• Introducing Image Options for ResetEra 2.0! Check the left side navigation bar to show or hide images, avatars, covers, and embedded media. More details at the link.

2020 Democratic Presidential Primary | OT | Biden Mulls Abrams as Running Mate

Oct 28, 2017
749
13 minutes ago:


Evil George Soros globalist elites, definitely don't want Bernie's protectionism though. But hey at least it was that evil moron Trump who made the boneheaded decision to pull the US out of the TPP and not that well-intentioned moron Bernie... kinda like how Jeremy Corbyn being anti-EU is preferable to Nigel Farage, JRM, Boris Johnson, etc.
Do stupid shit... BUT FROM THE LEFT
It is blatantly obvious that the Republicans will defend Trump even if they don't completely agree with him.

Also, I'm not a Bernie supporter. If you look at my post history in this thread, I clearly prefer Buttigieg. I approached you in good faith and wanted to have a discussion, because quite frankly, I wanted to engage with people here and develop a better understanding of American politics and the Democratic primary.

I don't appreciate your tone especially since you are behaving this way just because I'm not as skeptical of socialism and its perception as you are. And unless I'm misunderstanding your point, are now framing me as some dumb, conspiratorial leftie. Look, I'm not denying that socialism isn't beloved by all Americans, I just don't think it is the biggest deal breaker in the world when the current president is a moronic, racist, criminal fascist. Especially given how some socialists performed in the midterms, and how well socialist (or at least, socialist within the context of the skewed American political spectrum) policies poll with the majority of Americans.
 
Oct 29, 2017
4,448
Sydney
The only way this happens now is if the candidates openly admit that the republicans are right about their framing of them, which is not going to happen.

What is going to continue to happen is that Bernie, AOC and other politicians promoting some form of socialism are gonna tell Americans that they're taking ideas that are already popular with the people and expand them to other important areas that will benefit society. 'Medicare for All' is a perfect example of this. People are perfectly fine with the existence of Medicare (a socialist service), so framing universal/free healthcare as a Medicare that applies to everyone just makes it more palatable than 'socialist healthcare'. As long as these socialists point Americans to socialist services that Americans are already ok with, I really don't think they'll be negatively impacted when republicans claim that their policies are socialist.
Yeah you don't have to accept your opponent's premise, they're your opponent.

This goes for pretty much any Democrat as well. Trump is going to call whoever the nominee is crazy or radical or dishonest or dangerous or stupid or lazy or ugly or communist or nasty or whatever you don't give him oxygen by responding to that.
 
Oct 27, 2017
567
Beto on reparations.
O’Rourke is asked about reparations and gives lengthy answer recognizing systemic racism in US but doesn’t seem to take stance either way. “I want to make sure that this country has this conversation,” that it starts at community level and that there’s political will, he says.
 
Oct 25, 2017
3,974
Beto on reparations.
O’Rourke is asked about reparations and gives lengthy answer recognizing systemic racism in US but doesn’t seem to take stance either way. “I want to make sure that this country has this conversation,” that it starts at community level and that there’s political will, he says.
How patently Beto
 

xbhaskarx

Banned
Member
Oct 27, 2017
4,567
NorCal
And unless I'm misunderstanding your point, are now framing me as some dumb, conspiratorial leftie.
...
Especially given how some socialists performed in the midterms, and how well socialist (or at least, socialist within the context of the skewed American political spectrum) policies poll with the majority of Americans.
-That's not what I was saying...

-Socialists performed well in the midterms?? What are you basing that on?

So many socialists winning you're gonna get tired of winning folks, believe me.... if this is spun as winning in a historic wave election, maybe socialists will do the same when Bernie somehow manages to lose to Trump... they can spin that as a victory for "accelerationism"!

Bernie and his army are losing 2018
https://www.politico.com/story/2018/08/08/bernie-sanders-endorsements-2018-elections-767403

post-election:

As Blue Wave Sweeps in More Corporate Democrats, Election is a Serious Wake Up Call for Progressives
https://www.forapeoplesparty.org/election-results/

Our Revolution, Justice Democrats, Brand New Congress and the Democratic Socialists of America endorsed a combined 107 candidates for Congress this year. Forty-four of them won their primaries and only 12 won their general elections. Five of those 12 were already incumbents. Five more of them were longtime party politicians in line for higher office, rather than insurgent candidates. Only two of them were actually opposed by the party and unseated establishment Democrats in the primaries — Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and Ayanna Pressley. There are 435 members of Congress.​
It gets worse. Almost every candidate those groups endorsed for governor, lieutenant governor, and Senate, lost in the primary or the general election. That includes 13 candidates for governor, five candidates for lt. governor, and seven candidates for U.S. Senate. Incumbents Bernie Sanders and David Zuckerman were the only ones who won.​

Bernie Sanders and David Zuckerman. That's... two guys up in Vermont. Both re-elected. In a state that may have a smaller population than Beto's congressional district.

Look support socialists like Bernie if you miss the Soviet Union and are hoping he'll seize the means of production, fair enough... but to actually support either Bernie or socialists in general because you think they're the best hope for victory on the left... you know what I'm not going to say anything that could be perceived as an insult. Stay in school kids.
 
Last edited:
Oct 27, 2017
11,076
I honestly don't understand why people use candidates fumbling over reparations as some gotcha moment. I have no idea how they'd work, what form they'd take, who would qualify, or any of the numerous other details so seeing candidates equally dumbfounded doesn't do anything for me either way.
 
Oct 25, 2017
1,024
I honestly don't understand why people use candidates fumbling over reparations as some gotcha moment. I have no idea how they'd work, what form they'd take, who would qualify, or any of the numerous other details so seeing candidates equally dumbfounded doesn't do anything for me either way.
Well I'd hope our elected officials would put a little more thought into this stuff than the average person. Not that I think they do, but nevertheless, I do hope.
 

xbhaskarx

Banned
Member
Oct 27, 2017
4,567
NorCal
Beto is DONE, no person who announced their candidacy before formulating a well articulated position on reparations has ever won... that's like politics 101.
Well I'd hope our elected officials would put a little more thought into this stuff than the average person. Not that I think they do, but nevertheless, I do hope.
Which candidates have concrete policies on reparations that address the questions the previous person raised (how they'd work, what form they'd take, who would qualify, how much money we're talking about here, etc.)?
 
Oct 25, 2017
5,467
Which candidates have concrete policies on reparations that address the questions the previous person raised (how they'd work, what form they'd take, who would qualify, how much money we're talking about here, etc.)?
Ironically only Booker with the baby bonds thing. Not that he'd ever call it reparations.
 

xbhaskarx

Banned
Member
Oct 27, 2017
4,567
NorCal
Ironically only Booker with the baby bonds thing. Not that he'd ever call it reparations.
Vox says:
The candidate most fervently backing reparations is Marianne Williamson, a self-help guru and spiritual adviser who wants to set aside $100 billion to $500 billion for a reparations program.​
Those who think reparations policy will play a major role in determining the winner can place their money on Marianne Williamson here:
https://www.predictit.org/markets/d...n-the-2020-Democratic-presidential-nomination
 
Oct 25, 2017
5,467
Vox says:
The candidate most fervently backing reparations is Marianne Williamson, a self-help guru and spiritual adviser who wants to set aside $100 billion to $500 billion for a reparations program.​
Those who think reparations policy will play a major role in determining the winner can place their money on Marianne Williamson here:
https://www.predictit.org/markets/d...n-the-2020-Democratic-presidential-nomination
I mean, I kinda ruled her out because, well... Spirtualism. Not to mention that I don't really count that as a concrete or realistic policy. Also never said that reparations policy will play a major role in determining the winner of the primary. I suspect, especially based on polling of the issue, that it will have 0 impact when all's said and done. I just find it amusing that Booker of all people has the most realistic plan for bringing about reparations but would never call it that.
 

xbhaskarx

Banned
Member
Oct 27, 2017
4,567
NorCal
First time looking at Predictit in a few weeks...
https://www.predictit.org/markets/d...n-the-2020-Democratic-presidential-nomination

Wow Andrew Yang is doing surprisingly well, he wasn't even listed the last time I checked.


Still there is a clear top tier with four candidates, and that hasn't changed since the beginning...

(and I remain tempted to put my entire life savings into betting against Biden at 25%)
 
Oct 25, 2017
1,438
First time looking at Predictit in a few weeks...
https://www.predictit.org/markets/d...n-the-2020-Democratic-presidential-nomination

Wow Andrew Yang is doing surprisingly well, he wasn't even listed the last time I checked.


Still there is a clear top tier with four candidates, and that hasn't changed since the beginning...

(and I remain tempted to put my entire life savings into betting against Biden at 25%)

looool this is so tempting tbh. It kind of feels like easy money to bet against Biden at the moment.
 
Aug 27, 2018
553
My one hope with reparations lies sort of with UBI, not as a replacement, but as a starting precedence for giving people money without any means testing attached. If we can get that discussion started in a serious way, then I think reparations for the black community specifically might become an easier sell, and the method of what form it will take will be less questionable. Though I also think it goes without saying that it probably won't be so easy, as racists are going to racists and fight back against it no matter what.
 
Oct 27, 2017
668
I honestly don't understand why people use candidates fumbling over reparations as some gotcha moment. I have no idea how they'd work, what form they'd take, who would qualify, or any of the numerous other details so seeing candidates equally dumbfounded doesn't do anything for me either way.
I think there's a bill in the house or Senate that relates to reparations, heard about it from Majority Report and I think Tulsis the only 2020 supporter so that's pretty funny.
 
Oct 27, 2017
567
Beto is DONE, no person who announced their candidacy before formulating a well articulated position on reparations has ever won... that's like politics 101.

Which candidates have concrete policies on reparations that address the questions the previous person raised (how they'd work, what form they'd take, who would qualify, how much money we're talking about here, etc.)?
The reason I brought Beto's answer up is that Bernie has been given a lot of grief for supposedly not supporting reparations. A lot of #NeverBernie folks have also used it as a sign that he hates black people.
'What specific policy that only benefits black people do you propose' and other questions along this line.

I hope that they apply the same standard and logic when applied to Beto.
 
Oct 27, 2017
48
Los Angeles
Could have predicted Beto's answer on Reparations.

He doesn't have a position unless the Donors give it to him first. Hence why he has no positions on his website, and wont respond to the Washingtons post about his top five positions he wants to push. Instead, he just speaks in platitudes like he's from the 1990's.

That doesnt work anymore. It may have done something when you ran against Ted Cruz, one of the most despised politicians whom ever existed....but it wont work when your running against popular politicians who provide clarity like Sanders.
 

brainchild

GameXplain
Verified
Nov 25, 2017
5,334
Minnesota
Well I'd hope our elected officials would put a little more thought into this stuff than the average person. Not that I think they do, but nevertheless, I do hope.
The highest ranking black member of Congress is openly against reparations and considers it impossible to implement, and this is after he put a lot of thought into it. I agree with him and I'm also black. The issue is divisive among the black community. Not sure why people would expect presidential candidates to fare better on this issue.

What I want to see is support from all of them on passing HR40. We need real solutions, not just symbolic gestures.
 
Oct 27, 2017
281
Looked up Yang for the first time today, and an interview came up in which the interviewer posed some interesting questions:
Q. One area where it does seem that you are in agreement with Bernie Sanders though is health care. There’s an obvious moral argument that’s made for Medicare for all that essentially boils down to the idea everyone should have the right to get medical care when they’re sick. But from a more technical standpoint, why do you feel like single payer is the most efficient way to go?
Q. On a more political note, proposals like single payer are often branded as socialist and even un-American by people on the right. A lot of conservatives sometimes will invoke Marxism, Communism things along those lines in response. Do you feel like as a candidate that you have to some degree more credibility or more political capital on these issues than some of your opponents because of your background in the private sector?
Yang answered the latter question as follows:
I think I do just because people have a sense then I’m approaching this from a pragmatic, non-ideological standpoint. I have been a CEO, I have run companies and organizations and one of the things I say about healthcare to people is, “look, if you’re the CEO of a business. Our current system makes it harder to hire. Harder to treat people like full-time employees with benefits.” It’s harder to switch jobs, it’s harder to start a business. Our health care system is a giant weight on the dynamism of our economy and that’s something I understand because I’ve been the CEO of a private company that provided health insurance to its employees. So I do think I can make a different case for some of these policies than certain other political figures.
So his "different" arguments could conceivably be supplementary in nature, could help get through to more/additional/different types of voters, could maybe also help to persuade other candidates to get off the fence and become more forthright in their advocacy for single-payer, by making it more difficult for those fence-sitters (following what Carl Beijer says above) to portray insistence on single-payer as narrow-minded dogmatism. I mentioned something similar in relation to Kamala Harris, after the January CNN Town Hall:

...in previous posts (for example, here), I tried to emphasize that it was not Kamala Harris who put forward the negative framing of M4A, but Jake Tapper. In her direct response to Tapper, Kamala Harris attempted a brief (rather too brief, but then again her combination of brevity and nonchalance -- "...Ms. Harris breezily acknowledged...", the NYT wrote, in its account of the event -- arguably gave her answer the appearance of technocratic authoritativeness, as opposed to merely emotional/irrational/ideological fixation/obstinacy) 'positive reframing' of Tapper’s talking point, in which she focused on positive outcomes; predictably, it was only Jake Tapper’s inflammatory talking point (not Harris's 'positive reframing' of the talking point) that was repeated in press coverage of the issue, but more importantly, there was no sustained attempt at ‘positive reframing’ (of the type that Kamala Harris offered at the event itself) to counter the repetition of the negative talking point (in the subsequent coverage of the event).

In other words, as Kirblar and others have pointed out many times (and I have mentioned in the past, for example here), even Bernie would sign ACA 2.0 or similar incremental improvements, so it’s not a problem that Harris’s team said they are open to incremental reform. From the point of view of an M4A advocate, the only ‘problem’ would be the lack of sustained attempts at 'positive reframing':

https://twitter.com/PNHP/status/1093974578722938883

https://twitter.com/awgaffney/status/1095825129752408066

Also, private insurance is technically NOT excluded under the Senate M4A bill (as mentioned here), but the relevant part of the bill (Section 107, here) may be too restrictive, as Jon Walker frequently argues (see here and here and here, for example). If the rich or some employers want to pay for high-end ‘duplicative’ plans which hypothetically offered the same ‘benefits’ (the term used in Section 107) as M4A, but perhaps also offered higher compensation for providers (for those providers that might choose to opt out of M4A participation due to insistence on higher-end compensation, for example), then that may be a worthwhile concession to make (from the point of view of M4A advocates), in a political cost-benefit analysis.
It really sucks you have to reframe the question of healthcare from "everyone deserves to live" to "your employer given healthcare is getting worse and worse, having single payer would be an improvement and help your company/business". But greed is a powerful motivator I guess.
doesn't matter if it sucks. Frame it the way that will win, or it will lose. Look how well the Republicans have re-framed racism to make it palatable to more voters. We would do well to learn from that

Yang's technical explanations are exactly why he's my front-runner (I also like Harris). Presenting data driven solutions makes him stand head and shoulders above Trump's 'anything I don't know, nobody knows' nonsense. Both sides lean on 'feelings' as a crutch, and 'feelings' ain't easy to change. Ultimately, everyone just doubles down on their 'gut' and shouts at one another louder. We need analysis an evidence to change minds.

I'm certain that Yang has the largest cross-over appeal of any candidate, but I don't think he has enough Dem appeal to make it out of the primary. Hoping he at least continues climbing, and maybe finds a good position he can run from in the future
I feel like you took the wrong lesson here, which is that evidence doesn't actually change people's minds and you need to be able to change their feelings to affect policy.

Consider the problem of climate change, we know it's coming, we know what it'll take to stop it, but we have very little movement here because people don't want to upset their current lives for the future.

Or anti-vax, all the evidence in the world doesn't stop them from endangering theirs and others' kids.

The world runs on feelings.
I would argue that evidence has compounded in climate change's favor and the roadblocks with climate change action have little to do with people agreeing it's happening, what we need now is detailed plans that show we can stop it without effecting our quality of life

Maybe you have a point with anti-vax, though you could argue the anti-vax movement has been powered by bad evidence, and that the truth just doesn't have the proper PR team. After all, the rise in anti-vax tracks pretty solidly with the rise of the internet, where bad studies have been pushed.

Either way, I don't see "everyone deserves to live" as a winning argument for why people should support single-payer. You already have compassionate and empathetic people on board . You need to convince the selfish people, and that's where data will help. Show them that they will benefit
Appreciate the discussion! I can understand all the reactions. Some longform perspectives that may be of interest, in this context:

https://www.dissentmagazine.org/article/medicare-for-all-how-to-win-marketing-simple-policy-funding
...Once Democrats begin pushing Medicare for All in earnest, Republicans will claim that it’s too expensive, argue that it’s too disruptive, and portray it as vaguely “foreign” and “socialist.” The plan’s advocates should be prepared well in advance for the right’s inevitable counter-attack, which will assuredly be generously funded by conservative billionaires and powerful corporate lobbies. The “Medicare-for-All” branding is designed to blunt the last “socialist” branding by making what is, in fact, socialized medicine “speak American” by tying it to one of the most beloved pieces of social policy in U.S. history...
https://www.thenation.com/article/how-medicare-was-won/
...A half-century later, we’re witnessing the early stages of yet another popular thrust toward single payer, increasingly billed as “Medicare for All.” The nomenclature intends to evoke associations with the popular, trusted program, and is perhaps easier for Americans to latch onto than a phraseology that threatens to trigger a tedious lesson in comparative health policy. But if the conceptual jump from Medicare to Medicare for All can serve as a rough model for achieving universal health care in the United States, we should also look to the history of the social movements that achieved something that then, too, seemed impossible... All the evidence tells us that robust universal programs build solidarity, and create an impassioned base that enthusiastically defends them. Once Medicare for All is in place we can expect the same. Until then, it’s up to advocates to compel as many people as possible to envision the radically different society that stands to inherit it—and to accept nothing less...
 
Oct 25, 2017
5,506
I think it's fair to say that Kamala Harris will probably always have a more diverse crowd than Bernie. But then again, she would probably have a more diverse crowd than any body else running, even Joe Biden I'd guess. Bernie needs to do better w/ black voters if he wants to win obviously.
 
Last edited:
Oct 30, 2017
1,121
Could have predicted Beto's answer on Reparations.

He doesn't have a position unless the Donors give it to him first. Hence why he has no positions on his website, and wont respond to the Washingtons post about his top five positions he wants to push. Instead, he just speaks in platitudes like he's from the 1990's.

That doesnt work anymore. It may have done something when you ran against Ted Cruz, one of the most despised politicians whom ever existed....but it wont work when your running against popular politicians who provide clarity like Sanders.
LMAO. As Clinton stated, his entire strategy was to just overpromise things that aren't even realistic.
 
LMAO. As Clinton stated, his entire strategy was to just overpromise things that aren't even realistic.
Funny how the party then proceeded to basically adopt his entire platform at the convention then. And how so many of the current candidates are echoing those Super Unrealistic Things (regardless of whether or not they'll actually make good-faith efforts to achieve them). And how those same ideas are supported by growing majorities of people in polls.

Oh and how one by one, states are increasing the minimum wage to $15 an hour (even if over time), which was one of the mentioned Super Unrealistic Things.

... Bernie’s answer on reperations was clear? He just said he didn’t know what that even means multiple times
His "what does that mean" comment was directed at Harris, Booker, and Warren's nebulous "yes" answer in giving their support while not giving any details. Not reparations themselves.
 
Last edited:
Oct 25, 2017
4,512
Could have predicted Beto's answer on Reparations.

He doesn't have a position unless the Donors give it to him first. Hence why he has no positions on his website, and wont respond to the Washingtons post about his top five positions he wants to push. Instead, he just speaks in platitudes like he's from the 1990's.

That doesnt work anymore. It may have done something when you ran against Ted Cruz, one of the most despised politicians whom ever existed....but it wont work when your running against popular politicians who provide clarity like Sanders.
... Bernie’s answer on reperations was clear? He just said he didn’t know what that even means multiple times

Nobody has actually given a real answer on the question. Even Jessie Jackson seemed to get a bit pissed presidential candidates were bringing it up or supporting it without giving any detail on what they actually plan to do
 
Oct 25, 2017
1,776
California
LMAO. As Clinton stated, his entire strategy was to just overpromise things that aren't even realistic.
Medicare for All is very popular. The thing stopping it from passing is 100% money in politics, and the things that come along with that (media propaganda, politicians etc...). Its very important that Bernie and others stand up for it, cause that's where the battle needs to be fought. The people are already there. It's the politics that isnt.
 

brainchild

GameXplain
Verified
Nov 25, 2017
5,334
Minnesota
Even Jessie Jackson seemed to get a bit pissed presidential candidates were bringing it up or supporting it without giving any detail on what they actually plan to do
Yup


It's a complicated problem to solve, and we can't get anywhere close to solving it without the appropriate resources to study the issue. Most importantly, we want to make sure reparations is actually what's going to take place, and not significant unintended consequences.
 
Oct 26, 2017
96
Hamburg

I think Harris' rally might be slighlty bigger since balcony crowd is a bit more dense, but in any case they seem pretty comparable.

Abd it's good. Those crowds are probably different people. The democrats - no matter the candidate - need excited voters in the general.
 
Dec 26, 2018
3,352
Funny how the party then proceeded to basically adopt his entire platform at the convention then. And how so many of the current candidates are echoing those Super Unrealistic Things (regardless of whether or not they'll actually make good-faith efforts to achieve them). And how those same ideas are supported by growing majorities of people in polls.
Why are you ignoring the context not being the same as when Hillary ran? Many things have changed since '16. Trump got elected, the Justice Democrats (particularly AOC) shifted the political atmosphere more leftward and the Dems got the House. Most of the candidates differ with Bernie in that they are more open to working with the "establishment," being willing to compromise and don't have gruff demeanours which will piss off Schumer and Pelosi. They're not copying and pasting his plans, they're doing their own.

Oh and how one by one, states are increasing the minimum wage to $15 an hour (even if over time), which was one of the mentioned Super Unrealistic Things.
On a state level, not a national one.
 
Nov 18, 2017
722
Most of the candidates differ with Bernie in that they are more open to working with the "establishment," being willing to compromise and don't have gruff demeanours which will piss off Schumer and Pelosi. They're not copying and pasting his plans, they're doing their own.
.
They are the establishment. Of course they are open to doing that.
 
Feb 28, 2018
1,355
Some people here are laboring under the delusion that Bernie is absolutely unwilling to work with Nancy Pelosi and Chuck Schumer to push his agenda through Congress, despite the fact that he knows Chuck Schumer very well and has a strong base of support in the House and is not alone. I guarantee you if the choice is between M4A in steps and no M4A, Bernie will clearly go with the former.
 
Dec 26, 2018
3,352
Some people here are laboring under the delusion that Bernie is absolutely unwilling to work with Nancy Pelosi and Chuck Schumer to push his agenda through Congress, despite the fact that he knows Chuck Schumer very well and has a strong base of support in the House and is not alone. I guarantee you if the choice is between M4A in steps and no M4A, Bernie will clearly go with the former.
I didn't say Bernie was "unwilling" to work with them, I said he didn't have proper temperament to get the most out of the alliance when he ascends to the White House. Which is true. I don't know why this idea that he's supposed to be the best team player on the Hill among Democrats comes from Bernie followers, because they clearly haven't been following his career in politics.

This isn't about Bernie "knowing" people, he must know all the main players at this stage - it's working with them. Something his own peers that like him think he's flawed at doing that. People seem to be confusing him with Elisabeth Warren.

Define "strong base of support," please. Bernie's never had a concrete and stable relationship with the "establishment."
 
Feb 28, 2018
1,355
I didn't say Bernie was "unwilling" to work with them, I said he didn't have proper temperament to get the most out of the alliance when he ascends to the White House. Which is true. I don't know why this idea that he's supposed to be the best team player on the Hill among Democrats comes from Bernie followers, because they clearly haven't been following his career in politics.

This isn't about Bernie "knowing" people, he must know all the main players at this stage - it's working with them. Something his own peers that like him think he's flawed at doing that. People seem to be confusing him with Elisabeth Warren.

Define "strong base of support," please. Bernie's never had a concrete and stable relationship with the "establishment."
His policies will have the backing of most of the Progressive Caucus for one, and his leadership role in the Senate means he has some influence there. Bernie would not be alone in all this is all I'm saying.
 
Oct 25, 2017
31,565
Beto on reparations.
O’Rourke is asked about reparations and gives lengthy answer recognizing systemic racism in US but doesn’t seem to take stance either way. “I want to make sure that this country has this conversation,” that it starts at community level and that there’s political will, he says.
Beto on Feeding the homeless:

" I believe we must properly research the balanced diet required, triple check we have the right recipes, consult with the right cooks, makes sure we don't have too many cooks, and finally have a conversation with local governments to see if we even have the distribution channels set up"
 

brainchild

GameXplain
Verified
Nov 25, 2017
5,334
Minnesota
Beto on Feeding the homeless:

" I believe we must properly research the balanced diet required, triple check we have the right recipes, consult with the right cooks, makes sure we don't have too many cooks, and finally have a conversation with local governments to see if we even have the distribution channels set up"
I don't think that's a fair take. Feeding the homeless is not nearly as complex of an issue to tackle as delivering on reparations.