jrober38

Yes. If he can't run, he's a bottom 10 passer among starting QBs, which isn't good enough to win with at the NFL level. His body is destroyed, or he's just no longer willing to put it on the line he did when he first got into the league. You can't win with a QB who has a passer rating in the mid 80s in todays NFL, unless they're an electric runner.

He literally didn't say any of this. He said he wants to ban "AR-15s and AK-47s". He never said he wants to ban all guns. He never said he wants to ban all ammunition. You guys are the ones saying that, even though there's zero evidence of it being the case.

True. Hilariously, minorities are more conservative on most issues than white democrats.

Some assault weapons are already banned. Just like some semi-automatic rifles might become banned. You can't go out and buy a fully automatic rifle. They want to add some semi automatics to that list. They have no interest in taking all of your guns. Your paranoia is out of control.

Of course it is. You're not hunting deer in the Northeast US in a forest with brush and branches the bullet might have to go through with a freaking .22. Your odds of delivering a "clean kill" in those conditions are slim to none with a considerable chance of wounding and killing the animal without ever finding it. I'm a deer hunter and I don't know anyone who hunts with anything smaller than a .270. Beto O'Rourke has defined assault weapon, numerous times, as an AR-15 or AK-47. All your other guns are fine.

I find that hard to believe. I imagine the vast majority of deer hunters are hunting with something a hell of a lot bigger than a .22. Because every single other developed country in the world limits the cost of prescription drugs and limits the amount of money doctors can earn. They also take away the insurance aspect out of it, in the sense that it's run as a not for profit organization where there are no shareholders or dividends to pay out. It's really quite straight forward. It's not complicated. US healthcare is about twice as expensive per capita than most developed countries in the world.

No one is hunting deer with a 22 calibre semi automatic rifle. I can't imagine that would even be remotely legal given how inhumane it would be to the animal.

No. It's literally every "AR-15". How do you take "AR-15" and "AK-47" and jump to, they want all our guns!?!? Holy crap.

LOL More hysterical paranoia. Universal healthcare works great in every developed country in the world, at a fraction of the cost that Americans pay for healthcare.

Exactly. Such hysterical paranoia.

I completely disagree. You're paranoid if you think they have any intention of taking away your deer rifle.

Or that demographic just prefers several other candidates.

Saying you're going to take away AR-15s and AK-47s automatically means they're going after all pistols, shotguns and hunting rifles?

The notion that they all want to take away ALL guns is completely disingenuous.

I agree he's not going to win the nomination, but I don't think the fact that he's a gay married man would hurt him if for whatever reason he was the nominee.

I disagree. Current polls suggest over 60% of Americans support same sex marriage. The Democrat "base" would definitely support someone like Buttigieg.

Condoms are only 85% effective.

Think about what technology was in your life 20 years ago. Now think about how much is in your life today. The world will be drastically different in 20 years. Cars will be self driving, truckers will all be out of business, food service jobs will continue being taken over by computers and robots, etc. Jobs that are minimum wage, or close to it now, will probably mostly be eliminated in 20 years. For the 10s of millions of people who occupy these type of jobs now, what are they going to do when they're replaced by machines?

I've never understood how this is allowed to happen. I don't understand the difference between political contributions from a corporation and bribery.

I agree with most of this. Biden is who is at this point. I don't see him gaining anything but he probably won't lose support either. Bernie looked OLD. Holy crap. He looked like my 85 year old grandfather. I think he starts to sink considerably. He and Warren are essentially running the same campaign, give or take, and I think this will begin to shift a large portion of his support to Warren. Warren did well. She's extremely smart and calculating. She never answers questions that will hurt her and is a master at answering just enough and spinning so that the moderators don't press her on the tough questions for her, like how she's going to pay for anything. Beto definitely had his best debate. Very strong on guns but I don't think he offers enough other liberal substance to ever get the nomination. He could be viewed as an asset though as a vice pres, as I think head to head vs Pence he'd do pretty well if they can get him to stay on a couple topics. He'd also be an asset in Texas. Buttigieg has been solid. I think he'd do really well head to head with Trump. Booker is too nice. I don't think he has the guts to go toe to toe with Trump. He's not willing to get dirty. Harris has faded badly since her first debate. Klobuchar offers nothing other than she's from the midwest. I don't see any electability on the national stage. Yang has interesting ideas that will probably make a lot of sense in 20 years as the world becomes more and more automated and labour becomes less and less valuable. Castro went after Biden and I don't think it worked. He made a point questioning Joe's memory, but I don't think it helped him at all. If anything it smeared Biden but it wouldn't have helped Castro.

Exactly. This seems to be setting things up for another disaster. If the deficit is currently $1.1 trillion, in a recession, unless spending is drastically cut (which would further reduce GPD growth), the deficit could balloon to $1.4, maybe $1.5 trillion without factoring in any stimulus. In my estimation, the Fed isn't being aggressive reducing interest rates, because if they do that now and the economy falls into a recession in a couple years, they'll have zero tool available to them to stimulate the economy when the time comes. What Trump has done with the economy has been extremely reckless. Ballooning the deficit, and ramping up military spending at a time when the US isn't at war with anyone while reducing taxes. When the economy is great, countries should get their house in order, and start paying off their debt. The US has done the exact opposite under Trump. It's like they just had their best year ever due to performance related bonuses at their job, and instead of saving money, they moved into the house they previously couldn't afford and leased a couple cars they didn't need. When the business cycle changes, and revenues fall, the US will be in a terrible situation where they'll have to slash spending, or raise taxes, at a time that it would further damage the economy. There's a reason 30 year treasuries have dipped below the 2 year multiple times over the past couple months. The smart money knows what's going to happen.

The US is going to be in major trouble them the economy inevitably slows down and revenues fall.

I googled how many late term abortions and this came up as the first link. The data is taken straight from the CDC. http://www.johnstonsarchive.net/policy/abortion/late_term_abortion_usa.html https://www.cdc.gov/reproductivehealth/data_stats/abortion.htm Based off what I've read, 90% of all abortions are done before 3 months into the pregnancy. 98.7% are done by the 21st week. 50-250 abortions happen per year after 28 weeks with the due date being 39 weeks after conception, meaning you're likely dealing with a handful of situations per year around the 39 week mark. The notion by the right that babies are being aborted in mass in the delivery room couldn't be farther from the truth.

I'll reiterate from a couple weeks ago that late term abortions beyond 24 weeks represent 1.3% of all abortions in the US, of which many are performed because the fetus isn't viable due to severe birth defects. Based off of the data available, 50-250 abortions happen each year after 28 weeks. Hardly any of which are actually done in the final weeks of a pregnancy. The right would lead you to believe that number is actually in the thousands. That babies that are 39 weeks along are being aborted in mass when reality is that isn't even remotely the truth. I'm fairly certain there's zero evidence to support this opinion. Saying it's a woman's choice to get pregnant due to being raped or molested by a family member is a bit much.

You keep moving the goal posts. Ejaculating on someone while they're sleeping is a lot different than grabbing their butt.