Hindsight Is 2020

[Blackacre]

Hungry for Power Games: Funny or Dead
(alternative title: Hungry for Power Games: *sobs wildly*)




Yes, yes! Welcome to the Hungry for Power Games! Tributes, assemble! Oh, look at them. So few remain. Only half the field remains. Well, not anymore.


Today is a day I did not want to ever come, but come it did. The Republican Party has spoken, and so I am forced to end my campaign for President.

Stephen Colbert
Texas Senator and blob monster American Ted Cruz has ended his campaign. The second time in a row that the Senator offered himself to the Games, and the second time in a row the Games told him to go  himself. What were you expecting, going toe-to-toe with your own party’s President? Appeal to the RNC Chair? That’s his daughter! Even the voters of Texas told Ted Cruz they didn’t want him to be President. So sad! I look forward to Ted Cruz getting stomped on in 2024  too! Maybe we should make it a holiday, Kill Lyin’ Ted Day!

Well, um, I believe that’s it, right? Ted Cruz was the only one to drop out, right? Yes, I believe so. If I say Ted Cruz is the only one then there cannot possibly be another! So let us quickly bid farewell to the fallen…


I know we tried our best, and in a way, we did succeed. I think we elevated the conversation, made the campaign about the important issues and their complexities. And we did fantastic here in Minnesota where they know me best!

Stephen Colbert
No, please don’t! Please I’m begging you, don’t do this to me!

Al Franken
I’m really sorry, but my time is up. It’s clear that I will not be the 46th President of the United States.

Stephen Colbert
NOOOOOO!!!!! Not Al Franken! *deep breath* I’m… I’m okay. He was just… he was just another contender in the Hungry for Power Games. While everybody else was going at each other’s throats, Al Franken stayed quietly to the side, doing nothing interesting aside from showing his depth of knowledge on every issue under the sun. I guess I’m upset because it would have been really nice to have a general election in which a former comedian faced off against a joke.

Such an innocent soul, taken away from us by the brutality of the Games! Surely we gamemakers must learn a valuable lesson from this loss… But we won’t! Because the show must go on! Blood must continue to spill from the poll numbers and campaign coffers until we have a victor! But for now, we must bid farewell, to the fallen.

THE FALLEN
TED CRUZ
DISTRICT: ZOMBIESPENSTAR

THE FALLEN
AL FRANKEN
DISTRICT: MY HEART

Four Democratic candidates remain! Next time, they face off in yet another debate!
(Author’s note: with Ted Cruz gone, Donald Trump no longer has a serious primary challenger. As such, I will no longer be covering the Republican primaries and delegate allocation)

[You don't see any blue avatars now]

(alternative title: Hungry for Power Games: *sobs wildly*)

I have to admit, I laughed.

[Blackacre]

Hey guys! So I was sick the past couple of nights and was unable to post anything, but updates return tonight!

[Blackacre]

Saturday, March 7th, 2020
The Ninth Democratic Presidential Debate

Welcome, one and all, to the ninth of fifteen Democratic Presidential Debates! Please welcome to the stage our four contenders! The Champion of DREAMers, Tammy Baldwin! The Hero of Newark, Cory Booker! The Unions’ Choice, Sherrod Brown! And the Bane of Wall Street, Elizabeth Warren! These four candidates have survived debate after debate, primary after primary, and while eight of their competitors have fallen, they still stand!

But for how long?

NBC Hosted this one, which meant that for the very first time, the Democrats were taking questions from Megyn Kelly. The theme of this debate was foreign policy: ISIS was still in existence but was hardly the threat it was when it first came onto the scene in 2014. The real focus of the debate was Russia, and what the United States’ relationship with Russia should be. There’s a reason why most of the debates thus far have been focused on domestic policy: Russia-US relations have grown more and more complicated since Trump’s inauguration, and opinions have cleaved party lines. Before we actually go into the debate itself, here’s some background:

Early in Trump’s Presidency, it was clear he was going to make good on his NATO position: if member states don’t invest enough in their defence, the US wouldn’t come to their aid. Some NATO states actually did meet the requirements after Trump made that threat, but not all of them were able to. One of the states that couldn’t meet the 2% GDP requirement was Estonia, a small Baltic state on Russia’s western border. In July of 2018, Russia invaded Estonia, claiming a sizeable chunk of the nation for itself. The Trump administration didn’t have a coherent answer to this; we Vice President Pence and Secretary of Defence James Mattis, both anti-Russia hawks, on one hand, and Trump himself on the other. It seems like Trump’s eventual response was to provide military intelligence to NATO countries helping Estonia on the ground, like the UK and Germany, without committing any actual troops himself. This has given Trump some flack from his party’s hawks for not putting boots on the ground, and from a few on the left accusing him of secretly helping Russia, but also got him praise from doves in both parties.

With that in mind, the four candidates were all asked what they would do about Russia and Estonia, should they be given the title of Commander in Chief. This time, each candidate had a very different answer.

Cory Booker was the only one to approve of Donald Trump’s plan, pointing out that a full-on war in Russia could result in the end of the world, that America is weary of war, and that the NATO allies seem to be doing okay. He did, however, mention that he would be willing to ramp up support if things went south, and that he would reinstate the leniency toward NATO allies that Trump ended.

Tammy Baldwin accused Trump of not doing enough to try to stop Russia, and proposed giving weapons and medics to our NATO allies instead of just intelligence. She also proposed imposing new, harsh sanctions on Russia until they leave Estonia, as part of a declaration to the world that the United States will not tolerate nations’ sovereignty being infringed upon.

Sherrod Brown took a completely different angle. He proposed opening up negotiations with Putin, to offer Russia the benefits of being in the international community and having a positive relationship with the United States, on the condition that Russia leaves Estonia alone and doesn’t try to add any new territory in the future. However, if diplomacy didn’t work, Brown said he was prepared to get Russia out of Estonia through other means.

Finally, Elizabeth Warren sought to punish Putin and Russia not only for its actions in Estonia, but also for tampering with the 2016 election and for the annexation of Crimea. She proposed aiding NATO allies not only with medics and weapons, but also with airpower and perhaps with soldiers. She does not want the US to not be taken seriously in its efforts to fend off Russia trying to annex neighbouring states.

The debate wasn’t only about Russia. Israel was also addressed, with Warren’s Israel hawkishness shining through and the other candidates walking on eggshells while mentioning a two-state solution. However, Russia was the main focus and it’s where the audience got the most new information.

Next time: The second set of states vote!

[JustinTimeCuber]

Here’s some pre-primary polling for the next three states!

If The New Hampshire Primaries Were Held Today, Whom Would You Vote For?
Sen. Warren: 20%
Sen. Baldwin: 18%
Sen. Franken: 17%
Sen. Booker: 16%
Sen. Brown: 10%
Sen. Wyden: 10%
Mayor de Blasio: 5%
Gov. Brown: 2%

If the Nevada Primaries Were Held Today, Whom Would You Vote For?
Sen. Baldwin: 19%
Sen. Booker: 17%
Sen. Warren: 14%
Sen. Brown: 13%
Sen: Franken: 12%
Mayor de Blasio: 9%
Sen. Wyden: 7%
Gov. Brown: 2%

If The South Carolina Primaries Were Held Today, Whom Would You Vote For?
Sen. Booker: 25%
Sen. Brown: 19%
Mayor de Blasio: 15%
Sen. Warren: 12%
Sen. Franken: 8%
Sen. Baldwin: 4%
Gov. Brown: 1%
Sen. Wyden: 1%

Now, on with the debate!

Thursday, February 6th, 2020
The New Hampshire Debate

This debate had an element that had been requested by the base for a long time: moderators pulled from late night, left-wing comedy. John Oliver, Samantha Bee, and Trevor Noah were the ones asking questions. There were no jokes; all three were there for their knowledge of policy, not for their comedic talents. The debate was broadcast on the network home of Stephen Colbert: CBS.

Fresh off the heels of Sherrod Brown’s victory in the Iowa Caucuses, but also with Brown’s relatively poor polling in New Hampshire, he may as well have had a target painted on his back for attacks from the seven candidates who shared the stage with him. He got asked several loaded questions, on almost the same day that Marco Rubio’s operating system crashed four years prior. How’d he do? Pretty damn good. Here’s a recap of a sampling of what he was asked and how he answered.

Why did he vote against the 2008 immigration bill? Its provisions would have kept wages too low for both immigrant American workers and non-immigrant American workers. He did support the 2013 bill for addressing that concern, and he wholeheartedly supports Tammy Baldwin’s bill.

How would he be able to reverse Trump’s trade wars without going into free trade territory? By not being haphazard and hair-trigger-tempered. There would be possible trade deals but they would absolutely need to benefit American workers. The TPP didn’t meet that standard for him.

How can we trust him to not further violate civil liberties? His administration would be more transparent with its actions in national security than Trump or Obama.

That was just his performance, though; how’d everyone else do? Elizabeth Warren also nailed it. Railing against the banks and wall street is nothing new for her, but one line in particular allowed it all to come together:

Elizabeth Warren:
Yes, I do talk about Wall Street all the time. Do you want to know why? I do it because systemic problems this country faces have their roots there, and no President in recent history has been tough enough to actually solve those fundamental issues. I hope to be the one who succeeds where so many have failed.

Aside from that, nobody else really stood out. Booker was young and charismatic and flashy as always, Franken got into the nitty-gritty of tax policy but lacked a real wham line, and Baldwin kind of lost her thunder when Sherrod Brown complimented her immigration plan without trying to take credit for it.

And that was that. There was nothing more the candidates could do but go to their scheduled New Hampshire events until primary day.

Next time: New Hampshire votes!

ftfy I'm a grammar nazi

[rpryor03]

ftfy I'm a grammar nazi a member of the alt-write

ftfy

[JustinTimeCuber]

ftfy I'm a grammar nazi a member of the alt-write

ftfy

I am stealing this pun and passing it off as my own.

[Blackacre]

Tuesday, March 10th, 2020
Super Tuesday 2: The Lost Levels

Kansas Primary Vote Count/Delegate Allocation:
Sen. Warren: 36% - 14 Delegates
Sen. Brown: 35% - 14 Delegates
Sen. Baldwin: 20% - 8 Delegates
Sen. Booker: 9%
(36 Pledged, 1 Unpledged)

Louisiana Primary Vote Count/Delegate Allocation:
Sen. Booker: 36% - 20 Delegates
Sen. Brown: 29% - 16 Delegates
Sen. Warren: 20% - 11 Delegates
Sen. Baldwin: 15% - 9 Delegates
(56 Pledged, 3 Unpledged)

Nebraska Primary Vote Count/Delegate Allocation:
Sen. Brown: 40% - 12 Delegates
Sen. Warren: 30% - 10 Delegates
Sen. Baldwin: 18% - 4 Delegates
Sen. Booker: 12%
(28 Pledged, 2 Unpledged)

Maine Primary Vote Count/Delegate Allocation:
Sen. Warren: 54% - 16 Delegates
Sen. Brown: 20% - 6 Delegates
Sen. Baldwin: 17% - 6 Delegates
Sen. Booker: 9%
(28 Pledged, 2 Unpledged)

Michigan Primary Vote Count/Delegate Allocation:
Sen. Brown: 41% - 61 Delegates
Sen. Baldwin: 38% - 56 Delegates
Sen. Warren: 15% - 24 Delegates
Sen. Booker: 6%
(141 Pledged, 6 Unpledged)

Mississippi Primary Vote Count/Delegate Allocation:
Sen. Booker: 45% - 21 Delegates
Sen. Brown: 37% - 18 Delegates
Sen. Baldwin: 12%
Sen. Warren: 6%
(39 Pledged, 2 Unpledged)

Northern Mariana Islands Primary Vote Count/Delegate Allocation:
Sen. Baldwin: 41% - 4 Delegates
Sen. Brown: 34% - 3 Delegates
Sen. Warren: 16% - 2 Delegates
Sen. Booker: 9%
(9 Pledged, 2 Unpledged)

American Samoa
Northern Mariana Islands
Americans Abroad
Guam
US Virgin Islands

Senator Sherrod Brown: 416 Delegates
Senator Elizabeth Warren: 321 Delegates
Senator Tammy Baldwin: 289 Delegates
Senator Cory Booker: 276 Delegates
Unpledged: 227 Delegates

• 79 Superdelegates
• 148 Delegates won by Senator Al Franken

4,707 Delegates
1,529 Allocated
2,382 To Win

Sherrod Brown is beginning to look like he might become the frontrunner, opening up a lead of nearly 100 delegates. It’s true that he only won two states, Michigan and Nebraska, but he landed top two in literally every contest today, including Louisiana and Maine. For her part, Elizabeth Warren won two states, including her first win in a state that doesn’t border the Atlantic Ocean. But the momentum is no longer on her side.

Next time: We take stock, look at a couple new endorsements, and preview who needs what on next Tuesday’s extravaganza!

[GoTfan]

Looking forward to the special announcement.

[BuckeyeNut]

With Franken out, looks like Sherrod should clean house in the midwest.

[mjwatts1983]

Baldwin took Texas on Super Tuesday

Well... Texas never ceases to surprise me. This time in a good way. It's where I cut my political teeth.

I guess Brown & Booker split the black & Latino vote enough in that contest to give her the win.

Kind of surprised Warren didn't do as well given her Texas connections. She was a University of Houston graduate and taught law at the University of Texas.

I would have probably voted for Warren in my state's primary (Colorado) but come November I would cast my ballot for whomever was the Democratic nominee.

[Blackacre]

Everybody has their eyes on next Tuesday’s set of Primaries, AKA the Rubio-killer. Florida, Illinois, Missouri, North Carolina, and Ohio all vote then. (We get the results from the Americans Abroad primary that started after Super Tuesday 1, but that contest doesn’t provide many delegates, nor can it really be impacted at this point) So what does everybody need to do to advance? Here’s some polling for all five states:

If the Florida Primary Were Held Today, Who Would You Vote For?
Sen. Baldwin: 34%
Sen. Brown: 30%
Sen. Warren: 18%
Sen. Booker: 10%

If the Illinois Primary Were Held Today, Who Would You Vote For?
Sen. Brown: 31%
Sen. Baldwin: 31%
Sen. Booker: 12%
Sen. Warren: 10%

If the North Carolina Primary Were Held Today, Who Would You Vote For?
Sen. Booker: 27%
Sen. Brown: 26%
Sen. Warren: 25%
Sen. Baldwin: 11%

If the Ohio Primary Were Held Today, Who Would You Vote For?
Sen. Brown: 60%
Sen. Warren: 14%
Sen. Baldwin: 10%
Sen. Booker: 4%

If the Missouri Primary Were Held Today, Who Would You Vote For?
Sen. Brown: 35%
Sen. Booker: 35%
Sen. Warren: 13%
Sen. Baldwin: 9%

We see four tight races, (and Ohio) and clear objectives for everybody. Sherrod Brown will get what he needs from Ohio regardless, but he’s at the verge of leading in every other race. A clean sweep would be enough to effectively end the primary, wiping out two of his competitors and putting him in an almost unassailable position.

Cory Booker needs a win in either Missouri or North Carolina, preferably both. Even they probably won’t be enough; the rest of the South has already spoken and hasn’t given him the delegate freiwal he needed, but a win would keep him relevant and allow him to press onward, perhaps even take Warren’s place as the main alternative to Brown.

Tammy Baldwin needs a win in either Florida or Illinois, again, preferably both. If she gets those wins while Booker stumbles, she could supplant Warren. If she doesn’t get her wins, it might be game over.

Finally, Elizabeth Warren needs to survive and not get supplanted by Baldwin or Booker.

Those states are voting soon, but not yet. Something special's going to happen first, and next time I let you guys in on what that special thing is!

[Kingpoleon]

I'm hoping for a Booker/Wyden or Baldwin/Wyden ticket.

[Blackacre]

I'm hoping for a Booker/Wyden or Baldwin/Wyden ticket.

Can't say about the identity of the nominee, but the identity of the VP is unknown even to me. When the nominee is decided, I will open up the thread to Veep suggestions, and then you can try to get Wyden on the ticket

[Blackacre]

Next time:

There's going to be another debate.

HOWEVER!

This debate is going to be a collaboration between myself and two pundits: Kyle Kulinski and Tal Schneider. HUGE shout-out to GoTFan and Parrotguy for this. We're hammering out the questions and rebuttals and back and forths and followups now and we should have it up in a couple of days!

[UWS]

Oh boy!

Something tells me that one of the remaining presidential candidates will drop out of the race after mini Super Tuesday if this candidate earns disappointing results.

[GoTfan]

Next time:

There's going to be another debate.

HOWEVER!

This debate is going to be a collaboration between myself and two pundits: Kyle Kulinski and Tal Schneider. HUGE shout-out to GoTFan and Parrotguy for this. We're hammering out the questions and rebuttals and back and forths and followups now and we should have it up in a couple of days!

I'll be making the announcement from Kyle's perspective soon.

[Blackacre]

So the debate will be up tonight if all goes well! After that, it's back to business as usual!

[GoTfan]

Clip from Secular Talk's March 10, 2020 show. Title: Special Announcement

Okay, so I have something pretty special for you guys. Recently our show's gained a following on the Hill. We've had some pretty important interviews with people like Elizabeth Warren, Reuss Feingold, Tulsi Gabbard and so on.

However, this takes the cake.

Not that long ago, I did an interview not that long ago with Tal Schneider, and it was actually pretty widely praised. It was a pretty serious discussion of the future of the primary, and well, apparently we impressed some major people. So a few days ago, I got a call from a DNC representative, saying that he was offering myself and Tal one of the debates.

Dude, that's f***ing amazing. Look, I'm a YouTuber. I'm an affiliate of a much larger network. Yet, apparently I seemed to have gained a larger profile lately. Naturally, I jumped at the chance. I called Tal later in the day and she was really excited to do it, so we pooled our money and she's flying out here. It's going to be held in Chicago, Illinois. As you know, very important primary state, so I'm pretty excited that we were picked for such an important debate.

Now, how can you watch the debate? Well we'll be live-streaming it on the YouTube channel. Cenk and the rest of The Young Turks crew are going to be live-streaming it. Tal's show will be live-streaming it as well. In addition to YouTube, we'll also be using Facebook Live-on both of our accounts-to stream it.

Now don't you guys worry; I'm going to be asking some pretty loaded questions. We need concrete answers and I don't believe we've been getting that. Tal's going to be focusing on foreign policy, and I'll be looking at fiscal and electoral policy. We are trying to fundamentally change how debates are held. Hopefully we'll be successful in that.

Anyway guys, I'm really f***ing excited for it and I can't wait.

[GoTfan]

So the debate will be up tonight if all goes well! After that, it's back to business as usual!

Don't forget my Trump tweet!

[Blackacre]

Here's your Trump Tweet

[America Needs R'hllor]

Here's your Trump Tweet

Love it!

[Blackacre]

Saturday, March 14th, 2020
The Tenth Democratic Primary Debate
(Ft. GoTFan and Parrotguy)
(yeah, this is a doozy, so much so that it needs to take up 3 posts worth of content. But it was worth it!)

Live from Chicago, Illinois, it's the tenth Democratic Primary Debate with your moderators Kyle Kulinski and Tal Schneider!

Kyle Kulinski:
Hello and welcome to another Democratic Primary Debate for 2020. I'm Kyle Kulinski, host of Secular Talk radio and the Secular Talk YouTube channel. Moderating tonight's debate with me is Israeli political analyst and host of The Plog Show Tal Schneider. Round of applause for Tal for making the trip!

Now, Tal, I will ask you to explain the rules of tonight's debate.

Tal Schneider:
Thank you, Kyle.

Tonight, the first few minutes will be for opening statements from the candidates. Then, me and Kyle are each going to ask three questions, with an option for a follow-up or a rebuttal, and lastly, each candidate will have time for his or her closing statement.

Kyle Kulinski:
Thank you for that Tal. Now, the podium tonight has been arranged according to delegate count so far, so let's welcome our candidates, Senator Sherrod Brown of Ohio!

Tal Schneider:
Senator Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts!

Kyle Kulinski:
Senator Tammy Baldwin of Wisconsin!

Tal Schneider:
And Senator Cory Booker of New Jersey!

Kyle Kulinski:
In accordance with delegate count, Senator Brown will be allowed to give his opening statement first.

Sherrod Brown:
Thank you, and thank you for hosting tonight's debate. Let me get straight to the point: The last four years have been terrible for this country. Everybody on this stage can agree to that. Our current leadership cares more about looking good than about working to improve the United States. But so do many of our politicians from all sides. It's easy to scapegoat one person, or one group, or one institution as the cause of all our problems, but it's harder to make policy that actually addresses those problems. I'm running for President because I've spent the last 27 years working on policy that would help millions of Americans, and I want to put that policy front and centre in the conversation.

Elizabeth Warren:
Thank you. Donald Trump was onto something when he said that the elites were controlling our government, but over the last four years he has done nothing but play right into the hands of the very interests he blasted. The truth is that Wall Street really has been corrupting our politics for decades, and I am the only candidate with a record of standing up to Wall Street specifically and big moneyed interests in general. Donald Trump is a con and a fraud, so it's time to send someone to Washington who can really shake up the system!

Tammy Baldwin:
Thank you for having us tonight. We need to be aware not only on the impact that our country's actions have on the wider world, but also on how history will remember this era. If Donald Trump continues to call the shots, we won't be remembered fondly. We need to redeem ourselves in the eyes of history before any more damage can be done, and we need to do right by our most vulnerable communities. That means everybody from downtrodden construction workers to undocumented youth to an increasingly homeless and impoverished LGBT population. We need a President who can be a beacon of hope to these communities, rather than a threat, and that's why I'm here.

Cory Booker:
Thank you for having me. Every day that Donald Trump has been President, people's lives have been endangered. Everything from his travel ban to his tax cuts to his hateful rhetoric has put real people in real danger. But we cannot give up. We have overcome great challenges before in our history, and we did it by standing together and telling those who would harm us, that we will not back down. Donald Trump is a threat to our nation's well-being, and I'm running for President because I believe we can overcome this threat, as long as we stand together and act as one.

Kyle Kulinski:
Wonderful, now let's get started. Senator Brown, at a previous debate, you expressed support for a public option despite Senator Warren's call for single-payer universal healthcare. Senator, you are aware that the citizens of countries with single-payer systems like the UK and Australia pay less for their healthcare than we would under a public option?

Sherrod Brown:
The high cost of healthcare in the US compared with other countries is much more complicated than just the existence or lack of a single-payer system. A public option would not only guarantee that the US would provide health insurance to anyone who wants it, but it would also be an agent of competition, lowering the costs and raising the benefits of private insurance on the market. Other countries may have systems that work for them, but for America, I believe that a regulated private market with a strong public option is the best path going forward.

Kyle Kulinski:
Senator Warren, you've made a big deal about universal healthcare this election. Do you have a rebuttal?

Elizabeth Warren:
Yes. The Senator and I have discussed this before at length, but I would like to reiterate that healthcare should be considered a right. It's immoral in my view for companies to profit off of sick people, and the simplest and best fix to our system is a medicare for all, single-payer system.

[Blackacre]

Kyle Kulinski:
Senator Booker, in 2017, Senators Sanders and Klobuchar introduced an amendment to allow for the cheaper purchase of medical drugs in the United States. You joined a majority of Republicans in voting the amendment down. Later, your excuse was that they did not meet FDA regulations. Senator, how can these drugs not meet FDA regulations when they're manufactured in the United States?

Cory Booker:
The bill had no provisions to guarantee that the imported prescription drugs would be safe. It concerned importing drugs from Canada, so even if those drugs were manufactured in the US, we could only guarantee they would meet Canadian regulatory standards, not the standards of the FDA. A future bill might have fixed that issue, but I don't act based on a future piece that may or may not come.

Kyle Kulinski:
Senator, you are aware these drugs are already sold in the United States? They're just sold at higher prices. How could they not meet FDA regulations if they're being sold?  

Cory Booker:
Well, There is the possibility that the drugs were altered in Canada before being sold there, to fit their regulations and not our FDA. There was nothing in the bill I voted against that would have accounted for that, and if there was, I would have voted differently.

Kyle Kulinski:
Senator, that doesn't make sense. The drugs are manufactured in the US. They're sold in the US. They meet FDA regulations very clearly. Is it because you have received more money from pharmaceutical manufacturing that any other Senate Democrat? To be exact, we are talking over $500,000. Not to mention that these answers are just talking points from the pharmaceutical industry. Canada has stronger restrictions than we do.

I guess my question Senator is this: How do you sleep at night knowing that you have denied the ability of sick people to pay for their medication?  

Cory Booker:
I can assure you that none of my votes or statements are influenced by the pharmaceutical industry, no matter what your very loaded question implies. I did not affect the prices of drugs in the United States. The Republicans did when they voted to defang Obamacare, and one of my first acts as President would be to undo the damage the Republicans did to our healthcare system.

Tal Schneider:
This question is for Senator Baldwin. In the past, you've voiced opposition to the Israeli blockade of Gaza, calling it "de facto collective punishment"- which is, according to the Geneva accord, a warcrime. This is despite the fact that the blockade stops Hamas from acquiring missiles. You've also voted against sanctions on Iran in 2009, calling it "a misguided heavy handed approach". Will you continue the line of previous Presidents, putting importance on the alliance with Israel and its security, or will you change that line?

Tammy Baldwin:
I do want to maintain a friendship with the nation of Israel, however, I do think we need to re-examine our policy toward the middle east as a whole. In Israel, for example, it's clear that Palestinians are underrepresented, and I do believe that the blockade, regardless of its benefit, is de facto collective punishment. If Israel is ever threatened, my administration would do everything possible to protect Israel, but we need to acknowledge the nation's shortcomings and resolve them in one way or another.

Tal Schneider:
Senator Warren, you've been very supportive of Israel in the past. You've even rejected the notion that Israel uses excessive force in Gaza, presumably including the blockade. Do you have a rebuttal?

Elizabeth Warren:
I do. I believe it is important for us that we not only recognise that Israel has a right to exist, but that we protect it and encourage it to protect itself. The state of Israel is under constant siege from neighbours who want to see it destroyed, and I will help Israel do whatever it it can to make sure that does not happen.

Tal Schneider:
While we have you talking, this next question is for you. Following the reports on Russian hacking after the 2016 elections, you've started a pretty hard line on Russia. We're talking about a very powerful nation, and a nuclear one at that. What is your plan on dealing with Russian aggression without fanning it?

Elizabeth Warren:
Russia knows as well as we do that if they launch a single nuke, they will face retaliation. My plan is to drive the Russians out of Estonia by providing more aid to our NATO allies than Trump has been willing to give, and from there, our military will be a brick wall preventing Russia from trying to swallow more countries if it needs to be.

Tal Schneider:
You've talked about Estonia. What about Ukraine? Crimea has become similar to the Baltic Countries under the Soviet rule- their annexation unrecognized by most of the world, and yet not actively resisted. Would you change that?

Elizabeth Warren:
It would be more difficult to achieve than getting Russia out of Estonia and preventing its expansion, but I would commit the United States to the goal of freeing Crimea from Russian rule and use any tools at the President's disposal to do so.

Kyle Kulinski:
We will now move on to audience questions. This first one is from Michael Wells of Missouri.

Michael Wells:
Senator Baldwin, during both of your Senate campaigns, you took a considerable amount of money from various PACs. How can you claim to be a progressive when you take money from special interest groups represented through PACs?

Tammy Baldwin:
While it's true that the influence of money in politics is strong and that this influence affects government, PACs can be progressive if they serve to advance progressive causes. I have received help from organisations that want to strengthen unions, raise the minimum wage, expand immigration, and oppose the Trump Presidency. My friend Governor Feingold refused help from Super PACs twice, lost both times, and was only able to become Governor of Wisconsin and help the people of my state because in 2018 he accepted help from PACs that shared his goals.

Kyle Kulinski:
Senator Brown, you've made a point of being heavily opposed to the use of PACs and SuperPACS. Do you have a rebuttal?

Sherrod Brown:
I think Super PACS are toxic to this country's electoral system. I haven't used a Super PAC yet, and while I don't have any say in whether or not one does benefit me, I sure haven't seen any helping me in this primary. All I really have to say to Senator Baldwin is this: we will be watching you closely to see whether you go forward with campaign finance reforms you claim to support, whether you're voting on them in the Senate or directing them as our President.

[Blackacre]

Tal Schneider:
This next one is for you, Senator Brown. It's from Moshe, an American citizen currently residing in Tel Aviv who couldn't make it to Chicago tonight. It reads: "Senator Brown, do you support reducing the number of nuclear weapons worldwide and why? If so, how would you approach it?"

Sherrod Brown:
Absolutely. Nuclear weapons have the potential to end human life on earth, and it's imperative that we do everything we can to minimise that risk. I would use similar tactics that former President Obama used to get the Iran Deal, to make sure nuclear weapons stay out of nations that might use them. I would also invest in our nuclear facilities at home to make absolutely sure that there will be no nuclear accidents in the United States.

Tal Schneider:
You're speaking about stopping new countries from acquiring nukes. But would you actively try to negotiate with big nuclear powers such as Russia and China in order to try and reduce the number of nukes worldwide?

Sherrod Brown:
I would. I believe it is in the interests of all the major nuclear powers to reduce our nuclear stockpiles, so I would open up talks as soon as possible with that goal in mind.

Kyle Kulinski:
This next audience question is from one Emily McCarthy, from North Carolina.

Emily McCarthy:
Senator Warren, in both of your Senate races, you received large contributions from the securities and investment industries. In the 2012 race for example, you received over half a million dollars from them, and two years ago, they again donated over half a million to your campaign. Doesn’t this undermine your tough talk on Wall Street somewhat?

Elizabeth Warren:
No. Look at my votes in the Senate, look at the progressive policies I've championed, look at what I've done when given the chance to. My actions are not the actions of somebody corrupted by outside money. If the securities and investment industries wanted to buy a politician, well then they sure got disappointed!

Kyle Kulinski:
Senator, the securities and investment industries were largely responsible for the crash of 2008. How does being donated hefty sums of money by them not undermine your tough talk? How can the American people trust that you will maintain your progressive record in the White House?

Elizabeth Warren:
Look at my record in the Senate, look at my policy plans. These industries can give as much money to me as they want, they're still going to face a harsher regulatory burden under my administration so that they don't crash the economy again.

Tal Schneider:
This last question is from Aaron Katz of New York, and Senator Booker, it's for you.

Aaron Katz:
Senator Booker, would you support allowing more Syrian and Iraqi refugees into our country, and how would you make sure that they pose no threat?

Cory Booker:
We already had a strong vetting process under past administrations that ensured that no refugee would cause Americans any harm. I wish to use those vetting systems that were already in place, and increase our refugee intake above and beyond what former President Obama has done, let alone Trump. This is one of our obligations to the world, and it's important that we treat it as such, instead of something we can opt out of.

Tal Schneider:
But look at Europe. Clearly, they've been handling the refugee crisis very badly- many refugees are having a very hard time to assimilate, the numbers of new refugees appear to be uncontrollable, and a wave of backlash causes far-right politicians and ideas to gain immense popularity. How would you prevent these things from happening?

Cory Booker:
I would make sure that new refugees are resettled in places where they can easily adapt, where they are among Americans who would accept them and treat them as friends. There may be a backlash regardless, but any political cost is worth the tens of thousands of lives that would improve because of our actions.

Tal Schneider:
Well, that wraps up tonight's debate. Senator Brown, Senator Warren, Senator Booker, Senator Baldwin, thank you all for coming!

Next time: The third round of Tuesday states vote, and decide the fate of these four candidates!

Kyle Kulinski:
Almost forgot, does anybody have any closing statements?

Tammy Baldwin:
I have one: Life from New York, IT'S SATURDAY NIGHT!!!!!!