50,653
    Likes Received:
    41,718
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Greed motivated colonialists have been replaced by greed motivated multinational corporations. The end result for the 3rd world nations is exactly the same. Whatever assets they have will be strip mined and the nation abandoned to it's now poorer fate as soon as the profits dry up.

    What is interesting is that Yang has observed that happening right here in the USA and it is only going to get worse in the future. He has a solution and done the math to make it work so we do not end up like those 3rd world nations.
     
    Mr_Truth and Alan Ford like this.
  11. Alan Ford

    Alan Ford Member

    Joined:
    Dec 10, 2018
    Messages:
    43
    Likes Received:
    25
    Trophy Points:
    8
    Encouraging someone is actually shedding light upon these selfish practices, and genuinely caring to offer a solution. Hear! hear!
     
    JakeStarkey and Derideo_Te like this.
  12. Derideo_Te

    Derideo_Te Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 3, 2015
    Messages:
    50,653
    Likes Received:
    41,718
    Trophy Points:
    113
    https://www.yang2020.com/policies/the-freedom-dividend/

     
    redeemer216, Alan Ford and Mr_Truth like this.
  13. Right is the way

    Right is the way Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2013
    Messages:
    3,214
    Likes Received:
    1,584
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Finding a womanizer who has a pain killer addiction with mob ties in the democratic party shouldn't be that tough.
     
    usfan, BaghdadBob, 10A and 2 others like this.
  14. PatriotNews

    PatriotNews Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 20, 2008
    Messages:
    27,756
    Likes Received:
    3,715
    Trophy Points:
    113
    That's what we have. Give him a chance.
    giphy (26).gif
     
  15. Seth Bullock

    Seth Bullock Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2015
    Messages:
    13,625
    Likes Received:
    11,934
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Thanks for the kind words in your post, Derideo.

    I read the Wiki link you provided, and I went to Yang's campaign website and read more.

    On UBI:

    On its face, we might think that if we infuse everyone with $1000/month, we will improve the general welfare of people, particularly the poor and lower middle class. But consider this ... If we do that, we'll create a higher demand for things. And if we create more demand, those who produce and retail things are going to raise prices (not lower them) because that's how the market works. Prices will always rise to the level that the demand for things will tolerate. If they rise too high, the demand falls off, and sales drop. So producers and retailers find that highest price level they can go to that doesn't force that fall-off of sales. For example, let's imagine a family of 4 living in a 2-bedroom apartment because that's all they can afford. They would like to rent a house, but the cost of renting a house is too high. Now we give them an additional $1000/month, and they think they can now afford the house. What do you think is going to happen to the cost to rent that house? It's going to skyrocket because the demand will skyrocket. So also will the cost of that 2-bedroom apartment they're in. I think we could also expect the price of food, clothes, household products, electronics - everything, really - to rise right along with the increased demand.

    Another incentive to raise prices would be to recover as much of the VAT as possible. So now we would have dual forces at work raising prices - market demand for things and the effort to recover the cost of the VAT. As the market adjusts to the changing paradigm, we could find that eventually that $1000 becomes almost worthless, eaten up the higher cost of everything.

    - And we also know from experience that entitlements have a permanent and irrevocable nature about them. So as that $1000 becomes worth less and less, political pressure would inevitably come about to raise the UBI just like it does to raise the minimum wage. Correspondingly, there would be pressure exerted by producers not to raise the VAT. If our politicians, in their infinite wisdom, choose to satisfy both sides, then they take the easy route (surprise, surprise) and raise the UBI but not raise the VAT. The outcome is that we're going to deficit spend. Frankly, I do not trust our politicians to be fiscally responsible. Why should I? That is not their track record.

    - A VAT is, in effect, a back door sales tax. If it's an across-the-board 10% tax, it is automatically a regressive tax. That is, the cost that is passed on to the consumer is the same percentage on all things big and small, and it is passed on to consumers whose incomes are both big and small. And so, by its very nature, a regressive tax is harder on poor people than it is on higher income people. (It is for this very reason that income taxes are progressively higher as a percentage at higher income levels than at lower levels.) I suppose an alternative would be to impose a VAT that is progressive, so that cheap items have a low VAT, with a sliding scale that would result in the most expensive items having the highest VAT.

    - Some people don't need an extra $1000/month, and some poor people shouldn't be given $1000/month. What do I mean by that?

    If a couple is working hard and earning $150,000/year, do they really need a government subsidy of $12,000? No, they don't. Nice to have? Sure. But necessary? No.

    On the flip side of the coin, what about homeless people? I note that every time a city clears out a homeless camp and cleans it up, they remove mountains - and I mean mountains - of used needles. The problem these people have is drug addiction. A secondary problem is mental illness. We are not going to cure either of those problems by handing them money. I think there are ways to address those problems, but handing those people money is not one of them. Those people need intervention, rehabilitation and supervision, but not a cash handout.

    - And I don't appreciate this verbiage from Yang's website ... "Big companies and rich people are excellent at moving things around to avoid taxes – Amazon, Google, and other companies funnel hundreds of billions in earnings overseas. A VAT makes it impossible for them to benefit from the American people and infrastructure without paying their fair share."

    The reason I don't appreciate it is that it is insulting my intelligence. It is trying to tell me that big, greedy corporations are going to pay for this, not me. It is the same old "you can have everything and someone else will pay for it" appeal (like "free" medical care or "free" education). It's an appeal to our baser instincts of class envy and class resentment. In my opinion, that is not a good way to run a country, and above all, it's untruthful. Inevitably, we will pay for it. And when I say "we", I don't mean "them". I mean "us". So my response is, "Don't appeal to my baser instincts, and don't insult my intelligence."

    A counter to Yang's UBI

    Increase availability of better jobs

    • We should demand fair trade with other nations, not free trade.
    • We should incentivize U.S. companies to produce in the U.S.
    • We should dis-incentivize U.S. companies from producing overseas for the domestic U.S. market.
    • We should incentivize foreign companies to produce in the U.S.
    Control immigration
    • A glut of workers holds down wages. A shortage of workers pushes wages up.
    Invest in education
    • I am not opposed to free tuition for college students. I am against most of the formulas that are talked about to achieve that. I do not want the federal government involved in this with every politician from Maine to Hawaii sticking their fingers into it. I believe this can be done by far more efficiently and less expensively at the state level, and the only thing holding us back is ourselves.
    Balance the federal budget
    • I want my federal government to balance its budget before it embarks on any new tax and spend programs. If we are going to raise taxes, then let's dedicate those new taxes to balancing the existing budget, not to new programs. When we have shown enough fiscal responsibility to do that, then let's talk about new programs, but not before. (Yes, I am a fiscal Nazi.)

    Other topics of concern from Yang's website

    Health care for all
    Gun control
    Electoral college
    Lowering the voting age to 16
    Supreme Court

    We can tackle those things later if you wish.

    Thanks again.:handshake:

    Seth :flagus:
     
    Mrs. b., usfan, vman12 and 2 others like this.
  16. APACHERAT

    APACHERAT Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jun 23, 2013
    Messages:
    38,026
    Likes Received:
    16,042
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male

    That's all we need, another JFK and another Berlin Wall, Bay of Pigs, missile crises and another Vietnam War.

    No thank you.

    History has shown us that the "young and brightest" in the endgame weren't to bright.
     
    Le Chef likes this.
  17. perotista

    perotista Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jul 12, 2014
    Messages:
    16,902
    Likes Received:
    5,680
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    JFK was unique. He was suited to a T to handle the era and situation he was thrust in. I can't envision someone stating, "Ask not what your country can do for you, but what you can do for your country." He'd be laughed out of town today. JFK wasn't tied down to push just liberal or conservative causes or agendas either. Back then the Democratic Party was known as the big tent party, it had both its liberal and conservative wings with a bunch in-between. He was very much the anti-communist, I suppose some would classify him as a war hawk today. Yet, he knew when to apply constraints. JFK had the support of the nation behind him, Democrats, Republicans and independents. Back then I think we all knew that a successful presidency also made for a successful nation.

    JFK averaged a 65% approval rating throughout his almost three years. 85% average approval by Democrats, 51% by Republicans and a 64% average from independents. No president has come close to an approval percentage by the opposing party since. Reagan came the closest with a 40% approval average by Democrats. By comparison, Trump has average 7% from Democrats, Obama 14% average from Republicans, G.W. Bush average a 30% approval from Democrats for his first term, due to 9-11. He averaged only a 9% during his second term. Bill Clinton averaged 32% from Republicans.

    I think polarization and hyper partisanship will prevent another JFK from arising. Let's face it, neither JFK nor Eisenhower could gain their respective party's nomination today. Both parties have moved too far away from what they stood for and their political ideology. There is no JFK on the horizon and even if there was one, neither party would nominate him.
     
    Injeun and APACHERAT like this.
  18. JakeStarkey

    JakeStarkey Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 4, 2016
    Messages:
    25,747
    Likes Received:
    9,526
    Trophy Points:
    113
    We did, and he blew it immediately with his luv luv for Putin and Russia.
     
    Alan Ford and Derideo_Te like this.
  19. PatriotNews

    PatriotNews Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 20, 2008
    Messages:
    27,756
    Likes Received:
    3,715
    Trophy Points:
    113
    That #FakeNews story has been debunked.

    Who sold uranium to Russia and let Putin invade Ukraine and annex Crimea? Who paid a foreign agent for a Russian dossier and then used it to spy on the opposition party candidate Donald Trump?

    Wake up people, it's all been a lie by Democrats in their lust for power.
     
    Last edited: Apr 21, 2019
    Injeun likes this.
  20. JakeStarkey

    JakeStarkey Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 4, 2016
    Messages:
    25,747
    Likes Received:
    9,526
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Uranium 1 is known by the American electorate to be a so-failed GOP attack on Clinton.

    All of America knows Trump and the GOP climbed into bed with Putin and Russia.

    The American people have come to their senses about GOP lies in its failing grab for power.
     
    Last edited: Apr 21, 2019
  21. Seth Bullock

    Seth Bullock Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2015
    Messages:
    13,625
    Likes Received:
    11,934
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    The hyper-partisanship you speak of is, in my opinion, deliberately fueled and fomented by our political class. I do not think they represent the average American. I think the American public would like to have a JFK-esque president, but our political class simply won't let us have one.
     
  22. PrincipleInvestment

    PrincipleInvestment Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 12, 2016
    Messages:
    23,170
    Likes Received:
    16,477
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    IRONIC! See thread title & author.
     
    vman12 likes this.
  23. PrincipleInvestment

    PrincipleInvestment Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 12, 2016
    Messages:
    23,170
    Likes Received:
    16,477
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    I'd have more respect for the "orange man bad" posters. If they'd just insult Trump's for flaws he actually has. At least they don't fabricate conspiracies. They hate him, they so, that's that. No tinfoil required.
     
    Last edited: Apr 21, 2019
  24. perotista

    perotista Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jul 12, 2014
    Messages:
    16,902
    Likes Received:
    5,680
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    I think you're right. That hyper-partisanship and polarization is one reason for independents rising from 30% of the electorate in 2006 to 42% today. Both major parties are shrinking, moving away from where most folks are ideological wise to the left and right fringes is one of the main causes. Something is definitely wrong when close to half of all Americans have no political party to call their own.

    I think its interesting that in 1961 and again in 1964 the Democratic Party peaked at 51% of the electorate. In the era of the big tent Democratic party. Disowning its conservative wing and dropping most of its moderates has caused that party to drop to 30% today.

    https://www.people-press.org/interactives/party-id-trend/
     
    Last edited: Apr 21, 2019
    Derideo_Te likes this.
  25. JakeStarkey

    JakeStarkey Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 4, 2016
    Messages:
    25,747
    Likes Received:
    9,526
    Trophy Points:
    113
    The hyper-partisanship of the extremists on the right wing have blown up, poisoning the faith of the rest of America in them and thier causes.
     

Share This Page