Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple News Launches Candidate Guide to the 2020 Democratic Debates
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I think it's great to have a one-stop shop for summaries on the Democratic primary candidates and their positions, campaign trail news and so forth.
One can round up the equivalent solo, sure, but it takes more time (and can involves scaling more paywalls than most of us have budgets for).
It's really important to sort out the candidates' positions and understand how each is interacting as the potential voters and reporters question them on the trail. Apple News' curated roundup does sound like a good springboard from which to do deeper dives on candidates we end up thinking we'd like to follow in more detail on our own.
One can round up the equivalent solo, sure, but it takes more time (and can involves scaling more paywalls than most of us have budgets for).
It's really important to sort out the candidates' positions and understand how each is interacting as the potential voters and reporters question them on the trail. Apple News' curated roundup does sound like a good springboard from which to do deeper dives on candidates we end up thinking we'd like to follow in more detail on our own.
Last edited by a moderator:
I'm no fan of Pres. Trump (didn't vote and will never vote for him) but the "cages" were built during the previous administration: https://www.apnews.com/fdfbafe1f2784a759bc7c3a8e8ddbcab (also see here: https://qz.com/1291470/photos-immigrant-children-detained-at-the-placement-center-in-2014/). The current president makes a number of egregious claims about immigration but those cages were built and used during Pres. Obama's administration.
As for going to war with Iran - Pres. Trump is not a hawk. He's about the least hawkish president we've had for a long time (e.g., https://www.nytimes.com/2019/01/08/opinion/trump-troops-syria-afghanistan.html). He's not a non-interventionist but he's not about to start a war with Iran (unless they directly attack U.S. territory - in that case any president from any party would take military action). That's been his schtick from Day 1. This doesn't mean he never gets involved in foreign military actions against terrorist organizations (https://www.reuters.com/article/us-...rventionist-u-s-military-policy-idUSKBN13W06L) but if he prevails against some of his hawkish advisors, he'll never go to war with any other country, especially not Iran. Wars are too costly. He makes/made his money from entertainment and real estate, not the military-industrial complex. Sure, he panders to the Republican base by drumming up increased military spending but he's not going to start wars.
Then since there are a lot of candidates running in the primary, and they are arrayed well across the spectrum of Democratic views, you're in luck and can probably find a candidate who's to your liking.
I think that it's a bad idea on Apple's part.
Apple and Tim should stay out of politics and concentrate on fixing the issues within Apple.
Apple and Tim should stay out of politics and concentrate on fixing the issues within Apple.
Their point was that we don't want one state basically deciding who wins. Where in your scenario we need to remove "a bunch of flyover redneck states" (which seems like a weird way to put it).
They may differentiate themselves in the future but, to me, it looks like they are all the same.
I currently do not see any conservative let alone moderate Democrats running in the primaries.
How many republicans are working on this “curation” team? Just asking.
Their point was that ignoring 13% of the population was somehow o.k. mine was that ignoring <5% was at least as o.k. (just need to subtract some lightly populated states to make the math work).
Real issue isn't that popular vote would somehow make the coast rule the rest, nor that the EC makes it the other way round.
Problem is most people in the US live in states that are so firmly red or blue that their vote doesn't count at all.
Those few that live in states that matter are forced to choose the lesser evil from a set of 2 candidates predetermined by an undemocratic process that has the tendency to weed out reasonable candidates early on.
Thats how you got Trump (and one might argue a few presidents before him) and that why him doing again is a possibility.
This is the type of thinking you need to reflect on after your 2020 loss. Not trying to be rude. Just re-evaluate yourself.
By “conservative” do you mean the poor not having health care, homophobic policies, and removing women’s rights?
It's literally just a description of the candidates in tonight and tomorrow's debates so that people have a general sense of what each is about. Probably a good resource given how many are running. Who opens a news app and doesn't expect any politics?
Registered Democrat but man I can't stand this party now. "We're gonna beat Trump, we're better than Trump." Sounds good guys?
As a Democrat myself I feel that they all should get together in one room and nominate two candidates to run. There are way too many guys(and gals) running this time around. It shows how divided the Democratic party is.
Saying that Trump got more votes if you ignore California is like saying that if you ignore your left leg, you actually lost weight on your diet. You can’t just pretend that 12% of the US population doesn’t count.
You can’t be seriously complaining about identity politics when the republicans especially Trump are the biggest offenders of it. Somehow straight white males in this country suddenly want to act like a disenfranchised group
i'm just wondering how many of them are gonna drop out the week following these debates. i don't see a person winning by simply running on a non-issue platform such as "at least i'm not so-and-so". guess we'll have to wait and see what happens.
Every election is a sort of advance auction sale of stolen goods. - H. L. Mencken
Mencken said this one hundred years ago. If anyone thought that wasn’t true it can’t be denied anymore.
Among the Democrats who have announced so far, even if I put on a blue dog Den hat -- which I'm capable of doing now and then-- I would not categorize as other than moderate the following, in no particular order: Steve Bullock, Michael Bennet, Tim Ryan, Amy Klobuchar, Wayne Messam, John Hickenlooper.
Disadvantages of these more centrist or "bridging" candidates may well be that some of them have pretty low name recognition on a national level... which can end up linked to not enough funding... so they are not all likely to make it to the 2nd round of debates later on.
But, if a voter leaning to the Democrats is looking for a particular shade of blue, now is the time to look at the policies of all the announced Dem candidates and pick one to support and kick in five or ten bucks to help clear the higher bar for funding that the DNC is requiring for candidates to qualify for second round debates.
The time for a Dem to complain that the nominee is too progressive or too establishment is not three weeks before the convention. This is another reason it's nice that Apple News will be aggregating info on the Democratic primary candidates relatively early in the season.
That's politics now. Candidate Obama was the anti-Bush candidate. Candidate Trump was one of the anti-Obama candidates. Now some/most of the Democratic candidates are trying to be the anti-Trump candidate. That's because it panders to their base. Those who focus more on ideology and policy (Yang and some others) are at risk of being drowned out by those who want to be the anti-Trump candidate (Sanders [which is unfortunate because he is really a policy candidate at heart], Booker, de Blasio, Biden, Harris, etc.). Whoever wins out will have to be more anti-Trump to survive their base. Elizabeth Warren is likely the best/most accomplished person who could navigate that tricky position.
That’s the standard right-wing response whenever anyone talks about Trump’s incompetence and corruption, but I genuinely don’t see how any rational person can look at Obama and Trump and not see that Obama is orders of magnitude more intelligent and ethical than Trump. Whether you like Trump’s policies or you don’t, he is clearly not qualified for the job, intellectually, emotionally, or ethically.