Thread: Democrat 2020 POTUS Candidates & Primaries

nebish - 1/12/2019 at 04:51 PM

Officially Announced:

X - Out- Michael Bennet (announced 5/2/19)(withdrew 2/11)
- 54, current US Senator from Colorado, former chief of staff to then Governor Hickenlooper, former Denver Public Schools Superintendent, businessman and lawyer.
http://michaelbennet.com/win

Joe Biden (announced 4/25/19)
- 76, 2009-2017 Vice President, US Senator from Delaware 1973-2009, two-time POTUS candidate in 1988 and 2008.
https://joebiden.com/

X - Out - Michael Bloomberg (announced 11/24/19)(withdrew 3/4)
- 77, 2002-2013 NYC Mayor, has run and won as Republican before, founder Bloomberg LP
https://www.mikebloomberg.com/

X - Out - Cory Booker (announced 2/1/2019)(suspends campaign 1/13/20)
-49 years old, current US Senator from NJ, former Newark Mayor, Rhodes Scholar
https://corybooker.com/

X - Out Steve Bullock (announced 5/14/19)(withdrew 12/2)
- 53, two-term and current Governor of Montana, former state Attorney General, lawyer
https://stevebullock.com/

X - Out - Pete Buttigieg (announced 4/14/19) (withdrew 3/1)
- 37, Rhodes Scholar, Naval Reservist deployed in Afghanistan, two-term Mayor of South Bend IN
https://peteforamerica.com/meet-pete/

X - Out - Julian Castro (announced 1/12/19)(withdrew 1/2/20)
-44 year old, former Mayor of San Antonio and HUD Secretary for Obama, delivered keynote speech at 2012 DNC
https://www.facebook.com/Julian-Castro-97458155742/

X - Out - Bill de Blasio (announced 5/16/19)(withdrew 9/20)
-58, two-term current Mayor of New York City, former NYC Public Advocate, NYC City Council.
https://billdeblasio.com/

X - Out - John Delaney (announced 7/28/17)(withdrew 1/31/20)
-55 years old, former US House member from Maryland 2013-2019 (did not run for reelection), prior career in business
https://www.johnkdelaney.com/

X - Out - Tulsi Gabbard (announced 1/11/19, withdrew 3/18)
-37 years old, current US House member from Hawaii, member of National Guard and served in Iraq, former vice-chair DNC who stepped down to endorse Bernie Sanders
https://www.tulsi2020.com/

X - Out - Kirsten Gillibrand (announced 3/17/2019)(withdrew 8/28)
- 52, current US Senator from New York (replaced Hillary Clinton's seat and was reelected twice), former member of US House, lawyer
https://kirstengillibrand.com/

X - Out - Mike Gravel (announced 4/2/19)(withdrew 8/6)
- 88, US Senator from Alaska 1969-1981, 2008 POTUS candidate, has stated he is not seeking party nomination instead running to appear in the debates (atleast he is honest)
https://www.mikegravel.org/

X - Out - Kamala Harris (announced 1/21/19)(withdrew 12/3)
-54 years old, current US Senator from California, former District Attorney and Attorney General of California
https://kamalaharris.org/

X - Out - John Hickenlooper (announced 3/4/19)(withdrew 8/15)
- 67, two-term Governor of Colorado, former Mayor and entrepreneur
https://www.hickenlooper.com/

X - Out - Jay Inslee (announced 3/1/10)(withdrew 8/21)
- 68, two-term Governor of Washington, former state legislator
https://jayinslee.com/

X - Out - Amy Klobuchar (announced 2/10/19)(withdrew 3/2)
- 58, current US Senator from Minnesota, former county attorney and prosecutor
https://www.amyklobuchar.com/

X - Out - Wayne Messam (announced 3/28/19)(withdrew 11/20)
- 44, three-term Mayor of Miramar, FL, city commissioner 2011-2015, businessman
https://wayneforusa.com/

X - Out - Seth Moulton (announced 4/22/19)(withdrew 8/23)
- 40, current member of US House from Massachusetts, Marine Corp Captain serving 4 tours in Iraq, Green New Deal co-sponsor
https://sethmoulton.com/

X-Out-Richard Ojeda (announced 11/12/18)(suspended campaign 1/25/19)
-48 years old, 24 year Army veteran, former WV Senate, lost bid for US House in 2018
https://voteojeda.com/

X-Out-Beto O'Rourke (announced 3/14/19)(withdrew 11/1)
- 46 years old, former US House member from Texas 2013-2019, lost 2018 US Senate election, formerly served on El Paso city council
https://betoorourke.com/

X - Out - Deval Patrick (announced 11/16/19)(withdrew 2/12)
- 63, 2007-2015 Governor of Massachusetts, 1994-1997 assistant AG, lawyer
https://devalpatrick2020.com/

X - Tim Ryan (announced 4/4/19)(withdrew 10/24)
- 45, current and 9 term member of the US House from Ohio, former congressional aide and state Senator
https://timryanforamerica.com/

X - Out Bernie Sanders (announced 2/19/2019)(suspends "active campaigning" 4/8/20)
- 77, current US Senator from Vermont, self described Democratic Socialist, serving as elected representative in Washington since 1991, former Mayor of Burlington, lost Democrat Nomination 2016
https://berniesanders.com/

X - Out - Joe Sestak (announced 6/23/19)(withdrew 12/1)
- 67, member of US House 2007-2011, Naval Academy with 31 years of service, National Security Council Director for President Clinton, beat Arlen Specter in 2010 Senate primary but lost general.
https://www.joesestak.com/

X - OUT - Tom Steyer (announced 7/9/19)(withdrew 2/29)
- 62, billionaire and former hedge fund manger with time spent at Goldman Sachs and founder of Farallon Capital. Also founder of political lobbying and advocacy groups NextGen America and Need to Impeach.
https://www.tomsteyer.com/

X-OUT Eric Swalwell (announced 4/8/19)(withdrew 7/8)
- 38, current member of US House from California, former CA county deputy DA
https://swalwell.house.gov/

X - Out - Elizabeth Warren (announced 2/9/19)(suspended 3/5)
- 69, current US Senator from Massachusetts, former law professor with appointments for advising and oversight on bankruptcy and consumer protections
https://elizabethwarren.com/

X - Out - Marianne Williamson (announced 1/28/2019)(withdrew 1/12/20)
-66 years old, author, teacher and activist, lost California Congressional election in 2014 as an Independent
https://marianne.com/

X - Out - Andrew Yang (announced 11/6/2017)(withdrew 2/11)
-43 years old, venture capitalist and entrepreneur, Ambassador of Global Entrepreneurship for Obama
https://www.yang2020.com



[Edited on 4/9/2020 by nebish]


gina - 1/12/2019 at 07:05 PM

I like Yang's Universal Basic Income. I think that will help solve a lot of problems.

Ojeda has an interesting idea about capping the wealth of our Washington representatives but I doubt he could get that passed. Still an interesting candidate.

Tulsi:
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2019/jan/11/tulsi-gabbard-run-president -2020-democrat-hawaii
Iraqi war veteran, she met secretly with Assad. Maybe Mueller should look into that.
"Gabbard has also drawn criticism for secretly meeting with Syria’s president, Bashar al-Assad, during a 2017 trip to the war-torn country. Gabbard opposes removing Assad from power."



[Edited on 1/12/2019 by gina]

[Edited on 1/12/2019 by gina]


nebish - 1/21/2019 at 01:26 PM

Kamala Harris (announced 1/21/19)
-54 years old, current US Senator from California, former District Attorney and Attorney General of California
https://kamalaharris.org/


Chain - 1/21/2019 at 01:31 PM

quote:
Kamala Harris (announced 1/21/19)
-54 years old, current US Senator from California, former District Attorney and Attorney General of California
https://kamalaharris.org/


She's an excellent candidate in my opinion....Smart, articulate, and a very experienced prosecutor. I've seen a number of interviews with her over past few months and she's very impressive in my opinion. In particular, a recent C-span interview where she was speaking at a law school I believe...

[Edited on 1/21/2019 by Chain]


MartinD28 - 1/21/2019 at 07:14 PM

quote:
quote:
Kamala Harris (announced 1/21/19)
-54 years old, current US Senator from California, former District Attorney and Attorney General of California
https://kamalaharris.org/


She's an excellent candidate in my opinion....Smart, articulate, and a very experienced prosecutor. I've seen a number of interviews with her over past few months and she's very impressive in my opinion. In particular, a recent C-span interview where she was speaking at a law school I believe...

[Edited on 1/21/2019 by Chain]


X2

Former Attorney General of California. Every time I've heard her speak I came away more & more impressed. I wouldn't mind seeing her on the the ticket as either candidate for prez or VP.


2112 - 1/21/2019 at 09:21 PM

quote:
quote:
quote:
Kamala Harris (announced 1/21/19)
-54 years old, current US Senator from California, former District Attorney and Attorney General of California
https://kamalaharris.org/


She's an excellent candidate in my opinion....Smart, articulate, and a very experienced prosecutor. I've seen a number of interviews with her over past few months and she's very impressive in my opinion. In particular, a recent C-span interview where she was speaking at a law school I believe...

[Edited on 1/21/2019 by Chain]


X2

Former Attorney General of California. Every time I've heard her speak I came away more & more impressed. I wouldn't mind seeing her on the the ticket as either candidate for prez or VP.


I've never been a huge fan of hers. She is definitely left of me, although she is definitely highly intelligent and we'll spoken. I'm not sure how much appeal she'll have to the independents, although if she faces the dumpster fire that is Trump it might not matter.


tcatanesi - 1/21/2019 at 11:02 PM

Our country couldn't handle a female president of color.

We haven't evolved enough.

I like her. Smart and a little sassy.


BoytonBrother - 1/22/2019 at 04:18 PM

I can hear the right desperately searching online for something.....anything at all, to hate about Kamala Harris. “Surely there must be something, and I’m going to find it and pretend to hate her for it.” Just watch.

In the next couple weeks, Fox News will find it, create the talking point, and we’ll see it regurgitated here by the usual sheep who can’t articulate for themselves. It’ll be such a coincidence, that Goob and Mule will miraculously share the same frustrations as Fox News, at the same time!


BrerRabbit - 1/22/2019 at 04:23 PM

Maybe she claimed she was .00001 % caucasian at some point? Hahaha - then we could nickname her "Betsy Ross".


BoytonBrother - 1/22/2019 at 07:20 PM

quote:
Maybe she claimed she was .00001 % caucasian at some point? Hahaha - then we could nickname her "Betsy Ross".


They hate her already, and don’t even know why. I can’t wait to see the posts by Goober, Mule, and BIGV - all together in unison, spouting the same talking point provided to them by the media.

So what did you dig up boys? What insignificant factoid will you latch onto so you can pretend-hate her? How much time until you post it here? When she gains steam I imagine.


Chain - 1/22/2019 at 10:15 PM

quote:
Maybe she claimed she was .00001 % caucasian at some point? Hahaha - then we could nickname her "Betsy Ross".


She actually is bi-racial.....So I suppose the Fox news crowd and the right will seize upon that as being a serious flaw.

What I think i find most appealing about her is while certainly a bit sassy (which I like in a candidate), she's at the same time calm and even slightly reserved. I think that is because she's very intelligent and doesn't talk merely to talk but think's deeply before she speaks.

I would say an example of this was in her questioning of Cavanaugh some months ago...While many politicians in such panel discussions ask prepared questions verbatim right off a sheet of paper, she, on the other hand showed her experience as a prosecutor in the way she questioned and listened to Cavanaugh...Her style of speaking and interaction reminds me slightly of Barack Obama.

[Edited on 1/22/2019 by Chain]


MartinD28 - 1/23/2019 at 12:30 AM

quote:
quote:
Maybe she claimed she was .00001 % caucasian at some point? Hahaha - then we could nickname her "Betsy Ross".


She actually is bi-racial.....So I suppose the Fox news crowd and the right will seize upon that as being a serious flaw.

What I think i find most appealing about her is while certainly a bit sassy (which I like in a candidate), she's at the same time calm and even slightly reserved. I think that is because she's very intelligent and doesn't talk merely to talk but think's deeply before she speaks.

I would say an example of this was in her questioning of Cavanaugh some months ago...While many politicians in such panel discussions ask prepared questions verbatim right off a sheet of paper, she, on the other hand showed her experience as a prosecutor in the way she questioned and listened to Cavanaugh...Her style of speaking and interaction reminds me slightly of Barack Obama.

[Edited on 1/22/2019 by Chain]


Chain - I thought yesterday about her questioning of Cavanaugh, but I didn't post about it. Glad that you brought that up. My read is the same as yours. Glad you posted it. I'd like to see her as part of the ticket moreso than Warren or Gillibrand.


Chain - 1/23/2019 at 10:49 PM

quote:
quote:
quote:
Maybe she claimed she was .00001 % caucasian at some point? Hahaha - then we could nickname her "Betsy Ross".


She actually is bi-racial.....So I suppose the Fox news crowd and the right will seize upon that as being a serious flaw.

What I think i find most appealing about her is while certainly a bit sassy (which I like in a candidate), she's at the same time calm and even slightly reserved. I think that is because she's very intelligent and doesn't talk merely to talk but think's deeply before she speaks.

I would say an example of this was in her questioning of Cavanaugh some months ago...While many politicians in such panel discussions ask prepared questions verbatim right off a sheet of paper, she, on the other hand showed her experience as a prosecutor in the way she questioned and listened to Cavanaugh...Her style of speaking and interaction reminds me slightly of Barack Obama.

[Edited on 1/22/2019 by Chain]


Chain - I thought yesterday about her questioning of Cavanaugh, but I didn't post about it. Glad that you brought that up. My read is the same as yours. Glad you posted it. I'd like to see her as part of the ticket moreso than Warren or Gillibrand.


You're welcome....I agree and have said previous that I want no part of either Warren or Gillibrand on the ticket either as Pres. or VP....They both can do good things in the Senate. Even more so should the Dems gain control in of the Senate. And for the record, Gillibrand is one of my Senators....I'm a fan of hers, but think she should stay in Senate.


BIGV - 1/23/2019 at 10:58 PM

I do not believe we are ready for a Woman President; the Dems aspirations for the WH lay with 77 year old Bernie Sanders changing Parties.


BrerRabbit - 1/23/2019 at 11:03 PM

quote:
I do not believe we are ready for a Woman President


Guess that makes me not part of the "we".


MartinD28 - 1/23/2019 at 11:43 PM

quote:
I do not believe we are ready for a Woman President; the Dems aspirations for the WH lay with 77 year old Bernie Sanders changing Parties.



bigv,

Can you expand upon your reasoning why you make that statement about a Woman President"? Who are the "we" that you personally refer to? We doesn't include me.

You say you "do not believe we are ready for a Woman President". So - when do you think we will be ready? 10 years, 20 years, never?

I'll bet you $100.00 that Bernie won't be the nominee. Are you in?


OriginalGoober - 1/24/2019 at 01:29 AM

quote:
I can hear the right desperately searching online for something.....anything at all, to hate about Kamala Harris. “Surely there must be something, and I’m going to find it and pretend to hate her for it.” Just watch.

In the next couple weeks, Fox News will find it, create the talking point, and we’ll see it regurgitated here by the usual sheep who can’t articulate for themselves. It’ll be such a coincidence, that Goob and Mule will miraculously share the same frustrations as Fox News, at the same time!


She seems confused and blows where the politcal winds shift. I understand that she made it her personal mission to have truancy become criminal offense in California, clogging up the courts with low income minorities. If she is such a hard liner not sure why she is a democrat and opposes the Wall and Trump.


OriginalGoober - 1/24/2019 at 01:48 AM

quote:
Officially Announced:

Julian Castro (announced 1/12/19)
-44 year old, former Mayor of San Antonio and HUD Secretary for Obama, delivered keynote speech at 2012 DNC
https://www.facebook.com/Julian-Castro-97458155742/

John Delany (announced 7/28/17)
-55 years old, former US House member from Maryland 2013-2019 (did not run for reelection), prior career in business
https://www.johnkdelaney.com/

Tulsi Gabbard (announced 1/11/19)
-37 years old, current US House member from Hawaii, member of National Guard and served in Iraq, former vice-chair DNC who stepped down to endorse Bernie Sanders
https://www.tulsi2020.com/

Kamala Harris (announced 1/21/19)
-54 years old, current US Senator from California, former District Attorney and Attorney General of California
https://kamalaharris.org/

Richard Ojeda (announced 11/12/18)
-48 years old, 24 year Army veteran, former WV Senate, lost bid for US House in 2018
https://voteojeda.com/

Andrew Yang (announced 11/6/2017)
-43 years old, venture capitalist and entrepreneur, Ambassador of Global Entrepreneurship for Obama
https://www.yang2020.com/


I believe those are the only officially announced candidates at the moment. Many, many more will be coming!

[Edited on 1/21/2019 by nebish]



nebish - 1/24/2019 at 02:05 AM

And....we're in the gutter. My intention is to keep this tread alive until the election.


MartinD28 - 1/24/2019 at 12:18 PM

quote:
quote:
Officially Announced:

Julian Castro (announced 1/12/19)
-44 year old, former Mayor of San Antonio and HUD Secretary for Obama, delivered keynote speech at 2012 DNC
https://www.facebook.com/Julian-Castro-97458155742/

John Delany (announced 7/28/17)
-55 years old, former US House member from Maryland 2013-2019 (did not run for reelection), prior career in business
https://www.johnkdelaney.com/

Tulsi Gabbard (announced 1/11/19)
-37 years old, current US House member from Hawaii, member of National Guard and served in Iraq, former vice-chair DNC who stepped down to endorse Bernie Sanders
https://www.tulsi2020.com/

Kamala Harris (announced 1/21/19)
-54 years old, current US Senator from California, former District Attorney and Attorney General of California
https://kamalaharris.org/

Richard Ojeda (announced 11/12/18)
-48 years old, 24 year Army veteran, former WV Senate, lost bid for US House in 2018
https://voteojeda.com/

Andrew Yang (announced 11/6/2017)
-43 years old, venture capitalist and entrepreneur, Ambassador of Global Entrepreneurship for Obama
https://www.yang2020.com/


I believe those are the only officially announced candidates at the moment. Many, many more will be coming!

[Edited on 1/21/2019 by nebish]





Ah...Stormy Daniels. Trump had a fling with her after his son was born & then paid hush money to make the story go away prior to the election. We can see why purists like goob & the Evangelicals would vote for her.


MartinD28 - 1/24/2019 at 12:21 PM

quote:
quote:
I can hear the right desperately searching online for something.....anything at all, to hate about Kamala Harris. “Surely there must be something, and I’m going to find it and pretend to hate her for it.” Just watch.

In the next couple weeks, Fox News will find it, create the talking point, and we’ll see it regurgitated here by the usual sheep who can’t articulate for themselves. It’ll be such a coincidence, that Goob and Mule will miraculously share the same frustrations as Fox News, at the same time!


She seems confused and blows where the politcal winds shift. I understand that she made it her personal mission to have truancy become criminal offense in California, clogging up the courts with low income minorities. If she is such a hard liner not sure why she is a democrat and opposes the Wall and Trump.


goob - see BoytonBrother's post 1/22/2019 at 11:18. You just validated his point. Bingo.


BrerRabbit - 1/24/2019 at 02:32 PM

And the Stormy post validated the "we are not ready for a woman president" post. That is, if "we" means dickhead simpletons who are frightened and threatened by intelligent women.



BoytonBrother - 1/24/2019 at 04:51 PM

quote:
I do not believe we are ready for a Woman President


Translation: I am not ready for a woman President - I can’t speak for anyone but myself.

Does the “why” even matter?


BoytonBrother - 1/24/2019 at 05:04 PM

quote:
She seems confused and blows where the politcal winds shift.


Lol, ok buddy.

quote:
I understand that she made it her personal mission to have truancy become criminal offense in California


Yay for Google!

quote:
clogging up the courts with low income minorities. If she is such a hard liner not sure why she is a democrat and opposes the Wall and Trump.


Well Goober, it’s because people can be different from one another.....even people among the same political affiliation. I know this comes as a shock.

As for opposing Trump and his wall, even you can understand the value of distancing yourself from a soon-to-be disgraced President working for Russia. You and your ilk might be ok being associated with scum, but any serious professional would be foolish to brand themselves with it. Even Guliani just said he’s afraid of what his tombstone will say. You really don’t get this?


BrerRabbit - 1/24/2019 at 06:15 PM

quote:
...afraid of what his tombstone will say


lol . . . "Here LIES."

[Edited on 1/24/2019 by BrerRabbit]


BIGV - 1/24/2019 at 06:47 PM

quote:
quote:
I do not believe we are ready for a Woman President; the Dems aspirations for the WH lay with 77 year old Bernie Sanders changing Parties.



bigv,

Can you expand upon your reasoning why you make that statement about a Woman President"? Who are the "we" that you personally refer to? We doesn't include me.

You say you "do not believe we are ready for a Woman President". So - when do you think we will be ready? 10 years, 20 years, never?

I'll bet you $100.00 that Bernie won't be the nominee. Are you in?


On Bernie?...No, but thanks!...But I believe he represents the Dems best chance to win.

"We" being representative of the Voting block as a whole. Not everyone who finds their way to a Polling station lives in N.Y. or California and a good % of those voters have readily voiced their opinions on this.

When will "we" be ready? one more Generation, change takes time a evidenced by how gradually States are coming around to the Legalization of Pot.....

The Dems will argue that Hillary was extremely qualified to hold the highest office in the land...How did she lose given the system has elected what?...44/45 other Presidents?


BIGV - 1/24/2019 at 06:50 PM

quote:
quote:
quote:
I can hear the right desperately searching online for something.....anything at all, to hate about Kamala Harris. “Surely there must be something, and I’m going to find it and pretend to hate her for it.” Just watch.

In the next couple weeks, Fox News will find it, create the talking point, and we’ll see it regurgitated here by the usual sheep who can’t articulate for themselves. It’ll be such a coincidence, that Goob and Mule will miraculously share the same frustrations as Fox News, at the same time!


She seems confused and blows where the politcal winds shift. I understand that she made it her personal mission to have truancy become criminal offense in California, clogging up the courts with low income minorities. If she is such a hard liner not sure why she is a democrat and opposes the Wall and Trump.


goob - see BoytonBrother's post 1/22/2019 at 11:18. You just validated his point. Bingo.


This same argument can be and will be made by the Democrats about almost any Republican Candidate.......

"I predict someone on this Board will soon celebrate a Birthday"


BoytonBrother - 1/24/2019 at 07:04 PM

The most recent popular votes would suggest that the majority of the country is ready. It’s the conservatives who aren’t ready.


BIGV - 1/24/2019 at 07:07 PM

quote:
The most recent popular votes would suggest that the majority of the country is ready. It’s the conservatives who aren’t ready.


"Popular" votes are not enough. The people in the breadbasket of the Country have a voice. We may not agree with it, but there they are.


BoytonBrother - 1/24/2019 at 07:46 PM

quote:
"Popular" votes are not enough. The people in the breadbasket of the Country have a voice. We may not agree with it, but there they are.


Right. So then the people in the red state breadbasket aren’t ready for a woman President, but the “voting block as a whole” favored Hillary by a couple million.


BrerRabbit - 1/24/2019 at 08:58 PM

quote:
Who are the "we" that you personally refer to?


We the peephole.


MartinD28 - 1/24/2019 at 10:01 PM

quote:
quote:
quote:
I do not believe we are ready for a Woman President; the Dems aspirations for the WH lay with 77 year old Bernie Sanders changing Parties.



bigv,

Can you expand upon your reasoning why you make that statement about a Woman President"? Who are the "we" that you personally refer to? We doesn't include me.

You say you "do not believe we are ready for a Woman President". So - when do you think we will be ready? 10 years, 20 years, never?

I'll bet you $100.00 that Bernie won't be the nominee. Are you in?


On Bernie?...No, but thanks!...But I believe he represents the Dems best chance to win.

"We" being representative of the Voting block as a whole. Not everyone who finds their way to a Polling station lives in N.Y. or California and a good % of those voters have readily voiced their opinions on this.

When will "we" be ready? one more Generation, change takes time a evidenced by how gradually States are coming around to the Legalization of Pot.....

The Dems will argue that Hillary was extremely qualified to hold the highest office in the land...How did she lose given the system has elected what?...44/45 other Presidents?


The midterms saw a record number of women elected to Congress. Almost all were Dems. Wonder why the GOP continues to elect mainly white males while the Dems much more reflect the makeup of the population's diversity?

Hillary probably lost because she was hated by many, and they voted for the other horribly flawed candidate with the belief that they were voting for the lesser of two evils. I doubt HC lost because she is a woman. With what the country has seen of whatever the f Trump is combined with the vote for female candidates in the midterms, I'd say the country is more than ready for a woman to become POTUS.

There will always be pockets of narrow minded, chauvinistic, and backwards thinking individuals, but society as a whole always changes as time moves forward.


BIGV - 1/24/2019 at 11:08 PM

quote:
There will always be pockets of narrow minded, chauvinistic, and backwards thinking individuals, but society as a whole always changes as time moves forward.


Very true statement and they come in all shapes, sizes, colors and are members of any number of political parties.....


MartinD28 - 1/24/2019 at 11:18 PM

quote:
quote:
There will always be pockets of narrow minded, chauvinistic, and backwards thinking individuals, but society as a whole always changes as time moves forward.


Very true statement and they come in all shapes, sizes, colors and are members of any number of political parties.....


So let's concentrate on the other statement I made. What is your explanation for the following:

"The midterms saw a record number of women elected to Congress. Almost all were Dems. Wonder why the GOP continues to elect mainly white males while the Dems much more reflect the makeup of the population's diversity?"


BIGV - 1/25/2019 at 01:12 AM

quote:
quote:
quote:
There will always be pockets of narrow minded, chauvinistic, and backwards thinking individuals, but society as a whole always changes as time moves forward.


Very true statement and they come in all shapes, sizes, colors and are members of any number of political parties.....


So let's concentrate on the other statement I made. What is your explanation for the following:

"The midterms saw a record number of women elected to Congress. Almost all were Dems. Wonder why the GOP continues to elect mainly white males while the Dems much more reflect the makeup of the population's diversity?"


Difference in the way the Parties are viewed would be my guess. A lot of new voters come from from cultures where the Gov't takes care of everything, gee whiz, which Party do you think fits that profile? For example you seem to see most Republicans in one way and most Dems in another, that's cool, but you have to accept that not everyone is going to agree with that assessment. I have no problem with Democrats per say, but their leadership makes me laugh...For example, the existing funds for a lot of Gubmint workers are about to run out and the Party of the "People" would rather see some people end up homeless and without food than to give President Trump one penny for his wall. Nice. As far as Branding voters can we agree that there are Democrats in Iowa and Oklahoma that are 80 year old white guys who don't believe a Woman can be President? Sure there are.....Both major parties wear rose colored glasses and turn a blind eye whenever it suits them......

Vote Libertarian; less Government


BrerRabbit - 1/25/2019 at 01:21 AM

Yep, absolutely! Vote Libertarian; sap the Republicans! Power to them! If I were a Republican politician I would be scared to death of Libertarians right now.

[Edited on 1/25/2019 by BrerRabbit]


nebish - 1/25/2019 at 03:31 AM

The only issue I have with Kamala Harris, it's actually an issue with CNN, they are going to air a town hall style show from Iowa. Hopefully they will be doing this for all the candidates. It seems rather unfair to the other candidates that they would give her this air time and platform and not her fellow Democrat competitors like Castro or Gabbard or the other lesser know candidates. It's almost like CNN is deciding who to promote by doing this. She was only 6th in a Politico Iowa December poll of potential candidates with 7%. This town hall event should help boost that, but CNN should be offering such to the other candidates as well.


BoytonBrother - 1/25/2019 at 03:48 AM

quote:
A lot of new voters come from from cultures where the Gov't takes care of everything, gee whiz, which Party do you think fits that profile?


Inner cities vote democrat. Bible Belt votes Trump. By asking “which”, did you think it was just one party?

quote:
I have no problem with Democrats per say


“Per say”, lol. I appreciate you leaving the option of hating them outright on the table.

quote:
the existing funds for a lot of Gubmint workers are about to run out and the Party of the "People" would rather see some people end up homeless and without food than to give President Trump one penny for his wall. Nice.


Existing funds are about to run out and our Russian asset President would rather see Americans end up homeless and without food because he wants a $5billion monument to himself built.

But see it how you want, and excuse a traitor to our country working for a foreign adversary. Blame other officials because of their political affiliation instead. Just have some courage and say you don’t like Democrats. It’s way more respectable than dancing around with this lazy nonsensical analysis. Trump owns it, as he said, period. Hostage taking is a sleazy tactic, and it’s better to spend $5billion on something that will definitely work - not a symbol for white supremist America. Trump is in charge. Obviously.


BIGV - 1/25/2019 at 04:16 AM

quote:
quote:
A lot of new voters come from from cultures where the Gov't takes care of everything, gee whiz, which Party do you think fits that profile?


Inner cities vote democrat. Bible Belt votes Trump. By asking “which”, did you think it was just one party?

quote:
I have no problem with Democrats per say


“Per say”, lol. I appreciate you leaving the option of hating them outright on the table.

quote:
the existing funds for a lot of Gubmint workers are about to run out and the Party of the "People" would rather see some people end up homeless and without food than to give President Trump one penny for his wall. Nice.


Existing funds are about to run out and our Russian asset President would rather see Americans end up homeless and without food because he wants a $5billion monument to himself built.

But see it how you want, and excuse a traitor to our country working for a foreign adversary. Blame other officials because of their political affiliation instead. Just have some courage and say you don’t like Democrats. It’s way more respectable than dancing around with this lazy nonsensical analysis. Trump owns it, as he said, period. Hostage taking is a sleazy tactic, and it’s better to spend $5billion on something that will definitely work - not a symbol for white supremist America. Trump is in charge. Obviously.


You are certainly entitled to your opinion and as always have stated it with nothing but eloquence and tact. But, I respectively disagree.


cyclone88 - 1/25/2019 at 04:33 AM

quote:
On Bernie?...No, but thanks!...But I believe he represents the Dems best chance to win.


Now that he's been exposed for the misogynist many knew him to be, Dem women under 77 won't vote for him. He's DOA.


2112 - 1/25/2019 at 05:02 AM

quote:
quote:
quote:
quote:
There will always be pockets of narrow minded, chauvinistic, and backwards thinking individuals, but society as a whole always changes as time moves forward.


Very true statement and they come in all shapes, sizes, colors and are members of any number of political parties.....


So let's concentrate on the other statement I made. What is your explanation for the following:

"The midterms saw a record number of women elected to Congress. Almost all were Dems. Wonder why the GOP continues to elect mainly white males while the Dems much more reflect the makeup of the population's diversity?"


Difference in the way the Parties are viewed would be my guess. A lot of new voters come from from cultures where the Gov't takes care of everything, gee whiz, which Party do you think fits that profile? For example you seem to see most Republicans in one way and most Dems in another, that's cool, but you have to accept that not everyone is going to agree with that assessment. I have no problem with Democrats per say, but their leadership makes me laugh...For example, the existing funds for a lot of Gubmint workers are about to run out and the Party of the "People" would rather see some people end up homeless and without food than to give President Trump one penny for his wall. Nice. As far as Branding voters can we agree that there are Democrats in Iowa and Oklahoma that are 80 year old white guys who don't believe a Woman can be President? Sure there are.....Both major parties wear rose colored glasses and turn a blind eye whenever it suits them......

Vote Libertarian; less Government


I know A LOT of people who claim to be Libertarian, yet they never win elections, or even get more than 1 or 2 percent of the vote. Sometimes I think Libertarians like to make a lot of noise and act like they're smarter than everyone else, but when they get in the voting booth they vote Republican every time. Heck, I don't know anybody who claims to be in the Green Party (and I live in liberal California), yet they get more votes than Libertarians. If Gary Johnson couldn't do better against Trump than he did, then I think the Libertarian Party will never be more than an insignificant footnote.


BoytonBrother - 1/25/2019 at 11:51 AM

quote:
the Party of the "People" would rather see some people end up homeless and without food than to give President Trump one penny for his wall. Nice.


“The hostage negotiator would rather see the bank customer die than give the bank robber cash and a helicopter. Nice.”

If you look at this ink blot and direct your ire at the Democrats, then you are clearly bigoted against a certain political affiliation.


BIGV - 1/25/2019 at 04:34 PM

quote:
quote:
the Party of the "People" would rather see some people end up homeless and without food than to give President Trump one penny for his wall. Nice.


“The hostage negotiator would rather see the bank customer die than give the bank robber cash and a helicopter. Nice.”


You do realize that there are a good percentage of Voters who see Pelosi and Schumer as the "Hostage negotiators"? They have an equal opportunity to end this, but choose to wear their disdain on their collars.


quote:
If you look at this ink blot and direct your ire at the Democrats, then you are clearly bigoted against a certain political affiliation.


And your feelings toward Republicans? Ask yourself if the shoe fits?

You are amazing.


BoytonBrother - 1/25/2019 at 05:28 PM

quote:
And your feelings toward Republicans? Ask yourself if the shoe fits?

You are amazing.


Not true at all. I was ready to vote Republican in 2016, until they chose the one guy who was attacking America and praising foreign adversaries at the time - I couldn't stomach that treasonous language. I like George W. Bush. I respect traditional conservative family values. I don't agree with Republican politics, but I'll gladly vote for them if they present the stronger candidate. Dismiss it if you want, but it's the truth. As for the past 2 years, yes, I'm ashamed of the Republicans in Washington who cower and turn a blind eye to the poison in the White House. Shame on them, and shame on the people who vote for this crap - sometimes you gotta put personal interests and emotions aside and do what's right - this does not belong in our White House, period. Why didn't republican voters choose Chris Christie? What about Kasich? Bush? Show me a good Republican leader like George W. Bush, and he's got my vote in 2 seconds.


BIGV - 1/25/2019 at 06:01 PM

quote:
Why didn't republican voters choose Chris Christie? What about Kasich? Bush? Show me a good Republican leader like George W. Bush, and he's got my vote in 2 seconds.


I voted for Obama in '08, believed in the possibility of real change....Returned to the Libertarian ticket after that. I believe that for a lot of Voters President Trump was the outsider, the "Take no Prisoners, accept no more biz as usual type of Candidate" where, imo, Bush always looked he was going to cry, Kasich seemed angry and Christie couldn't take care of himself....


MartinD28 - 1/25/2019 at 06:41 PM

For those who want to blame the Dems or place blame equally, take a look at any number of polling results and see if that is reflective of the truth.

From Marketwatch today

"Sixty percent of Americans say Trump bears a great deal of responsibility for the shutdown."

That seems a far cry from a Pelosi or Schumer blame stat.

Most polls have Trump's approval rating at mid 30's now.


MartinD28 - 1/25/2019 at 06:47 PM

quote:
quote:
Why didn't republican voters choose Chris Christie? What about Kasich? Bush? Show me a good Republican leader like George W. Bush, and he's got my vote in 2 seconds.


I voted for Obama in '08, believed in the possibility of real change....Returned to the Libertarian ticket after that. I believe that for a lot of Voters President Trump was the outsider, the "Take no Prisoners, accept no more biz as usual type of Candidate" where, imo, Bush always looked he was going to cry, Kasich seemed angry and Christie couldn't take care of himself....


So do you think Trump's no more biz as usual has been good for America, inclusive of all Americans, positive for foreign relations with our allies, devoid of questionable dealings with enemy nations, managing debt, clean & swamp draining, & putting qualified individuals (the best people) in key positions?

Record turnover in resignations in appointments & resignations by Generals?


BIGV - 1/26/2019 at 01:08 AM

quote:
For those who want to blame the Dems or place blame equally, take a look at any number of polling results and see if that is reflective of the truth.


Polls!...The same ones that said Hillary would win in a landslide?


BIGV - 1/26/2019 at 01:15 AM

quote:
So do you think Trump's no more biz as usual has been good for America


As I have done with preceding Presidents from Ford, through Obama, my answer is "I do not know, it's too soon to tell". I believe you judge the White House as terms are completed, I've always thought that. Now some may disagree, especially if disgust is the driving factor.


BIGV - 1/26/2019 at 01:22 AM

quote:
If Gary Johnson couldn't do better against Trump than he did, then I think the Libertarian Party will never be more than an insignificant footnote.


So be it. I believe in less Gubmint and the Libertarian Parties platform is the best fit for me and my belief system. Your mileage may vary.

I participate in the process by voting, 2% or 40, You'll find me casting my Vote on Election day, driven by my conscience and what I believe to be right.


sckeys - 1/26/2019 at 01:59 AM

Ive voted libertarian some but they blew the best chance they will ever get in 16. All these dems rolling out this early is crazy but i hope there is an unknown on the way.


nebish - 1/26/2019 at 04:03 AM

quote:
For those who want to blame the Dems or place blame equally, take a look at any number of polling results and see if that is reflective of the truth.

From Marketwatch today

"Sixty percent of Americans say Trump bears a great deal of responsibility for the shutdown."

That seems a far cry from a Pelosi or Schumer blame stat.

Most polls have Trump's approval rating at mid 30's now.


Trump is to blame 100% for the shut down; and unnecessary and misplaced fight - wrong place, wrong time. And I place 100% blame on the Democrats for the length of the shut down. This could've ended the exact same way it did today weeks ago had the Democratic leadership been crafty (or reasonable) enough. Instead they sat it out and let the Republicans and Trump bleed to death. It's fine, they got what they wanted I suppose, but there were other people involved, not just the opposing political party. These people pretend to care about "us" when it is really all about "them".

That is the view from where I sit. Polls can reflect alot of things, but we all have our own perspective, or we should.


BIGV - 1/26/2019 at 04:11 AM

quote:
These people pretend to care about "us" when it is really all about "them"..


Exactly, selfish B^%tards all


MartinD28 - 1/26/2019 at 02:07 PM

quote:
quote:
For those who want to blame the Dems or place blame equally, take a look at any number of polling results and see if that is reflective of the truth.


Polls!...The same ones that said Hillary would win in a landslide?


Paint strokes and perspective.

Polls - If you look at the polls leading up to the prez election they were statistically much closer for HC / Trump than the polls that were increasingly against Trump / GOP being blamed for shutdown. The gaps were growing by the weeks. So prez poll continually narrowed while shutdown poll continually widened.

I guess you don't think that these numbers that were so statistically significant against Trump's shutdown had anything to do with him caving? Do you think it was his love, empathy, and compassion for the American people that had him do a 180? If that's the case he wouldn't have orchestrated this facade in the first place.


BIGV - 1/26/2019 at 03:37 PM

quote:
quote:
quote:
For those who want to blame the Dems or place blame equally, take a look at any number of polling results and see if that is reflective of the truth.


Polls!...The same ones that said Hillary would win in a landslide?


Paint strokes and perspective.

Polls - If you look at the polls leading up to the prez election they were statistically much closer for HC / Trump than the polls that were increasingly against Trump / GOP being blamed for shutdown. The gaps were growing by the weeks. So prez poll continually narrowed while shutdown poll continually widened.

I guess you don't think that these numbers that were so statistically significant against Trump's shutdown had anything to do with him caving? Do you think it was his love, empathy, and compassion for the American people that had him do a 180? If that's the case he wouldn't have orchestrated this facade in the first place.


Your contempt for all things Trump is equal to my probable ridicule of most actions taken by Clinton had she been elected, so I understand where you are coming from. That being said, please know that my criticism of decisions made by the leadership of the Democratic Party will continue and that questions about that choice will most likely be responded to with an answer you won't agree with.

Enjoy the day


MartinD28 - 1/26/2019 at 04:40 PM

quote:
quote:
quote:
quote:
For those who want to blame the Dems or place blame equally, take a look at any number of polling results and see if that is reflective of the truth.


Polls!...The same ones that said Hillary would win in a landslide?


Paint strokes and perspective.

Polls - If you look at the polls leading up to the prez election they were statistically much closer for HC / Trump than the polls that were increasingly against Trump / GOP being blamed for shutdown. The gaps were growing by the weeks. So prez poll continually narrowed while shutdown poll continually widened.

I guess you don't think that these numbers that were so statistically significant against Trump's shutdown had anything to do with him caving? Do you think it was his love, empathy, and compassion for the American people that had him do a 180? If that's the case he wouldn't have orchestrated this facade in the first place.


Your contempt for all things Trump is equal to my probable ridicule of most actions taken by Clinton had she been elected, so I understand where you are coming from. That being said, please know that my criticism of decisions made by the leadership of the Democratic Party will continue and that questions about that choice will most likely be responded to with an answer you won't agree with.

Enjoy the day


My criticisms of Trump are based upon his & his campaign's track record leading up to an election (example - Russia relationships) and his two year presidency - verifiable facts, actions, and policies. Your criticism of HC as you stated is based upon "actions taken by Clinton had she been elected". That in itself is a hypothetical premise for something that never came to be. So there really is no equality between "contempt for all things Trump is equal to my (i.e. bigv) probable ridicule of most actions taken by Clinton". She wasn't elected, he was, and he has a track record to be judged upon as President as opposed to someone who wasn't elected and has no record as president to be judged upon.


BIGV - 1/26/2019 at 04:43 PM

quote:
My criticisms of Trump are based upon his & his campaign's track record leading up to an election (example - Russia relationships) and his two year presidency - verifiable facts, actions, and policies. Your criticism of HC as you stated is based upon "actions taken by Clinton had she been elected". That in itself is a hypothetical premise for something that never came to be. So there really is no equality between "contempt for all things Trump is equal to my (i.e. bigv) probable ridicule of most actions taken by Clinton". She wasn't elected, he was, and he has a track record to be judged upon as President as opposed to someone who wasn't elected and has no record as president to be judged upon.


Fair enough. Your judgments and criticisms of Political viewpoints and standards are different than mine, I can accept that.

Enjoy the day.


Sang - 1/26/2019 at 05:33 PM

quote:

So be it. I believe in less Gubmint and the Libertarian Parties platform is the best fit for me and my belief system. Your mileage may vary.

I participate in the process by voting, 2% or 40, You'll find me casting my Vote on Election day, driven by my conscience and what I believe to be right.



That's funny - most libertarians I know don't want the Gubmint spending $5.7 billion on a useless wall.....they (for the most part) don't want the Gubmint spending or doing anything.....




https://www.lp.org/issues/immigration

Libertarians believe that if someone is peaceful, they should be welcome to immigrate to the United States.

Libertarians believe that people should be able to travel freely as long as they are peaceful. We welcome immigrants who come seeking a better life. The vast majority of immigrants are very peaceful and highly productive.

Indeed, the United States is a country of immigrants, of all backgrounds and walks of life…some families have just been here for more generations than others. Newcomers bring great vitality to our society.

A truly free market requires the free movement of people, not just products and ideas.

Whether they are from India or Mexico, whether they have advanced degrees or very little education, immigrants have one great thing in common: they bravely left their familiar surroundings in search of a better life. Many are fleeing extreme poverty and violence and are searching for a free and safe place to try to build their lives. We respect and admire their courage and are proud that they see the United States as a place of freedom, stability, and prosperity.

Of course, if someone has a record of violence, credible plans for violence, or acts violently, then Libertarians support blocking their entry, deporting, and/or prosecuting and imprisoning them, depending on the offense.

Libertarians do not support classifying undocumented immigrants as criminals. Our current immigration system is an embarrassment. People who would like to follow the legal procedures are unable to because these procedures are so complex and expensive and lengthy. If Americans want immigrants to enter through legal channels, we need to make those channels fair, reasonable, and accessible.


BoytonBrother - 1/26/2019 at 06:20 PM

quote:
Your judgments and criticisms of Political viewpoints and standards are different than mine, I can accept that.


Why don’t you explore his question instead of bailing when the question is tough? This sounds like you are completely stumped on a response to his logic and reason. When you can’t defend your position, what credibility is left?


BrerRabbit - 1/26/2019 at 06:43 PM

quote:
That's funny - most libertarians I know don't want the Gubmint spending $5.7 billion on a useless wall.....they (for the most part) don't want the Gubmint spending or doing anything.....

https://www.lp.org/issues/immigration

Libertarians believe that if someone is peaceful, they should be welcome to immigrate to the United States.

Libertarians believe that people should be able to travel freely as long as they are peaceful. We welcome immigrants who come seeking a better life. The vast majority of immigrants are very peaceful and highly productive.

Indeed, the United States is a country of immigrants, of all backgrounds and walks of life…some families have just been here for more generations than others. Newcomers bring great vitality to our society.

A truly free market requires the free movement of people, not just products and ideas.

Whether they are from India or Mexico, whether they have advanced degrees or very little education, immigrants have one great thing in common: they bravely left their familiar surroundings in search of a better life. Many are fleeing extreme poverty and violence and are searching for a free and safe place to try to build their lives. We respect and admire their courage and are proud that they see the United States as a place of freedom, stability, and prosperity.

Of course, if someone has a record of violence, credible plans for violence, or acts violently, then Libertarians support blocking their entry, deporting, and/or prosecuting and imprisoning them, depending on the offense.

Libertarians do not support classifying undocumented immigrants as criminals. Our current immigration system is an embarrassment. People who would like to follow the legal procedures are unable to because these procedures are so complex and expensive and lengthy. If Americans want immigrants to enter through legal channels, we need to make those channels fair, reasonable, and accessible.


Thanks for digging this up - this is pretty much exactly my view. I guess I am a Libertarian in many respects.

A truly free market requires the free movement of people, not just products and ideas.

I like the way these folks think!


[Edited on 1/26/2019 by BrerRabbit]


BIGV - 1/26/2019 at 10:24 PM

quote:
quote:
Your judgments and criticisms of Political viewpoints and standards are different than mine, I can accept that.


Why don’t you explore his question instead of bailing when the question is tough? This sounds like you are completely stumped on a response to his logic and reason. When you can’t defend your position, what credibility is left?


I don't like to argue about politics and prefer to use the Whipping Post as a place to read, drop an opinion and move on. I really don't care how people view that way of doing things; you always have the option of reading what I write, shrugging your shoulders and moving on. The Sun will rise tomorrow either way. Credibility?......Pertaining to a Political view on a Musical website?

As far s Sang raising the Libertarian view on the Wall....No Party is a perfect fit, I am fine with that


nebish - 1/27/2019 at 02:43 PM

I simply don't know how anyone could say "I'm a Libertarian"...or Democrat...or Republican. I never get how someone could so easily find alignment with all their views into one little neat political box.

Personally, I think it is refreshing when we see a self described insert party name here breaks ranks or supports something out of the party norm.

Just picking a side and standing by it or making one's views all fit the positions of one party would be much easier I guess. Personally I think it is counterproductive to one's own exploration and evolving on ideas and principles and is just another way that we become a spiteful and divided society. Isn't there enough of that already with race and religion and gender and income and age...actually what do I know, America must like things that way.


Sang - 1/28/2019 at 12:32 AM

Well yes, we all need someone to look down on.......


nebish - 1/28/2019 at 01:38 PM

Wanted to try and keep the names in the thread to offically declared candidates, but this is a unique exception.

Former Starbucks CEO Howard Schultz on possible run as independent:

"I feel if I ran as a Democrat I would have to be disingenuous and say things that I don't believe because the party has shifted so far to the left".

Schultz was on 60 minutes last night and will be on CNBC tomorrow.

quote:

Howard Schultz, Former Starbucks Chief, Is Preparing for an Independent 2020 Run

By Andrew Ross Sorkin

Jan. 27, 2019

Howard Schultz, the former chief executive of Starbucks and a self-described “lifelong Democrat,” said Sunday he was preparing to run for president as an independent and had already begun the groundwork required to be on the ballot in all 50 states.

Mr. Schultz, in an interview with The New York Times, said he planned to crisscross the country for the next three months as part of a book tour before deciding whether to enter the race. A billionaire, Mr. Schultz would face a difficult road despite his considerable wealth: Few independent candidates have mounted successful challenges for the White House.

“We have a broken political system with both parties basically in business to preserve their own ideology without a recognition and responsibility to represent the interests of the American people,” Mr. Schultz said in the interview.

“Republicans and Democrats alike — who no longer see themselves as part of the far extreme of the far right and the far left — are looking for a home,” he added. “The word ‘independent,’ for me, is simply a designation on the ballot.”

Mr. Schultz was also featured in a segment on “60 Minutes” on Sunday night ahead of the publication of his new book, “From the Ground Up,” in which he criticized President Trump as “not qualified to be the president.”

The possibility of Mr. Schultz’s candidacy as an independent has drawn condemnation from Democrats, who said that an independent run would split the vote on Election Day 2020 and hand Mr. Trump a second term.

“I have two words for Howard Schultz on a potential run for president as an independent: Just don’t,” Tina Podlodowski, chairwoman of the state Democratic Party of Washington, said last week as speculation mounted about Mr. Schultz’s plans.

Neera Tanden, president of the Center for American Progress and a former adviser to Hillary Clinton, said on Twitter, “If he enters the race, I will start a Starbucks boycott because I’m not giving a penny that will end up in the election coffers of a guy who will help Trump win.”

Mr. Schultz said he was well aware of the criticism, but said it was misplaced.

“I am certainly prepared for the cynics and the naysayers to come out and say this cannot be done,” he said. “I don’t agree with them. I think it’s un-American to say it can’t be done. I’m not doing this to be a spoiler.”

Asked if he would consider changing his mind and run as a Democrat, he said, “I feel if I ran as a Democrat I would have to be disingenuous and say things that I don’t believe because the party has shifted so far to the left.”

“When I hear people espousing free government-paid college, free government-paid health care and a free government job for everyone — on top of a $21 trillion debt — the question is, how are we paying for all this and not bankrupting the country?” Mr. Schultz said.

“It’s as big of a false narrative as the wall,” he added. “Doesn’t someone have to speak the truth about what we can afford while maintaining a deep level of compassion and empathy for the American people?”

Mr. Schultz, who grew up in the public housing projects in the Canarsie section of Brooklyn, became a billionaire by building Starbucks from seven stores in Seattle into a global coffee chain with over 350,000 employees. He was known as a progressive corporate leader, offering full health benefits for full- and part-time employees and their domestic partners, and Starbucks became the first privately owned American company to include part-time workers in its stock-option program.

With an estimated net worth of $3.3 billion, Mr. Schultz, 65, is one of several billionaires who had been mentioned as possible presidential contenders.

The former hedge fund titan Tom Steyer, who had been eyeing a run, announced this month he would focus his energies on a private effort to impeach Mr. Trump. Michael R. Bloomberg, the former New York City mayor, is contemplating a presidential run as a Democrat.

Even before Mr. Schultz’s announcement, Senator Bernie Sanders and Democrats including Senator Elizabeth Warren, who has already announced her candidacy, had delivered pre-emptive strikes at billionaires, specifically citing those who self-fund their campaigns.
Sign Up for On Politics With Lisa Lerer

A spotlight on the people reshaping our politics. A conversation with voters across the country. And a guiding hand through the endless news cycle, telling you what you really need to know.

Mr. Bloomberg, with an estimated net worth of nearly $48 billion, has said he would self-fund any campaign. Mr. Schultz is expected to fund some of his own campaign, but would also likely seek public donations for a race that could cost more than $1 billion.

Mr. Schultz’s consideration of entering the race as an independent evokes the 1992 campaign by the eccentric Texas billionaire Ross Perot, also a political neophyte. Mr. Perot, for a time, was the leader in the polls and gained almost 19 percent of the popular vote, the most for an independent candidate since Theodore Roosevelt in 1912.

Like Mr. Schultz, Mr. Perot expressed concern about the national debt and vowed to reduce it. Mr. Perot failed to win any electoral votes.

Mr. Schultz, who pointed to a recent Gallup poll showing that 42 percent of voters identified as politically independent, scoffed at the comparisons to previous efforts of independent candidates.

“This is a very different time in America today in terms of how divided we are and the need for the country to come together,” he said. “I’ve done the work this year to unequivocally remove, if I decide to run, any concern regarding ballot access.”

Mr. Schultz is relying in part on a small team of outside advisers, including Steve Schmidt, the former campaign strategist for John McCain’s 2008 presidential effort.

Mr. Schultz’s success or failure may lie in who emerges as a top contender in the Democratic Party. If Joseph R. Biden Jr., who is seen as a moderate, decides to run, it would probably make it difficult for Mr. Schultz. However, he said he sees a clear opportunity if a far-left candidate emerges.

“If you have a choice between President Trump and a far-left progressive Democrat,” he said, “many people think President Trump will get re-elected.”

Stephanie Saul contributed reporting.



https://www.nytimes.com/2019/01/27/us/politics/howard-schultz-president-202 0.html


nebish - 1/28/2019 at 03:57 PM

Julian Castro on Jake Taper 1/27/19 (video)
https://www.cnn.com/videos/politics/2019/01/27/sotu-castro-full.cnn

Kamala Harris campaign kickoff transcript:

quote:

Transcript: Kamala Harris kicks off presidential campaign in Oakland
photo

Posted: Jan 27 2019 02:57PM PST

Updated: Jan 27 2019 04:47PM PST

Transcript from Kamala Harris' presidential campaign kickoff speech in Oakland, California on January 27, 2019.

I am so proud to be a daughter of Oakland, California. And as most of you know, I was born just up the road at Kaiser Hospital. And it was just a few miles away my parents first met as graduate students at UC Berkeley where they were active in the civil rights movement.

They were born half a world apart from each other. My father, Donald, came from Jamaica to study economics. My mother, Shyamala, came from India to study the science of fighting disease.

They came here in pursuit of more than just knowledge. Like so many others, they came in pursuit of a dream. And that dream was a dream for themselves, for me and for my sister Maya.

As children growing up here in the East Bay, we were raised by a community with a deep belief in the promise of our country – and, a deep understanding of the parts of that promise that still remain unfulfilled.

We were raised in a community where we were taught to see a world, beyond just ourselves. To be conscious and compassionate about the struggles of all people.

We were raised to believe public service is a noble cause and the fight for justice is everyone’s responsibility.

In fact, my mother used to say "don't sit around and complain about things, do something.” Basically I think she was saying. You’ve got to get up and stand up and don’t give up the fight!

And it is this deep-rooted belief that inspired me to become a lawyer and a prosecutor.

It was just a couple blocks from this very spot that nearly 30 years ago as a young district attorney I walked into the courtroom for the very first time and said the five words that would guide my life’s work:

“Kamala Harris, for the people.”

Now, I knew our criminal justice system was deeply flawed.

But I also knew the profound impact law enforcement has on people’s lives, and it's responsibility to give them safety and dignity.

I knew I wanted to protect people.

And I knew that the people in our society who are most often targeted by predators are also most often the voiceless and vulnerable.

And I believed then as I do now, that no one should be left to fight alone.

You see, in our system of justice, we believe that a harm against any one of us is a har against all of us. That’s why when we file a case, it’s not filed in the name of the victim. It reads, “The People.”

This is a point I have often explained to console and counsel survivors of crime, people who faced great harm. Often at the hands of someone they trust – be it a relative or a bank or a big corporation.

I would remind them. You are not invisible. We all stand together.

That’s the power of the people.

My whole life, I’ve only had one client: the people.

Fighting for the people meant fighting on behalf of survivors of sexual assault - a fight not just against predators but a fight against silence and stigma.

For the people meant fighting for a more fair criminal justice system.

At a time when prevention and redemption were not in the vocabulary or mindset of most district attorneys, we created an initiative to get skills and job training instead of jail time for young people arrested for drugs.

For the people meant fighting for middle class families who had been defrauded by banks and were losing their homes by the millions in the Great Recession.

And I'll tell you, sitting across the table from the big banks, I witnessed the arrogance of power. Wealthy bankers accusing innocent homeowners of fault, as if Wall Street’s mess was of the people’s making.

So we went after the five biggest banks in the United States. We won 20 billion dollars for California homeowners and together we passed the strongest anti-foreclosure law in the United States of America. We did that together.

For the people meant fighting transnational gangs who traffic in drugs and guns and human beings. And I saw their sophistication, their persistence and their ruthlessness.

And folks, on the subject of transnational gangs, let’s be perfectly clear: the President's medieval vanity project is not going to stop them.

And in the fight for the people to hold this administration accountable, I have seen the amazing spirit of the American people.

During the health care fight, I saw parents and children with grave illnesses walk the halls of the United States Congress, families who had travelled across the country at incredible sacrifice.

They came to our nation’s capital believing that if their stories were heard, and if they were seen, their leaders would do the right thing.

I saw the same thing with our Dreamers. They came by the thousands. By plane, train and automobile. I’m sure they were sleeping ten-deep on someone’s living room floor.

They came because they believe in our democracy and the only country they’ve ever known as home.

I met survivors who shared their deepest, most painful personal experiences – who told stories they had never before revealed, even to their closest loved ones – because they believed that if they were seen, that their leaders would do the right thing and protect the highest court in our land.

Together we took on these battles.

To be sure we’ve won and we’ve lost, but we’ve never stopped fighting.

And that’s why we are here today.

We are here because we have another battle ahead.

We are here knowing that we are at an inflection point in the history of our world.

We are at an inflection point in in the history of our nation.

We are here because the American Dream and our American democracy are under attack and on the line like never before.

We are here at this moment in time because we must answer a fundamental question.

Who are we? Who are we as Americans?

So, let’s answer that question. To the world. And each other. Right here. And, right now.

America, we are better than this.

When we have leaders who lie and bully and attack a free press and undermine our democratic institutions that’s not our America.

When white supremacists march and murder in Charlottesville or massacre innocent worshipers at a Pittsburgh synagogue that’s not our America.

When we have children in cages crying for their mothers and fathers, don't you dare call it border security, that’s a human rights abuse and that’s not our America.

When we have leaders who attack public schools and vilify public school teachers that’s not our America.

When bankers who crashed our economy get bonuses but workers who brought our country back can't even get a raise that’s not our America.

And when American families are barely living paycheck to paycheck, what is this administration’s response?

Their response is to try to take away health care from millions of families.

Their response is to give away a trillion dollars to the biggest corporations in this country.

And their response is to blame immigrants as the source of all our problems.

And guys lets understand what is happening here: People in power are trying to convince us that the villain in our American story is each other.

But that is not our story. That is not who we are. That’s not our America.

Our United States of America is not about us versus them. It’s about We the people!

And in this moment, we must all speak truth about what’s happening.

Seek truth, speak truth and fight for the truth.

So let's speak some truth. Shall we?

Let’s speak truth about our economy. Our economy today is not working for working people.

The cost of living is going up, but paychecks aren't keeping up.

For so many Americans, a decent retirement feels out of reach and the American Dream feels out of touch.

The truth, is our people are drowning in debt.

Record student loan debt. Car loan debt. Credit card debt. Resorting to payday lenders because you can’t keep up with the bills.

People are drowning in America.

We have a whole generation of Americans living with the sinking fear that they won't do as well as their parents.

Let’s speak another truth about our economy. Women are paid on average 80 cents on the dollar. Black women, 63 cents. Latinas, 53 cents.

And here’s the thing. When we lift up the women of our country, we lift up the children of our country. We lift up the families of our country. And the whole of society benefits.

Let's speak another truth. Big pharmaceutical companies have unleashed an opioid crisis from the California coast to the mountains of West Virginia. And people once and for all we have got to call drug addiction for what it is: a national public health emergency. And we don't need another War on Drugs.

Let’s speak truth. Climate change is real and it is happening now. From wildfires In the west to hurricanes in the east, to floods and droughts in the heartland, we're not gonna buy the lie. We're gonna act, based on science fact, not science fiction.

And let’s speak an uncomfortable but honest truth with one another: racism, sexism, anti-Semitism, homophobia, transphobia are real in this country. They are age-old forms of hate with new fuel. And we need to speak that truth so we can deal with it.

Let’s speak the truth that too many unarmed black men and women are killed in America. Too many black and brown Americans are locked up. From mass incarceration to cash bail to policing, our criminal justice system needs drastic repair. Let’s speak that truth.

Let’s speak truth. Under this administration, America’s position in the world has never been weaker. Democratic values are under attack around the globe. When authoritarianism is on the march. When nuclear proliferation is on the rise. We have foreign powers infecting the White House like malware. Let us speak truth about these clear and present dangers.

And let’s speak the biggest truth, the biggest truth of all: In the face of powerful forces trying to sow hate and division among us, the truth is that as Americans we have much more in common than what separates us. Let’s speak that truth.

So, let's not buy into that stuff that they are trying to peddle. Let's never forget, that on the fundamental issues, we all have so much more in common than what separates us.

You know, some say we need to search to find that common ground. Here’s what I say, I say we need to recognize that we are already standing on common ground.

I say we will rise together or we will fall together as one nation, indivisible.

And I want to be perfectly clear: I'm not talking about unity for the sake of unity. Hear me out. I'm not talking about unity for the sake of unity.

I'm not talking about some façade of unity.

And I believe we must acknowledge that the word unity has often been used to shut people up or to preserve the status quo.

After all let’s remember: when women fought for suffrage, those in power said they were dividing the sexes and disturbing the peace.

Let’s remember: when abolitionists spoke out and civil rights workers marched, their oppressors said they were dividing the races and violating the word of God.

But Fredrick Douglass said it best and Harriet Tubman and Dr. King knew.

To love the religion of Jesus is to hate the religion of the slave master.

When we have true unity, no one will be subjugated for others. It’s about fighting for a country with equal treatment, collective purpose and freedom for all.

That’s who we are.

And so, I stand before you today, clear-eyed about the fight ahead and what has to be done—with faith in God, with fidelity to country, and with the fighting spirit I got from my mother. I stand before you today to announce my candidacy for President of the United States.

I’m running for president because I love my country. I love my country.

I’m running to be president, of the people, by the people, and for all people.

I’m running to fight for an America where the economy works for working people.

For an America where you only have to work one job to pay the bills, where hard work is rewarded and where any worker can join a union.

I am running to declare, once and for all, that health care is a fundamental right, and we will deliver that right with Medicare for All!

I am running to declare education is a fundamental right, and we will guarantee that right with universal pre-k and debt free college!

I am running to guarantee working and middle class families an overdue pay increase. We will deliver the largest working and middle-class tax cut in a generation. Up to $500 a month to help America's families make ends meet.

And we’ll pay for it by reversing this administration’s give aways to big corporations and the top one percent.

I’m running to fight for an America where our democracy and its institutions are protected against all enemies, foreign and domestic.

Which is why I will defend this nation against all threats to our cybersecurity.

We will secure our elections and our critical infrastructure to protect our democracy.

And we will honor our service members and veterans – so no one who has served this country has to wait in line for weeks and months to get what they are owed when they return home on first day.

I’m running to fight for an America where no mother or father has to teach their young son that people may stop him, arrest him, chase him, or kill him, because of his race.

An America where every parent can send their children to school without being haunted by the horror of another killing spree.

Where we treat attacks on voting rights and civil rights and women’s rights and immigrant rights as attacks on our country itself.

An America where we welcome refugees and bring people out of the shadows, and provide a pathway to citizenship.

An America where our daughters, where our sisters, where our mothers and grandmothers are respected where they live and where they work.

Where reproductive rights are not just protected by the Constitution of the United States but guaranteed in every state.

I’ll fight for an America where we keep our word and where we honor our promises.

Because that’s our America.

That’s the America I believe in.

That’s the America I know we believe in.
And as we embark on this campaign, I will tell you this: I am not perfect. Lord knows, I am not perfect. But I will always speak with decency and moral clarity and treat all people with dignity and respect. I will lead with integrity. And I will speak the truth.

And of course, we know this is not going to be easy guys. It’s not going to be easy.
We know what the doubters will say.

It’s the same thing they've always said.

They’ll say it’s not your time. They’ll say wait your turn. They’ll say the odds are long. They’ll say it can’t be done.

But America’s story has always been written by people who can see what can be unburdened by what has been. That is our story. That is our story.
As Robert Kennedy many years ago said, “Only those who dare to fail greatly can ever achieve greatly.”

He also said, “I do not lightly dismiss the dangers and the difficulties of challenging an incumbent President, but these are not ordinary times and this is not an ordinary election.” He said, "At stake is not simply the leadership of our party and even our country. It is our right to moral leadership of this planet.”

So today I say to you my friends, these are not ordinary times. And this will not be an ordinary election. But this is our America.

And here’s the thing. It’s up to us.

It’s up to us. Each and every one of us.

So let's remember in this fight we have the power of the people.

We can achieve the dreams of our parents and grandparents.

We can heal our nation.

We can give our children the future they deserve.

We can reclaim the American Dream for every single person in our country.

We can restore America’s moral leadership on this planet.

So let’s do this.

And let’s do it together.

And let's start now.

Thank you. God bless you. And God bless the United States of America.

http://www.ktvu.com/news/transcript-kamala-harris-kicks-off-presidential-ca mpaign-in-oakland



2112 - 1/28/2019 at 05:33 PM

Kamala Harris had 20,000 at her rally yesterday. Very impressive. And to see the comments from those on the right tell me they are worried about her. Apparently they are still mad that she asked tough questions to Kavanaugh. When they are mad at you for doing your job, you must be doing something right. Still not my first choice, but I'm starting to think that she will be one of the top 2 or 3 contenders for the nomination.


Chain - 1/28/2019 at 10:07 PM

quote:
Kamala Harris had 20,000 at her rally yesterday. Very impressive. And to see the comments from those on the right tell me they are worried about her. Apparently they are still mad that she asked tough questions to Kavanaugh. When they are mad at you for doing your job, you must be doing something right. Still not my first choice, but I'm starting to think that she will be one of the top 2 or 3 contenders for the nomination.


The Right should be afraid of her.....I think people relate to her and her life story and know she's a sharp, tough, experienced attorney who not only has a very impressive record as a prosecutor, but has successfully administered large organizations of professionals. In other words, qualified to run a branch of government (unlike the current occupant of the White House).

Also, as witnessed in her questioning of Kavanaugh, she's also thoughtful, calm, and determined. One other thing in her favor is that the Right hasn't had a decade or two to demonize her like they did Hilary Clinton. In this sense she's similar to Obama. They couldn't successfully demonize him and they may not be able to do so with Kamala Harris.

However, I'm sure Newt, Rush Limp dick, Coulter, etc. are all digging for something they can throw at her and hope sticks.


crazyjoe - 1/29/2019 at 02:45 AM

Getting ready to watch the Kamala Harris town hall, so far I like her......Peace.....joe


sckeys - 1/29/2019 at 04:15 AM

The angry white men are all over themselves since Cortez came along. Shes perfect for them to spew their hate at.


nebish - 1/29/2019 at 03:39 PM

Unfortunately I fell asleep at about 9:30 and didn't remember to record the town hall. Will have to catch up.

I think it is interesting how people are lashing out at Schultz. If he said he would be considering to run as a Democrat the narrative would be totally different. Whether or not he is a viable candidate either as an I or as a D, I hear him being minimized...as an MSNBC guest on Hayes' show said "he has no constituency". Sure I get that a block of the left resents and does not want an uber wealthy candidate running (see Bloomberg) and the party is being pushed strongly further left, but I feel if he would've said he would possibly run as a Democrat he would be reported on and viewed much differently.

Also, nobody is mentioning the fact that Trump himself my face challenges in the primary, or even in the general ~ is he even going to end up on the ballot with the Mueller stuff and all this time between now and then (643 days), SOOOO many things can happen that damage or impede Trump's reelection; I don't like seeing a potentially interesting candidate get disregarded like this....unless he is just doing it for publicity to sell books?


BoytonBrother - 1/29/2019 at 03:46 PM

quote:
The angry white men are all over themselves since Cortez came along. Shes perfect for them to spew their hate at.


Kamala, Ocasio-Cortez, Beto, the horror! I can see their brains short-circuiting. Didn’t some idiot post here recently “Democrats won’t elect a white Christian male anymore”, lol. 2 elections out of 45 and that guy has his panties in a wad about race (but we didn’t hear BIGV mention the race-baiting there. Instead he applauded it). What a weak-minded fool that poster was.


BIGV - 1/29/2019 at 03:54 PM

quote:
The angry white men are all over themselves since Cortez came along. Shes perfect for them to spew their hate at.


I've a serious question. Must you be angry and white to call out stupidity and ignorance?

The woman is not very bright


BIGV - 1/29/2019 at 04:00 PM

quote:
(but we didn’t hear BIGV mention the race-baiting there. Instead he applauded it).


Why is it always you who mentions race?....Are we not past this?.....Seeing Politicians as people; simply Men and Women with different thoughts? Either you agree with Ideologies and platforms or you do not. Why mention the color of one's skin?


StratDal - 1/29/2019 at 04:26 PM

I enjoyed Schultz's 60 Minutes interview. He sounds like a smart man that is grounded and could find common ground with all sides.

Right now, my first choice would be Bloomberg. He understands politics, business, and working with people. I'd like for him to run as a Republican but it would be difficult getting the nomination (would be hard for Santa!) at this time.

Good bet both of them wouldn't be on Twitter 24/7 either.


BoytonBrother - 1/29/2019 at 04:34 PM

quote:
Why is it always you who mentions race?....Are we not past this?.....Seeing Politicians as people; simply Men and Women with different thoughts? Either you agree with Ideologies and platforms or you do not. Why mention the color of one's skin?


I’m curious as to why you didn’t say this when that other poster brought it up in his lengthy post about race.


BIGV - 1/29/2019 at 04:41 PM

quote:
quote:
Why is it always you who mentions race?....Are we not past this?.....Seeing Politicians as people; simply Men and Women with different thoughts? Either you agree with Ideologies and platforms or you do not. Why mention the color of one's skin?


I’m curious as to why you didn’t say this when that other poster brought it up in his lengthy post about race.


Because you do it with the most consistency and defend it while doing so with the utmost of enthusiasm.


sckeys - 1/29/2019 at 04:55 PM

quote:
quote:
The angry white men are all over themselves since Cortez came along. Shes perfect for them to spew their hate at.


I've a serious question. Must you be angry and white to call out stupidity and ignorance?

The woman is not very bright


That may well be true, its just that all the hate ive seen directed at her has come from old white dudes. There is Larry Elder, the African American who seems to just have distain for Mexicans.


MartinD28 - 1/29/2019 at 05:18 PM

quote:
quote:
The angry white men are all over themselves since Cortez came along. Shes perfect for them to spew their hate at.


I've a serious question. Must you be angry and white to call out stupidity and ignorance?

The woman is not very bright


Or maybe you just don't agree with her viewpoints and consider her to not be bright because of that?


BoytonBrother - 1/29/2019 at 05:31 PM

quote:
Because you do it with the most consistency and defend it while doing so with the utmost of enthusiasm.


That answers why you call me out on it, but it doesn't answer my previous question. I guess I don't understand the point of dodging questions from me and others here, and call it "arguing".

quote:
The woman is not very bright


What an ignorant pompous way to speak.


BIGV - 1/29/2019 at 05:38 PM

quote:
quote:
quote:
The angry white men are all over themselves since Cortez came along. Shes perfect for them to spew their hate at.


I've a serious question. Must you be angry and white to call out stupidity and ignorance?

The woman is not very bright


Or maybe you just don't agree with her viewpoints and consider her to not be bright because of that?


Watch her videos and listen to the lack of knowledge on all things historic. Her diction; not too much intellectual agility here. Zero understanding of finances. The message becomes secondary when you can't get through the delivery .

I repeat, watch her videos, particularly when she is being interviewed


BIGV - 1/29/2019 at 05:41 PM

quote:
quote:
Because you do it with the most consistency and defend it while doing so with the utmost of enthusiasm.


That answers why you call me out on it, but it doesn't answer my previous question. I guess I don't understand the point of dodging questions from me and others here, and call it "arguing".

quote:
The woman is not very bright


What an ignorant pompous way to speak.


What a charming response.

Go ahead, get in the last word.....lol


BoytonBrother - 1/29/2019 at 06:05 PM

quote:
Go ahead, get in the last word.


Anyone else ever notice this odd response from him all the time? Anyway, why must it be the last word? I have more questions for you to dodge.

quote:
Watch her videos and listen to the lack of knowledge on all things historic. Her diction; not too much intellectual agility here. Zero understanding of finances.


What interviews are you watching? Any links of this behavior you describe? Because I've only seen her come off as intelligent and unique....that whole ink-blot test thing again....I wonder what it is.

quote:
The message becomes secondary when you can't get through the delivery


Putting the content of the message second summarizes you perfectly!




sckeys - 1/29/2019 at 06:32 PM

I wasnt directing my comments to anyone on here personally as that is never my intenion. As we know,, SC, where i live is fire truck red. ive been observing the land of the angry white man for many years up close.
Even when we go rounds with mule n goob i dont get personal or consider them bad. Bad Shine can do strange things to folks.


BIGV - 1/29/2019 at 06:36 PM

quote:
I wasnt directing my comments to anyone on here personally as that is never my intenion. As we know,, SC, where i live is fire truck red. ive been observing the land of the angry white man for many years up close.
Even when we go rounds with mule n goob i dont get personal or consider them bad. Bad Shine can do strange things to folks.


Where in S.C.? My Mother's family is from Savannah, Ga. and I spent quite a few childhood summers in Bluffton, S.C. on the May River.


BoytonBrother - 1/29/2019 at 06:57 PM

quote:
As we know,, SC, where i live is fire truck red. ive been observing the land of the angry white man for many years up close.


They exist in every state and every city, unfortunately. And there’s no motivation among them to evolve to a rational thought about it. They willfully choose to be lazy and simple.


sckeys - 1/29/2019 at 07:36 PM

quote:
quote:
I wasnt directing my comments to anyone on here personally as that is never my intenion. As we know,, SC, where i live is fire truck red. ive been observing the land of the angry white man for many years up close.
Even when we go rounds with mule n goob i dont get personal or consider them bad. Bad Shine can do strange things to folks.


Where in S.C.? My Mother's family is from Savannah, Ga. and I spent quite a few childhood summers in Bluffton, S.C. on the May River.


Im in the upstate, near Sburg. Im trying to place Bluffton. I can see the dang sign. I think lower state. Savannah is about 5 hrs but it seems like days for some reason. I used to go there for St PAt day.

[Edited on 1/29/2019 by sckeys]


BoytonBrother - 1/29/2019 at 08:03 PM

quote:
Watch her videos and listen to the lack of knowledge on all things historic.


You are not qualified to know this, so what does it mean then?

quote:
Her diction; not too much intellectual agility here.


Making an assumption about her based on her speech are we? That's prejudiced.

quote:
Zero understanding of finances.


Not qualified to know this either - just more bias against her and her political affiliation.

quote:
The message becomes secondary when you can't get through the delivery .


No, YOU can't get through the delivery because of an accent. Others can get through it just fine. To dismiss her message because of her accent is so blatantly ignorant and bigoted, but I respect your honesty about it. Thanks for offering the last word.


BIGV - 1/29/2019 at 08:18 PM

quote:
quote:
quote:
I wasnt directing my comments to anyone on here personally as that is never my intenion. As we know,, SC, where i live is fire truck red. ive been observing the land of the angry white man for many years up close.
Even when we go rounds with mule n goob i dont get personal or consider them bad. Bad Shine can do strange things to folks.


Where in S.C.? My Mother's family is from Savannah, Ga. and I spent quite a few childhood summers in Bluffton, S.C. on the May River.


Im in the upstate, near Sburg. Im trying to place Bluffton. I can see the dang sign. I think lower state. Savannah is about 5 hrs but it seems like days for some reason. I used to go there for St PAt day.



Nice. Savannah celebrates St Patties like no other!.. Bay street, damn fun spot. Bluffton just east of Beaufort and South of Hilton Head.

Spartanburg as in home of MTB?


sckeys - 1/30/2019 at 12:21 AM

quote:
quote:
quote:
quote:
I wasnt directing my co Savannah is about 5 hrs but it seems like days for some reason. I used to go there for St PAt day.



Nice. Savannah celebrates








Spartanburg as in home of MTB?



Yea, same place. I dont get out like i used to but for a small place its always had a good music scene. I first seen Govt Mule there in 95 i think it was. I


BoytonBrother - 1/31/2019 at 03:06 PM

I’ll tell you what, it may not matter who the Democrat candidates are. If reports are true that Republicans in Washington are turning on Trump, then I’d be worried if I were one of them. If a Republican senator stands up to Trump, takes him down, and restores foreign relations authority, then the Democrats are going to have a very difficult time defeating a “conservative leader that stood up to Trump, cleaned the filth that tarnished the Republican Party image, and restored dignity and class like the Reagan day’s”, it’ll be almost impossible to beat. He/she would be hailed as a hero, even among the left. I’d vote for that character and backbone over any of the Democrat candidates so far, especially if all they do is bash Trump during their campaigns.


Chain - 1/31/2019 at 03:55 PM

quote:
I’ll tell you what, it may not matter who the Democrat candidates are. If reports are true that Republicans in Washington are turning on Trump, then I’d be worried if I were one of them. If a Republican senator stands up to Trump, takes him down, and restores foreign relations authority, then the Democrats are going to have a very difficult time defeating a “conservative leader that stood up to Trump, cleaned the filth that tarnished the Republican Party image, and restored dignity and class like the Reagan day’s”, it’ll be almost impossible to beat. He/she would be hailed as a hero, even among the left. I’d vote for that character and backbone over any of the Democrat candidates so far, especially if all they do is bash Trump during their campaigns.


I'm not sure he/she would be a hero but only someone who finally put the country and the presidency above their own self interests. I think many on the left, middle, and also the right may feel that Republicans waited far too long to take Trump to task for what he's potentially done to the country. In other words, a too little too late kind of thing.

I would also add that issues like health care, saving the middle class, huge tax cuts for the rich, etc. have energized enough voters that no matter what a Republican does to Trump, these issues may overshadow simply standing up to an incompetent and dangerous bully...

I agree, however, that the Democrat who wins the nomination needs to offer substantive ideas and pragmatic plans to address these very issues....Just bashing Trump may not be enough.


nebish - 2/1/2019 at 03:20 PM

Cory Booker (announced 2/1/2019)
-49 years old, current US Senator from NJ, former Newark Mayor, Rhodes Scholar
https://corybooker.com/

Marianne Williamson (announced 1/28/2019)
-66 years old, author, teacher and activist, lost California Congressional election in 2014 as an Independent
https://marianne.com/


OriginalGoober - 2/1/2019 at 07:42 PM

Unfortunately Newark, NJ is a very violent place to live and nobody feels safe in many areas there. Corey thinks he is a legend in his own mind but his accomplishments are pretty weak. His biggest assest for lots of democrats is he's been posturing as far left as Pelosi which will translate into a poor campaign because he will not be able to appeal to middle America.

Spartacus 2020


BoytonBrother - 2/1/2019 at 08:58 PM

Those democrats live rent free in your head, don’t they. Must suck.


nebish - 2/8/2019 at 01:39 PM

CNN's second Presidential Town Hall will be with Howard Schultz. Geesh, it would be nice to talk to one of the many who has actually filed with the election committee to run rather than a 'maybe'.


nebish - 2/9/2019 at 09:32 PM

Elizabeth Warren (announced 2/9/19)
- 69, current US Senator from Massachusetts, former law professor with appointments for advising and oversight on bankruptcy and consumer protections
https://elizabethwarren.com/


nebish - 2/11/2019 at 02:39 PM

Amy Klobuchar (announced 2/10/19)
- 58, current US Senator from Minnesota, former county attorney and prosecutor
https://www.amyklobuchar.com/


MartinD28 - 2/11/2019 at 04:18 PM

quote:
CNN's second Presidential Town Hall will be with Howard Schultz. Geesh, it would be nice to talk to one of the many who has actually filed with the election committee to run rather than a 'maybe'.


Agree 100%.

I think CNN did a grab on HS because he probably increases ratings and would be considered the "outsider / spoiler".

I think we should get a town hall of the dozens of potential Dems or at least once they announce, as well as Trump and the possibly 1 or 2 GOP candidates should they challenge the "great one" or unless he's found to be damaged goods beyond what he was in 2015 through current.


nebish - 2/11/2019 at 04:29 PM

Yeah, that is what it is. Schultz was the guy everyone was talking about, for the wrong reasons, but CNN is likely just trying to capitalize on a person that might generate more interest and viewers.

I know some of these candidates have made the rounds of being guests on the various shows, but I would really like to see them give equal time to all of them rather than cherry picking.


BIGV - 2/11/2019 at 05:15 PM

Regardless of Party affiliation, it is becoming more difficult in each upcoming Election to get "excited" about any Candidate wishing to live in the White House. All of the people listed by the OP are just "the next group" throwing their hats in the ring. If President Trump has accomplished anything, I think most will agree that he has lowered the standard of who is qualified. Has this really opened a discussion about Oprah Winfrey running for President? Any celebrity is now adequate? Any Politician?...Yikes.

Just as the Republicans did with McCain/Palin in 2008, the Dems will do in 2020, the next group who have "earned" a shot at being President. When was the last time a True "Leader" emerged form any Party? "Roosevelt" in '32?...Kennedy in '60?..Reagan in '80?....Obama in '08?

That is the issue with me. The difference in voting for a Leader or a candidate. No wonder there is so much Voter apathy.


porkchopbob - 2/11/2019 at 05:58 PM

quote:
Just as the Republicans did with McCain/Palin in 2008, the Dems will do in 2020, the next group who have "earned" a shot at being President.


I think the Dems already did this with Hilary in 2016, and Gore in 2000. I think 2020 will actually be a reaction to 2016's primaries for Democratic voters and we will see a fresh face emerge. And it won't be Oprah.


BoytonBrother - 2/11/2019 at 06:08 PM

quote:
CNN is likely just trying to capitalize on a person that might generate more interest and viewers.


I hope everyone ignores the 24-hour cable news outlets for reasons exactly like this. Network news is unlikely to pull shenanigans like this since they have other programming responsibilities.


nebish - 2/18/2019 at 02:17 PM

Amy Klobuchar CNN Townhall tonight from New Hampshire.


cyclone88 - 2/19/2019 at 01:29 PM

And now we have 77-year-old Bernie Sanders.

I'm not a politico and perhaps I'm naive, but don't these guys know when it's time to give it up and become elder statemen/advisers to younger, fresher candidates? It's purely ego driven.

Age matters. As 81-year-old Jack Nicholson recently said, "My days of having any woman I wanted are OVER. I don't like it, but I'm realistic. I'm not going to make a fool of myself."


BIGV - 2/19/2019 at 10:36 PM

quote:
And now we have 77-year-old Bernie Sanders.


YeeHa! The Champion of free stuff rides again.


Sang - 2/19/2019 at 10:50 PM

You mean free stuff for people instead of corporations? LOL


MartinD28 - 2/19/2019 at 10:54 PM

quote:
quote:
And now we have 77-year-old Bernie Sanders.


YeeHa! The Champion of free stuff rides again.


Maybe Bernie will propose a middle class tax cut where many in the middle class end up paying more, and it blows up the deficit. Oh...I forgot that successful sham already has an owner.

I guess you're OK with that?


BoytonBrother - 2/19/2019 at 11:13 PM

quote:
YeeHa! The Champion of free stuff rides again.


BIGV, I was utterly shocked, shocked I tell ya, that you were arguing in Anything Goes....that’s so not like you to get involved with that, lol.


BIGV - 2/19/2019 at 11:36 PM

quote:
quote:
quote:
And now we have 77-year-old Bernie Sanders.


YeeHa! The Champion of free stuff rides again.


Maybe Bernie will propose a middle class tax cut where many in the middle class end up paying more, and it blows up the deficit. Oh...I forgot that successful sham already has an owner.

I guess you're OK with that?


My quote was about Free Health care, Free public college and a higher minimum wage, all things that attract Millennials who have no clue about who ends up paying. Yay!

Can you here the shouts of glee coming from the leaders of the Democratic party?!


MartinD28 - 2/20/2019 at 12:27 AM

quote:
quote:
quote:
quote:
And now we have 77-year-old Bernie Sanders.


YeeHa! The Champion of free stuff rides again.


Maybe Bernie will propose a middle class tax cut where many in the middle class end up paying more, and it blows up the deficit. Oh...I forgot that successful sham already has an owner.

I guess you're OK with that?


My quote was about Free Health care, Free public college and a higher minimum wage, all things that attract Millennials who have no clue about who ends up paying. Yay!

Can you here the shouts of glee coming from the leaders of the Democratic party?!


Actually to answer your question - no, I doubt those are attainable, and I doubt you'd hear shouts of glee.

But I see you didn't answer the question I raised.


BIGV - 2/20/2019 at 12:44 AM

quote:
But I see you didn't answer the question I raised.


You answered a statement about Bernie with a question about the President.

The thread title pertains to "Officially Declared Democrat 2020 POTUS Candidates" of which Bernie is now included.....

Let's stay focused here


cyclone88 - 2/20/2019 at 12:46 AM

quote:
And now we have 77-year-old Bernie Sanders.

I'm not a politico and perhaps I'm naive, but don't these guys know when it's time to give it up and become elder statemen/advisers to younger, fresher candidates? It's purely ego driven.

Age matters. As 81-year-old Jack Nicholson recently said, "My days of having any woman I wanted are OVER. I don't like it, but I'm realistic. I'm not going to make a fool of myself."


WP, you missed the point. I don't care what Sanders offers or doesn't. He's effing OLD - 79 in Nov. 2020. Give it up. Whisper in some young candidates ear, but go away. Quit diluting the dem pool.

[Edited on 2/20/2019 by cyclone88]


MartinD28 - 2/20/2019 at 01:10 AM

quote:
quote:
But I see you didn't answer the question I raised.


You answered a statement about Bernie with a question about the President.

The thread title pertains to "Officially Declared Democrat 2020 POTUS Candidates" of which Bernie is now included.....

Let's stay focused here



Which was a retort to your accusation about something that even you should know Bernie will not be able to achieve as opposed to an action that the President did achieve and was damaging to many in the middle class - those whom were supposed to benefit so we were led to believe.


MartinD28 - 2/20/2019 at 01:14 AM

quote:
quote:
And now we have 77-year-old Bernie Sanders.

I'm not a politico and perhaps I'm naive, but don't these guys know when it's time to give it up and become elder statemen/advisers to younger, fresher candidates? It's purely ego driven.

Age matters. As 81-year-old Jack Nicholson recently said, "My days of having any woman I wanted are OVER. I don't like it, but I'm realistic. I'm not going to make a fool of myself."


WP, you missed the point. I don't care what Sanders offers or doesn't. He's effing OLD - 79 in Nov. 2020. Give it up. Whisper in some young candidates ear, but go away. Quit diluting the dem pool.

[Edited on 2/20/2019 by cyclone88]


Agree. Bernie has had his run and made his mark. Time to let others lead the way. I'd be shocked if he has the support this time around.


BIGV - 2/20/2019 at 01:17 AM

quote:
Which was a retort to your accusation about something that even you should know Bernie will not be able to achieve


"Even I should know"...LOL....

How about Bernie?...Think he knows?...Bet it won't stop him from promising it....


OriginalGoober - 2/20/2019 at 01:23 AM

So whats Bernie been up too? How has been spending his millions and millions in campaign contributions from his duped supporters. I say duped because he was never going to challenge the belle of the ball in 2016. He predictably folded like a cheap suit. Now shady's back again. How fun is this going to be to watch all the democrats try to be like the socialist and explain how they want America to be more like Venezuela.


cyclone88 - 2/20/2019 at 01:43 AM

quote:

WP, you missed the point. I don't care what Sanders offers or doesn't. He's effing OLD - 79 in Nov. 2020. Give it up. Whisper in some young candidates ear, but go away. Quit diluting the dem pool


Agree. Bernie has had his run and made his mark. Time to let others lead the way. I'd be shocked if he has the support this time around.


He's lost all the women after the harassment & discrimination claims re his 2016 run. He's tone deaf to what that means.


BIGV - 2/20/2019 at 01:48 AM

quote:
quote:

WP, you missed the point. I don't care what Sanders offers or doesn't. He's effing OLD - 79 in Nov. 2020. Give it up. Whisper in some young candidates ear, but go away. Quit diluting the dem pool


Agree. Bernie has had his run and made his mark. Time to let others lead the way. I'd be shocked if he has the support this time around.


He's lost all the women after the harassment & discrimination claims re his 2016 run. He's tone deaf to what that means.


That being said, watch as he remains an important player right up to the Convention.


2112 - 2/20/2019 at 01:54 AM

quote:
So whats Bernie been up too? How has been spending his millions and millions in campaign contributions from his duped supporters. I say duped because he was never going to challenge the belle of the ball in 2016. He predictably folded like a cheap suit. Now shady's back again. How fun is this going to be to watch all the democrats try to be like the socialist and explain how they want America to be more like Venezuela.


Venezuela? More like Canada and Scandinavia. Why not use socialist states more similar to the US instead of one that is nothing at all like the US?


cyclone88 - 2/20/2019 at 02:14 AM

quote:
He's lost all the women after the harassment & discrimination claims re his 2016 run. He's tone deaf to what that means.


That being said, watch as he remains an important player right up to the Convention.


No, thanks. Women, particularly young women, know he's DOA.


nebish - 2/20/2019 at 04:23 AM

Bernie Sanders (announced 2/19/2019)
- 77, current US Senator from Vermont, self described Democratic Socialist, serving as elected representative in Washington since 1991, former Mayor of Burlington, lost Democrat Nomination 2016
https://berniesanders.com/

Maybe the best thing is we will get more Larry David on SNL.

I really believe that Bernie's time was last cycle. His message has now been picked up and spread throughout the party and he isn't unique anymore really.

Oh, he gets the CNN Townhall treatment next Monday.

[Edited on 2/20/2019 by nebish]


BoytonBrother - 2/20/2019 at 11:59 AM

quote:
Millennials who have no clue about who ends up paying.


I love how people like to bash millennials, to excuse the utter stupidity of the boomers who raised them with their backwards archaic thinking. Typical to point the finger at the pupil rather than the leader. It’s so much easier that way.




[Edited on 2/20/2019 by BoytonBrother]


BoytonBrother - 2/20/2019 at 12:32 PM

quote:
So whats Bernie been up too? How has been spending his millions and millions in campaign contributions from his duped supporters. I say duped because he was never going to challenge the belle of the ball in 2016. He predictably folded like a cheap suit. Now shady's back again. How fun is this going to be to watch all the democrats try to be like the socialist and explain how they want America to be more like Venezuela.


Has Goober jumped the shark? I’ll be honest, I used to get enraged by his posts but I haven’t in a very long time. I think he wants to provoke arguments and probably doesn’t even hate Democrats. This post just seems very fake and insincere because, in all honesty, how can somebody sit at home and feel so strongly about Bernie and Jussie Smollet?


cyclone88 - 3/4/2019 at 01:11 AM

Meet The Dogs of the 2020 Race:

https://qz.com/1552748/meet-the-dogs-of-the-2020-presidential-race/

Trump is the 1st prez in >100 years not to have a dog.

Sanders didn't have a dog in 2016 & still doesn't.


nebish - 3/6/2019 at 06:28 PM

John Hickenlooper (announced 3/4/19)
- 67, two-term Governor of Colorado, former Mayor and entrepreneur
https://www.hickenlooper.com/

Jay Inslee (announced 3/1/19)
- 68, two-term Governor of Washington, former state legislator
https://jayinslee.com/

Other news:
Hillary Clinton, officially not running.
Michael Bloomberg, not running.
Eric Holder, not running.
Jeff Merkley, not running.

quote:
Mr. Bloomberg said he felt his time and personal fortune would be better used promoting immigration reform, gun control and climate change. Mr. Holder wants to continue focusing on ending gerrymandering. Mrs. Clinton, who never seriously pursued a third primary bid, said she would keep “standing up for what I believe.” And Mr. Merkley will seek a third term in the Senate in 2020, after the State Legislature rejected his request to allow him to run for both positions simultaneously.


quote:
“I believe I would defeat Donald Trump in a general election,” Mr. Bloomberg wrote in a column published Tuesday. “But I am cleareyed about the difficulty of winning the Democratic nomination in such a crowded field.”


Kirsten Gillibrand and Pete Buttigieg remain in exploratory status.

[Edited on 3/6/2019 by nebish]


Bhawk - 3/6/2019 at 09:53 PM

quote:
How has been spending his millions and millions in campaign contributions from his duped supporters.



You can't use leftover campaign contributions for personal spending. Against Federal law since 1989.


Chain - 3/6/2019 at 10:37 PM

quote:
John Hickenlooper (announced 3/4/19)
- 67, two-term Governor of Colorado, former Mayor and entrepreneur
https://www.hickenlooper.com/

Jay Inslee (announced 3/1/19)
- 68, two-term Governor of Washington, former state legislator
https://jayinslee.com/

Other news:
Hillary Clinton, officially not running.
Michael Bloomberg, not running.
Eric Holder, not running.
Jeff Merkley, not running.

quote:
Mr. Bloomberg said he felt his time and personal fortune would be better used promoting immigration reform, gun control and climate change. Mr. Holder wants to continue focusing on ending gerrymandering. Mrs. Clinton, who never seriously pursued a third primary bid, said she would keep “standing up for what I believe.” And Mr. Merkley will seek a third term in the Senate in 2020, after the State Legislature rejected his request to allow him to run for both positions simultaneously.


quote:
“I believe I would defeat Donald Trump in a general election,” Mr. Bloomberg wrote in a column published Tuesday. “But I am cleareyed about the difficulty of winning the Democratic nomination in such a crowded field.”


Kirsten Gillibrand and Pete Buttigieg remain in exploratory status.

[Edited on 3/6/2019 by nebish]


I heard a great interview with Pete Buttigieg a week or two ago. He seems to have some great ideas and given he's a mayor that runs a fairly large city, knows how to actually govern beyond simply introducing and pushing legislation.

He's very smart, articulate, a veteran, a gay man, progressive, and very accomplished via his own merit and effort. In other words, everything Donald Trump is not. A great candidate it seems to me and a serious threat to established Democrats from the Senate and House.....


MartinD28 - 3/6/2019 at 11:07 PM

quote:
quote:
John Hickenlooper (announced 3/4/19)
- 67, two-term Governor of Colorado, former Mayor and entrepreneur
https://www.hickenlooper.com/

Jay Inslee (announced 3/1/19)
- 68, two-term Governor of Washington, former state legislator
https://jayinslee.com/

Other news:
Hillary Clinton, officially not running.
Michael Bloomberg, not running.
Eric Holder, not running.
Jeff Merkley, not running.

quote:
Mr. Bloomberg said he felt his time and personal fortune would be better used promoting immigration reform, gun control and climate change. Mr. Holder wants to continue focusing on ending gerrymandering. Mrs. Clinton, who never seriously pursued a third primary bid, said she would keep “standing up for what I believe.” And Mr. Merkley will seek a third term in the Senate in 2020, after the State Legislature rejected his request to allow him to run for both positions simultaneously.


quote:
“I believe I would defeat Donald Trump in a general election,” Mr. Bloomberg wrote in a column published Tuesday. “But I am cleareyed about the difficulty of winning the Democratic nomination in such a crowded field.”


Kirsten Gillibrand and Pete Buttigieg remain in exploratory status.

[Edited on 3/6/2019 by nebish]


I heard a great interview with Pete Buttigieg a week or two ago. He seems to have some great ideas and given he's a mayor that runs a fairly large city, knows how to actually govern beyond simply introducing and pushing legislation.

He's very smart, articulate, a veteran, a gay man, progressive, and very accomplished via his own merit and effort. In other words, everything Donald Trump is not. A great candidate it seems to me and a serious threat to established Democrats from the Senate and House.....


The early primaries will shake out a number of the Dems' crowded field candidates. California has moved up its primary to March, and this seems like a benefit for Kamala Harris.

The name of the game is money and name recognition. Some of the candidates are going to be challenged in these areas. Running & putting an organization together isn't cheap.

[Edited on 3/6/2019 by MartinD28]

[Edited on 3/6/2019 by MartinD28]


nebish - 3/15/2019 at 03:43 PM

Beto O'Rourke (announced 3/14/19)
- 46 years old, former US House member from Texas 2013-2019, lost 2018 US Senate election, formerly served on El Paso city council
https://betoorourke.com/


BrerRabbit - 3/15/2019 at 04:56 PM

quote:
Pete Buttigieg


What's in a name?



[Edited on 3/15/2019 by BrerRabbit]


BrerRabbit - 3/17/2019 at 02:21 AM

A truly disturbing idea just occurred to me : What if the backlash produces a liberal version of Trump? Can you even picture whar a creature that would be? Man man oh man - we haven't hit bottom yet.


nebish - 3/18/2019 at 01:27 PM

Kirsten Gillibrand (announced 3/17/2019)
- 52, current US Senator from New York (replaced Hillary Clinton's seat and was reelected twice), former member of US House, lawyer
https://kirstengillibrand.com/


gina - 3/30/2019 at 08:25 PM

Not a Presidential candidate but suprising nonetheless

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/former-cia-spy-valerie-plame-set-fo r-senate-run-as-democrat/ar-BBVoMvV



gina - 3/30/2019 at 08:32 PM

From the archives.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nAgJAxkALyc


nebish - 4/5/2019 at 01:00 AM

1st qrt fund raising. Required to report by 4/15, some reported early:

Buttigieg (still exploratory status): The 37 year-old mayor of South, Bend Indiana is gaining traction on the national stage, and raised $7 million in 2019's first quarter.

Harris: Raised a total of $12 million from 218,000 donors who gave an average of $55 since announcing her candidacy in January, her campaign said.

O'Rourke: Former Texas Congressman Beto O'Rourke announced raising $9.4 million in the first 18 days of his candidacy, an average of $522,000 per day. His campaign said the average donation size was $43, and 98% of contributions were under $200.

Sanders: Announced bringing in $18.2 million from 525,000 contributors, 99.5% of whom gave $100 or less, in the first six weeks of his campaign.

Yang: Entrepreneur and long-shot presidential candidate Andrew Yang reported raising $1.7 million from 80,000 donors who donated an average of just $17.92 in March and February alone, far outpacing the $659,000 he raised between October 2017 and December 2018

https://www.businessinsider.com/how-much-money-2020-democrats-candidates-ha ve-raised-fundraising-2019-4


nebish - 4/5/2019 at 01:10 AM

Tim Ryan (announced 4/4/19)
- 45, current and 9 term member of the US House from Ohio, former congressional aide and state Senator
https://timryanforamerica.com/


BIGV - 4/5/2019 at 02:15 PM

quote:
Beto O'Rourke (announced 3/14/19)
- 46 years old, former US House member from Texas 2013-2019, lost 2018 US Senate election, formerly served on El Paso city council
https://betoorourke.com/


Curiously arrested for B&E and Drunk Driving, that will be fodder during any possible debate...

Maybe he and the "Groper" Joe Biden can team up?


BoytonBrother - 4/5/2019 at 03:34 PM

quote:
Maybe he and the "Groper" Joe Biden can team up?


Are you ever not a jerk towards Democrats? Grow up already.


MartinD28 - 4/5/2019 at 04:07 PM

quote:
quote:
Beto O'Rourke (announced 3/14/19)
- 46 years old, former US House member from Texas 2013-2019, lost 2018 US Senate election, formerly served on El Paso city council
https://betoorourke.com/


Curiously arrested for B&E and Drunk Driving, that will be fodder during any possible debate...

Maybe he and the "Groper" Joe Biden can team up?


Did he grab them by the pu$$y like your guy, Mafia Don?


BoytonBrother - 4/5/2019 at 05:32 PM

quote:
Did he grab them by the pu$$y like your guy, Mafia Don?


Remember Martin, just because he never complains about Trump, and just because he said that nothing Trump says or does bothers him, it doesn’t mean Trump’s his guy. His guy is Gary Johnson. I guess he’s just a misunderstood guy.


BIGV - 4/5/2019 at 09:03 PM

quote:
quote:
quote:
Beto O'Rourke (announced 3/14/19)
- 46 years old, former US House member from Texas 2013-2019, lost 2018 US Senate election, formerly served on El Paso city council
https://betoorourke.com/


Curiously arrested for B&E and Drunk Driving, that will be fodder during any possible debate...

Maybe he and the "Groper" Joe Biden can team up?


Did he grab them by the pu$$y like your guy, Mafia Don?


Yes, the President is responsible for some pretty crass behavior, and pretty foul language.

You guys laugh at the President, I will chuckle at the list of contenders.


nebish - 4/5/2019 at 09:21 PM

Tim Ryan serves the district north of me. He took over for the very popular Jim Trafficant, a name that I'm sure most following national politics will remember. Say what you will about Trafficant, but this area loved him and he did alot for it as well. Ryan doesn't enjoy the same widespread support across party lines and doesn't have a strong resume, but still has strongly held that seat since with no serious challengers. The base there is staunchly Democrat, in fact, Trumbull county (where Ryan was born) and within his current district voted for non-incumbent Republican Presidential candidate for the first time in like almost 90 years when Trump took the area in 2016.

Looking towards his prospects to win the nomination, he would be best served to moderate towards the middle and be the working man's candidate...the union blue collar people in this area and the ones that Ryan is going to say he represents do not care about gay rights, or protections for illegal immigrants, or green energy, or whatever the hot left issue of the day is. If he could be middle of the road on some of the more liberal issues and speak to the concerns of blue collar workers like Bernie and Trump did in 2016 I think he could do well.

Problem is that isn't who he is, he has picked up the flag and carried it for the party while he has tried to make a name for himself among the national base. All while he likely could never win state-wide office outside of his protected pocket of loyal Democrat voters.

Sherrod Brown on the other hand would've been an immensely better candidate out of Ohio than Ryan.

I think Ryan sees himself as filling a void among the current crop of candidates, I just don't know where his traction is really going to be. Based off of his career and accomplishments he has little to point to as "why him".


BoytonBrother - 4/6/2019 at 03:15 AM

quote:
You guys laugh at the President, I will chuckle at the list of contenders.


If by "chuckle" you mean "being a complete jerk to people based on their political affiliation", then yes, you "chuckle".


BIGV - 4/6/2019 at 03:22 AM

quote:
quote:
quote:
Beto O'Rourke (announced 3/14/19)
- 46 years old, former US House member from Texas 2013-2019, lost 2018 US Senate election, formerly served on El Paso city council
https://betoorourke.com/


Curiously arrested for B&E and Drunk Driving, that will be fodder during any possible debate...

Maybe he and the "Groper" Joe Biden can team up?


Did he grab them by the pu$$y like your guy, Mafia Don?


Nothing to do with Biden. Is Joe a little to "touchy/feely" or not?...Yes or No?

"Was 'Beto'... arrested for those two crimes?" Yes or No?


Chain - 4/6/2019 at 02:18 PM

Harris/Buttigiege makes for a compelling Dem ticket in 2020...Covers close to every demographic in the ever expanding progressive wing of the Democratic party.

Of course it'll make every right wing conservative voter sh@t their pants and come to the polls, but what the hell....The Dems have the numbers in their favor if their base actually votes.


2112 - 4/7/2019 at 05:23 PM

quote:
Harris/Buttigiege makes for a compelling Dem ticket in 2020...Covers close to every demographic in the ever expanding progressive wing of the Democratic party.

Of course it'll make every right wing conservative voter sh@t their pants and come to the polls, but what the hell....The Dems have the numbers in their favor if their base actually votes.


Remember total number of votes don't matter. Is that a ticket that the purple states (Midwest and Florida) would vote for? That's all that matters.


Chain - 4/7/2019 at 08:10 PM

quote:
quote:
Harris/Buttigiege makes for a compelling Dem ticket in 2020...Covers close to every demographic in the ever expanding progressive wing of the Democratic party.

Of course it'll make every right wing conservative voter sh@t their pants and come to the polls, but what the hell....The Dems have the numbers in their favor if their base actually votes.


Remember total number of votes don't matter. Is that a ticket that the purple states (Midwest and Florida) would vote for? That's all that matters.


I do in fact think the purple states could vote for such a ticket. If the Dems show up and vote and enough independents swing in their favor. It's all about turnout and I think Harris and Butti are compelling enough to energize just enough independents to swing the purple states. If, if, the Dem base go to the polls....

I think Butti has proven exactly that with his election as mayor in a pretty conservative part of Indiana.


BoytonBrother - 4/8/2019 at 01:18 PM

quote:
Curiously arrested for B&E and Drunk Driving, that will be fodder during any possible debate...

Maybe he and the "Groper" Joe Biden can team up?


I think I get BIGV’s point. It took me a while because of how childish and demented it is, but I think I might get it: Because liberals preach tolerance of new ideas, they therefore should never criticize someone for their ideas. For if they do, they are nothing but hypocrites. Therefore, when liberals bash a guy who tries to hurt people everyday on Twitter, they are hypocrites for not tolerating a bully. In return, BIGV bullies and name-calls Biden, AOC, O’Rourke, migrants, and countless others in an attempt to equate the two behaviors. If liberals on this site don’t like his comments, then they should tolerate Trump’s daily vicious attacks on fellow Americans.

In BIGV’s mind, standing up to scum bag behavior is the same as name-calling Democrats because of their political views.

I can’t help but feel sorry for someone with such limited intelligence and awareness.


BIGV - 4/8/2019 at 03:15 PM

quote:
Remember total number of votes don't matter


On the contrary, it matters a lot. The total number of votes in each state determine who carries said group and because of this system, all of the States have equal representation, just like they do in the Congress and the Senate. The total amount of votes in each county ordain who should be Sheriff and so on. The total number of votes in one city elects a Mayor and so on. Don't like how laws in your State apply to you?..Move. Taxes too high in California?...relocate. Think there should be one voice in Government?...Disagree, the Electoral College is absolutely necessary.

Turning to the thread title, this is one of many reasons I laugh at Beto O'Rourke as a viable candidate for POTUS. Arrested for DWI and Burglary (Not a good start, or it that unfair to bring up? lol) He believes the Electoral College was a "Bad Compromise". He opposes more Border security, is against Deportation, is for the Dream act and is against the separation of families and voted no on a Bill that would have eliminated "Sanctuary States" yet it is the Democrats whom claim that Border security is a "Problem".

No Electoral College? One vote for everyone!...

Even if they've entered Illegally.


BIGV - 4/8/2019 at 03:34 PM

quote:
quote:
quote:
Beto O'Rourke (announced 3/14/19)
- 46 years old, former US House member from Texas 2013-2019, lost 2018 US Senate election, formerly served on El Paso city council
https://betoorourke.com/


Curiously arrested for B&E and Drunk Driving, that will be fodder during any possible debate...

Maybe he and the "Groper" Joe Biden can team up?


Did he grab them by the pu$$y like your guy, Mafia Don?


"My Guy" lol...Repeatedly, I have stated on this board that I voted for Gary Johnson. Perhaps, to further clarify that point, I could start defending the positions Mr. Johnson and the Libertarian Party take whenever a Political hot button is pressed. No wait, I find it much more satirically entertaining to laugh at the views posted by the left/democrats who still can not deal with the everyday reality that they lost the WH, and continue to whine about it.


Bhawk - 4/8/2019 at 04:21 PM

quote:
No wait, I find it much more satirically entertaining to laugh at the views posted by the left/democrats who still can not deal with the everyday reality that they lost the WH, and continue to whine about it.


In other words, if you don't like what the President does you should shut up, because there is no valid criticism of him, just whining.

Interesting perspective.


BoytonBrother - 4/8/2019 at 04:23 PM

quote:
No wait, I find it much more satirically entertaining to laugh at the views posted by the left/democrats who still can not deal with the everyday reality that they lost the WH, and continue to whine about it.


How asinine and low rent. Grow up. Act like a man.



[Edited on 4/8/2019 by BoytonBrother]


MartinD28 - 4/8/2019 at 04:35 PM

quote:
quote:
quote:
quote:
Beto O'Rourke (announced 3/14/19)
- 46 years old, former US House member from Texas 2013-2019, lost 2018 US Senate election, formerly served on El Paso city council
https://betoorourke.com/


Curiously arrested for B&E and Drunk Driving, that will be fodder during any possible debate...

Maybe he and the "Groper" Joe Biden can team up?


Did he grab them by the pu$$y like your guy, Mafia Don?


"My Guy" lol...Repeatedly, I have stated on this board that I voted for Gary Johnson. Perhaps, to further clarify that point, I could start defending the positions Mr. Johnson and the Libertarian Party take whenever a Political hot button is pressed. No wait, I find it much more satirically entertaining to laugh at the views posted by the left/democrats who still can not deal with the everyday reality that they lost the WH, and continue to whine about it.

Everybody on this site knows you voted for Gary Johnson because you feel the need to remind us of that regularly & then somehow in the best of your doublespeak use it to give yourself distance from Trump who you have no trouble with his actions. Your posts reflect an identification with Trump & his policies, and I doubt many here other than potentially you would argue to the contrary.


BoytonBrother - 4/8/2019 at 04:41 PM

quote:
or it that unfair to bring up, lol?

My Guy" lol

I will chuckle

I find it much more satirically entertaining to laugh at the views posted by the left/democrats

I laugh at Beto O'Rourke


You are doing a lot of laughing at people. Only an insecure passive-aggressive jacka$$ does this.


BIGV - 4/8/2019 at 04:47 PM

quote:
Everybody on this site knows you voted for Gary Johnson because you feel the need to remind us of that regularly & then somehow in the best of your doublespeak use it to give yourself distance from Trump who you have no trouble with his actions.


Yet, people here continually walk in step with the Liberal/Democratic mantra: "You dislike the Democratic platform, therefore you support and love President Trump"

And for the 30th time I prefer the actions of President Trump over any thoughts or views of most Hillary supporters.

Don't like or care for my views?...Walk around them.


BoytonBrother - 4/8/2019 at 04:59 PM

quote:
Don't like or care for my views?...Walk around them.


Nobody cares about your political views. It’s your ignorant, low rent, childish manner in which you present them. You are too easy.


BIGV - 4/8/2019 at 07:32 PM

quote:
quote:
No wait, I find it much more satirically entertaining to laugh at the views posted by the left/democrats who still can not deal with the everyday reality that they lost the WH, and continue to whine about it.


In other words, if you don't like what the President does you should shut up, because there is no valid criticism of him, just whining.

Interesting perspective.


Not at all, this is a Forum. I do find it funny however that the same people who consistently share their disgust concerning President Trump are the same ones who scream bloody murder when someone disses their Parties views. You can't have it both ways.


BoytonBrother - 4/8/2019 at 08:02 PM

quote:
I do find it funny however that the same people who consistently share their disgust concerning President Trump are the same ones who scream bloody murder when someone disses their Parties views. You can't have it both ways.


Nobody is screaming bloody murder over politics you big drama queen, calm down. If you can’t understand the difference between attacking political views, and attacking one’s behavior, I suggest you go back to school.


Bhawk - 4/8/2019 at 09:16 PM

quote:
quote:
quote:
No wait, I find it much more satirically entertaining to laugh at the views posted by the left/democrats who still can not deal with the everyday reality that they lost the WH, and continue to whine about it.


In other words, if you don't like what the President does you should shut up, because there is no valid criticism of him, just whining.

Interesting perspective.


Not at all, this is a Forum. I do find it funny however that the same people who consistently share their disgust concerning President Trump are the same ones who scream bloody murder when someone disses their Parties views. You can't have it both ways.


Again. The only reason to take that position is that you think that Trump is infallible, or, that any time he could be criticized is meaningless because you don't believe he is to be criticized on any one particular merit.

quote:
And for the 30th time I prefer the actions of President Trump over any thoughts or views of most Hillary supporters.


Hillary Clinton is not and never will be the President. Trump is. Any American citizen and taxpayer is free to think however they wish about his performance.

But, this statement of yours is quite profound.

Literally: "I don't care what Trump does. Could stab and eat a baby on the podium. It's still better than any thought a liberal has."

At least you are honest about it, I'll give you that.



BoytonBrother - 4/8/2019 at 09:38 PM

quote:
Again. The only reason to take that position is that you think that Trump is infallible


I think you have it wrong. His demented point is that a liberal has no right to criticize.

quote:
But, this statement of yours is quite profound.

Literally: "I don't care what Trump does. Could stab and eat a baby on the podium. It's still better than any thought a liberal has."

At least you are honest about it, I'll give you that.


His extremist views are nonsensical and beyond creepy. He can’t tell the difference between criticism of one’s behavior versus extremist bigotry.


BIGV - 4/9/2019 at 12:02 AM

quote:
quote:
quote:
quote:
No wait, I find it much more satirically entertaining to laugh at the views posted by the left/democrats who still can not deal with the everyday reality that they lost the WH, and continue to whine about it.


In other words, if you don't like what the President does you should shut up, because there is no valid criticism of him, just whining.

Interesting perspective.


Not at all, this is a Forum. I do find it funny however that the same people who consistently share their disgust concerning President Trump are the same ones who scream bloody murder when someone disses their Parties views. You can't have it both ways.


Again. The only reason to take that position is that you think that Trump is infallible, or, that any time he could be criticized is meaningless because you don't believe he is to be criticized on any one particular merit.

quote:
And for the 30th time I prefer the actions of President Trump over any thoughts or views of most Hillary supporters.


Hillary Clinton is not and never will be the President. Trump is. Any American citizen and taxpayer is free to think however they wish about his performance.


Of course they are, absolutely. But once again I sit in front of this computer and laugh myself to sleep over those who state their opinions about President Trump in the most unflattering of ways and then w/o drawing breath are extremely critical of those who laugh at Democratic policy. If you can dish it out you better be able to take it, especially when it is nowhere near being personal

quote:
But, this statement of yours is quite profound.

Literally: "I don't care what Trump does. Could stab and eat a baby on the podium. It's still better than any thought a liberal has."

quote:
At least you are honest about it, I'll give you that.


Haha....Thank You


BIGV - 4/9/2019 at 12:07 AM

quote:
Again. The only reason to take that position is that you think that Trump is infallible, or, that any time he could be criticized is meaningless because you don't believe he is to be criticized on any one particular merit.


The day I find President Trump "Infallible" Haha!...I will clearly state that. Until that time any inference made by anyone here even hinting that is on you.....


BoytonBrother - 4/9/2019 at 01:36 AM

quote:
But once again I sit in front of this computer and laugh myself to sleep over those who state their opinions about President Trump in the most unflattering of ways and then w/o drawing breath are extremely critical of those who laugh at Democratic policy.


Why not just say “critical of me” instead of pretending it’s about “Those who laugh at Democratic policy”. You are referring to yourself, just admit it. So strange.

quote:
If you can dish it out you better be able to take it, especially when it is nowhere near being personal


I have no issue with his wall or any of his policies really, but there’s no need to call the migrants “animals”, or mock a disabled person, or countless other horrific comments. It’s completely uncalled for and as low as it gets for the President of the United States to say to the world. There’s no need to be making daily threats and tantrums on Twitter like a fool. Reagan and Bush had good economies and conservative judges without lowering themselves into the gutter like that. There’s no reason for any decent conservative to accept such low standards for their leader.

But if a Democrat dares to call Trump out for his cruel behavior, you are going to insult decent Americans because it’s “their party” and we had “better be able to take it”? That making fun of someone strictly because they are Democrat, is the same as a Democrat calling out Trump for his cruelty?

That’s who you are as a person?






[Edited on 4/9/2019 by BoytonBrother]


BrerRabbit - 4/9/2019 at 02:45 PM

quote:
Repeatedly, I have stated on this board that I voted for Gary Johnson. Perhaps, to further clarify that point, I could start defending the positions Mr. Johnson and the Libertarian Party take . . .


Ok, defend this, Gary Johnson is against deportation of undocumented workers and says Trumps wall is "asinine" :

from Fox Business Insider:

https://www.foxbusiness.com/politics/gary-johnson-speaks-out-on-trumps-asin ine-wall

Libertarian presidential nominee Gary Johnson took on Donald Trump over his immigration policy and plans to build a wall along the border between the U.S. and Mexico.

"He [Donald Trump] talks about deporting 11 million undocumented workers. That has a basis in complete misunderstanding of the situation,” Johnson told the FOX Business Network’s Maria Bartiromo.

According to Johnson, America should not be opposed to immigration but rather have a more welcoming, supportive policy.

“Immigrants are not taking jobs that U.S. citizens want. We should be embracing immigration. We should make it as easy as possible for somebody that wants to come into the country and work to be able to get a work visa. And a work visa should entail a background check and a social security card so that taxes get paid.”

Johnson also spoke out against Trump’s calls to build a wall along the U.S.-Mexico border.

“Look, building a wall is just crazy. I can just see the Mexican president [saying], ‘Donald Trump, take this wall down.’ And you know what, he is going to be on the right side of history. At some point, if Trump is elected and if he does this wall, which is really asinine, we will take it down at some point.”




BIGV - 4/9/2019 at 02:47 PM

quote:
quote:
Repeatedly, I have stated on this board that I voted for Gary Johnson. Perhaps, to further clarify that point, I could start defending the positions Mr. Johnson and the Libertarian Party take . . .


Ok, defend this, Gary Johnson is against deportation of undocumented workers and says Trumps wall is "asinine" :

from Fox Business Insider:

https://www.foxbusiness.com/politics/gary-johnson-speaks-out-on-trumps-asin ine-wall

Libertarian presidential nominee Gary Johnson took on Donald Trump over his immigration policy and plans to build a wall along the border between the U.S. and Mexico.

"He [Donald Trump] talks about deporting 11 million undocumented workers. That has a basis in complete misunderstanding of the situation,” Johnson told the FOX Business Network’s Maria Bartiromo.

According to Johnson, America should not be opposed to immigration but rather have a more welcoming, supportive policy.

“Immigrants are not taking jobs that U.S. citizens want. We should be embracing immigration. We should make it as easy as possible for somebody that wants to come into the country and work to be able to get a work visa. And a work visa should entail a background check and a social security card so that taxes get paid.”

Johnson also spoke out against Trump’s calls to build a wall along the U.S.-Mexico border.

“Look, building a wall is just crazy. I can just see the Mexican president [saying], ‘Donald Trump, take this wall down.’ And you know what, he is going to be on the right side of history. At some point, if Trump is elected and if he does this wall, which is really asinine, we will take it down at some point.”



I can not.

NO Party and its beliefs are a perfect fit.

I stand with President Trump on the border issue.


BoytonBrother - 4/10/2019 at 02:28 PM

If only Democrats had someone they could tattle to when Trump name calls them.

When Trump berates people, it’s funny and admirable. When it happens to BIGV, he tattles to get me banned. John Wayne he is not.


nebish - 4/11/2019 at 11:11 PM

Eric Swalwell (announced 4/8/19)
- 38, current member of US House from California, former CA county deputy DA
https://swalwell.house.gov/


nebish - 4/21/2019 at 01:52 PM

Forgot to update Mayor Pete!

Pete Buttigieg (announced 4/14/19)
- 37, Rhodes Scholar, Naval Reservist deployed in Afghanistan, two-term Mayor of South Bend IN
https://peteforamerica.com/meet-pete/


gina - 4/25/2019 at 09:05 PM

It's already started.

“Welcome to the race Sleepy Joe,” President Donald Trump tweeted shortly after former Veep Joe Biden officially announced his 2020 White House race.

“I only hope you have the intelligence, long in doubt, to wage a successful primary campaign. It will be nasty – you will be dealing with people who truly have some very sick & demented ideas. But if you make it, I will see you at the Starting Gate!”


https://www.yahoo.com/entertainment/donald-trump-makes-joe-biden-130340726. html


Remarks: I think Hillary just is too incensed to go thru it again with Donald, though she has the experience, knowledge and even respect of foreign leaders to effectively manage foreign policy and affairs, she just does not want to go thru another campaign facing off with Trump. She has her dignity and would like to keep that.


nebish - 4/25/2019 at 11:06 PM

Gina, you post about Joe Biden, but then comment on Hillary?


nebish - 4/25/2019 at 11:07 PM

Joe Biden (announced 4/25/19)
- 76, 2009-2017 Vice President, US Senator from Delaware 1973-2009, two-time POTUS candidate in 1988 and 2008.
https://joebiden.com/

Other house cleaning updates:

Wayne Messam (announced 3/28/19)
- 44, three-term Mayor of Miramar, FL, city commissioner 2011-2015, businessman
https://wayneforusa.com/

Mike Gravel (announced 4/2/19)
- 88, US Senator from Alaska 1969-1981, 2008 POTUS candidate, has stated he is not seeking party nomination instead running to appear in the debates (atleast he is honest)
https://www.mikegravel.org/

Seth Moulton (announced 4/22/19)
- 40, current member of US House from Massachusetts, Marine Corp Captain serving 4 tours in Iraq, Green New Deal co-sponsor
https://sethmoulton.com/


BIGV - 4/26/2019 at 03:41 AM

quote:
Kamala Harris (announced 1/21/19)
-54 years old, current US Senator from California, former District Attorney and Attorney General of California


A true champion when it comes to avoiding the question asked, her favorite response?..."I think this is something we should have a conversation about". She just pulled this very same rabbit out of her hat again when asked by CNN's head clown Don Lemon about Bernie Saunders position on allowing incarcerated Felons to Vote...



Either you are a Nay or a Yay, the conversation was started, the question asked and she danced


BoytonBrother - 4/26/2019 at 10:49 AM

The usuals continue to display their scapegoats. How silly.


nebish - 4/26/2019 at 01:34 PM

quote:


A true champion when it comes to avoiding the question asked, her favorite response?..."I think this is something we should have a conversation about". She just pulled this very same rabbit out of her hat again when asked by CNN's head clown Don Lemon about Bernie Saunders position on allowing incarcerated Felons to Vote...


I've noticed this as well. I didn't appreciate her response on that question. I am accustomed and prepared for Democrats to restore the right to vote for prior felons who have served their time and been released. If I were looking to a candidate on this issue I would've rather they took the position that when one is incarcerated they lose several of rights, the right to vote being just one. I personally don't feel this is something "we need to have a conversation about", but rather something that shouldn't be looked into at all. Now maybe Kamala has never thought of such a thing and therefore could offer nothing better than her vague answer. Sometimes that works and sometimes it is better for the candidates to show their depth on topics and be prepared to take a position. Seemed to me she wanted to leave it open ended for the appearance of supporting it, but in reality she doesn't want to turn off any would-be voters if she in fact has reservations about it. Politicians. That is what they do.


BoytonBrother - 4/26/2019 at 02:08 PM

quote:
A true champion when it comes to avoiding the question asked, her favorite response?..."I think this is something we should have a conversation about". She just pulled this very same rabbit out of her hat again when asked by CNN's head clown Don Lemon about Bernie Saunders position on allowing incarcerated Felons to Vote.


So you're telling me, that you hate political correctness, you hate those who get offended so easily, but because someone said "we should have a discussion about it", you get offended and angry? How do you explain that?


BoytonBrother - 4/26/2019 at 05:36 PM

quote:
I personally don't feel this is something "we need to have a conversation about", but rather something that shouldn't be looked into at all.


Why not? I won't lose sleep over it either way, and certain prisoners surely don't deserve the right, but if we restore the right to felons once released, what does the actual incarceration have to do with the right? I think it should be about the crime and conviction, not whether they are behind bars or not.


quote:
I've noticed this as well. I didn't appreciate her response on that question.


quote:
Now maybe Kamala has never thought of such a thing and therefore could offer nothing better than her vague answer. Sometimes that works and sometimes it is better for the candidates to show their depth on topics and be prepared to take a position. Seemed to me she wanted to leave it open ended for the appearance of supporting it, but in reality she doesn't want to turn off any would-be voters if she in fact has reservations about it.


I don't get the issue. I don't expect a candidate to have a direct answer for every single issue right on the spot, especially complicated ones. I find it refreshing that a candidate recognizes and respects that it's a complex issue that deserves time and thought. I don't see why an answer like that, especially this early in the game, is being viewed negatively.


piacere - 4/26/2019 at 05:41 PM

You don't see it because you're a Democrat and she's a democrat and you tow the party line as hard as anyone.


BoytonBrother - 4/26/2019 at 05:51 PM

quote:
You don't see it because you're a Democrat and she's a democrat and you tow the party line as hard as anyone.


That's silly. I admire Reagan and the Bush family as much as anyone, and I pray to God every night that Trump would demonsrate that type of thoughtfulness when asked questions. Sorry man, but it's you that openly admits to towing the party line because of the nauseating liberal mindset. I respond to character and morals when picking a leader, not their political idealogy.


piacere - 4/26/2019 at 06:12 PM

quote:
quote:
You don't see it because you're a Democrat and she's a democrat and you tow the party line as hard as anyone.


That's silly. I admire Reagan and the Bush family as much as anyone, and I pray to God every night that Trump would demonsrate that type of thoughtfulness when asked questions. Sorry man, but it's you that openly admits to towing the party line because of the nauseating liberal mindset. I respond to character and morals when picking a leader, not their political idealogy.



As a Christian, no one casts their vote based on morals and character more than me. No one. And yes, some of the liberal agenda nauseates me, is that OK?


MartinD28 - 4/26/2019 at 06:25 PM

quote:
quote:
quote:
You don't see it because you're a Democrat and she's a democrat and you tow the party line as hard as anyone.


That's silly. I admire Reagan and the Bush family as much as anyone, and I pray to God every night that Trump would demonsrate that type of thoughtfulness when asked questions. Sorry man, but it's you that openly admits to towing the party line because of the nauseating liberal mindset. I respond to character and morals when picking a leader, not their political idealogy.



As a Christian, no one casts their vote based on morals and character more than me. No one. And yes, some of the liberal agenda nauseates me, is that OK?


So what would a Christian think about Trump accepting the Saudi position when they murdered a Washington Post journalist and cut up his body into pieces?

Does the Christian position support Trump in his affairs with a porn star and a Playboy Bunny after his child was born? He's certainly a man of morals?

Do you consider Trump a man of character. We do realize he's not one of those with the liberal agenda. He has his own agenda, and I doubt it's a conservative agenda other than appointing judges to appease a certain segment of the base?

What is your position on Trump's speech at Liberty University when he showed his ignorance of the Bible when trying to spew a few lines laced with mispronunciations?


Bhawk - 4/26/2019 at 06:57 PM

quote:
If I were looking to a candidate on this issue I would've rather they took the position that when one is incarcerated they lose several of rights, the right to vote being just one.


If that's the case we should execute anyone who is incarcerated.


BoytonBrother - 4/26/2019 at 07:13 PM

quote:
As a Christian, no one casts their vote based on morals and character more than me. No one. And yes, some of the liberal agenda nauseates me, is that OK?


You can feel however you want, but would Jesus want you be nauseated by other people's values? And the liberal agenda included providing affordable healthcare for those less fortunate, which is as Christian as it gets. Obamacare is exactly what Jesus would've wanted, and he'd be disappointed at all the fellow right-wing Christians that not only oppose Jesus's main mission, but go even further as to hate the man (Obama) who proposed the idea. Strange times we live in I guess.


nebish - 4/27/2019 at 02:42 PM

quote:
quote:
I personally don't feel this is something "we need to have a conversation about", but rather something that shouldn't be looked into at all.


Why not? I won't lose sleep over it either way, and certain prisoners surely don't deserve the right, but if we restore the right to felons once released, what does the actual incarceration have to do with the right? I think it should be about the crime and conviction, not whether they are behind bars or not.


quote:
I've noticed this as well. I didn't appreciate her response on that question.


quote:
Now maybe Kamala has never thought of such a thing and therefore could offer nothing better than her vague answer. Sometimes that works and sometimes it is better for the candidates to show their depth on topics and be prepared to take a position. Seemed to me she wanted to leave it open ended for the appearance of supporting it, but in reality she doesn't want to turn off any would-be voters if she in fact has reservations about it.


I don't get the issue. I don't expect a candidate to have a direct answer for every single issue right on the spot, especially complicated ones. I find it refreshing that a candidate recognizes and respects that it's a complex issue that deserves time and thought. I don't see why an answer like that, especially this early in the game, is being viewed negatively.




I'm not losing any sleep, didn't think about this at all the last 24+ hours. I mean really, I could care or I could not care. At the moment I am choosing to care for the sake of conversation.

My opinion, and other people can have different ones of course, I'm not necessarily right and others aren't necessarily wrong, is that prisoners are not part of a normalized community or society and therefore do not need and should not have any influence on issues that take place outside the prison walls. And prisoners are often moved from facility to facility, county to county, state to state so their potential temporary status anywhere doesn't require them to be counted among a constituent base that local, state or federal representatives should have to answer to or cater to. I do not have any strong objection to allowing them to vote once they rejoin our communities and society upon their release - that is a more reasonable point to me.

For me, it is just a politician being a politician. Although I disagree with the position, I have more respect for Bernie to make his point and bear the consequences that a controversial position might create for him, but he speaks up and says what and why he believes in. Candidates that try and hide behind vague "maybes" on issues do not come across as very confident or knowledgeable to me. Rather they seem to not want to cross would-be supporters to maintain support among a certain base. Kamala expanded upon her thoughts the next day, had she offered that in the moment I wouldn't have given it much thought...other than I disagree with the position.


BrerRabbit - 4/27/2019 at 02:49 PM

quote:
. . . prisoners are not part of a normalized community or society and therefore do not need and should not have any influence on issues that take place outside the prison walls.


Then it follows that prisoners' income not be subject to taxation.


BIGV - 4/27/2019 at 04:40 PM

quote:
but if we restore the right to felons once released, what does the actual incarceration have to do with the right? I think it should be about the crime and conviction, not whether they are behind bars or not.


"what does the actual incarceration have to do with the right"? EVERYTHING

quote:
Seemed to me she wanted to leave it open ended for the appearance of supporting it, but in reality she doesn't want to turn off any would-be voters if she in fact has reservations about it.


Exactly. Take a stance, stand behind it and defend it. You wish people to follow?...Lead.


quote:
I have more respect for Bernie to make his point and bear the consequences that a controversial position might create for him, but he speaks up and says what and why he believes in. Candidates that try and hide behind vague "maybes" on issues do not come across as very confident or knowledgeable to me.


BOOM! and Kamala does this a lot.


OriginalGoober - 4/27/2019 at 05:15 PM


I'm happy to have my vote cancelled out by a violent criminal.


BoytonBrother - 4/27/2019 at 05:18 PM

quote:
I'm happy to have my vote cancelled out by a violent criminal.


"my vote cancelled out" - Mr. Drama Queen playing the victim card. So silly.


BoytonBrother - 4/27/2019 at 05:22 PM

quote:
"what does the actual incarceration have to do with the right"? EVERYTHING


What a profound analysis.


BrerRabbit - 4/27/2019 at 06:04 PM

It would be good to hear forum members who belong to the majority of the US prison population doing time for dope or other lesser offenses, but I understand the reasons for not revealing that you are posting from behind bars, looking at the attitudes here .

Will just leave it at if you are inside for some lesser charge, particularly in the case of drugs, and more particularly for pot - I hope you get the right to vote for someone who might just change the bullsh!t law that put you there.


Sang - 4/27/2019 at 07:48 PM

Looks like members of Trump's campaign and staff won't be able to vote for a while....


BrerRabbit - 4/27/2019 at 08:57 PM

Every cloud has a silver lining.


BrerRabbit - 4/27/2019 at 09:00 PM

It is really more of an "if you get caught you can't vote" deal. Unless the unjailed potsmokers in states where it is illegal decide not to vote out of respect for the law condemning their behavior.


gina - 4/30/2019 at 09:46 PM

Senate Bill 145 would prevent any candidates who will not release their tax returns from being able to run for the Presidency. 20 states have people who do not even want to allow him to run (The Democratic Party is behind this reportedly).

https://www.yahoo.com/news/nearly-20-blue-states-move-102042503.html




nebish - 5/2/2019 at 05:24 PM

quote:
Senate Bill 145 would prevent any candidates who will not release their tax returns from being able to run for the Presidency. 20 states have people who do not even want to allow him to run (The Democratic Party is behind this reportedly).

https://www.yahoo.com/news/nearly-20-blue-states-move-102042503.html




Additionally from Salon:

quote:
Bills requiring prospective presidential candidates to disclose recent tax returns as a condition to appear on the ballot are currently pending in the following fourteen states: Arizona, California, Connecticut, Hawaii, Illinois, Minnesota, New Jersey, New York, North Carolina, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Vermont and Washington. Similar legislation, introduced this year, failed in Maryland, Mississippi, New Hampshire, New Mexico and Virginia.



quote:
Questions also remain whether states requiring presidential candidates to release their tax returns in order to appear on the ballot would be constitutional.


Not knowing myself the potential legality of their attempt; I would support such a requirement but would like to see it come at the national level so all states play by the same rules.


nebish - 5/2/2019 at 05:29 PM

Michael Bennet (announced 5/2/19)
- 54, current US Senator from Colorado, former chief of staff to then Governor Hickenlooper, former Denver Public Schools Superintendent, businessman and lawyer.
http://michaelbennet.com/win

[Edited on 5/2/2019 by nebish]


BIGV - 5/6/2019 at 02:16 AM

Andrew Yang -Declared Candidate for the Democratic Party, office of the President of the United States

"I’d start fining gun manufacturers $1 million for each person killed by their weapons. That would get more companies focused on how to keep guns out of the hands of those who would do others harm".

Genius!...Maybe we can fine the manufacturers of spoons too! (They make people fat)


alloak41 - 5/6/2019 at 02:32 AM

quote:
Andrew Yang -Declared Candidate for the Democratic Party, office of the President of the United States

"I’d start fining gun manufacturers $1 million for each person killed by their weapons. That would get more companies focused on how to keep guns out of the hands of those who would do others harm".


I think Mr. Yang makes good sense. The most successful companies throughout our history have proven that the key to success is focusing on ways to keep people from buying their product.


nebish - 5/7/2019 at 04:37 AM

quote:
Andrew Yang -Declared Candidate for the Democratic Party, office of the President of the United States

"I’d start fining gun manufacturers $1 million for each person killed by their weapons. That would get more companies focused on how to keep guns out of the hands of those who would do others harm".

Genius!...Maybe we can fine the manufacturers of spoons too! (They make people fat)


Absolutely ridiculous.

Republicans have mud on their face for doing nothing, something, anyt but this is pretty out there. So a civilian acts in self defense in an unfortunate situation to save their or their families' life and shoots and kills a perp. Lets say the state judicial process finds it was legitimate grounds of self defense and no charges are levied against the shooter. But the gun manufacturer would face a $1 million dollar fine. WTF? Crazy talk.


nebish - 5/10/2019 at 01:37 PM

Boston Celtics Head Coach Brad Stevens or Mayor Pete Buttigieg?





KCJimmy - 5/10/2019 at 08:31 PM

And now that you mention it, has anyone ever seen the two of them at the same place at the same time?


BrerRabbit - 5/10/2019 at 10:26 PM

Ears WAY bigger.


nebish - 5/14/2019 at 02:48 PM

Steve Bullock (announced 5/14/19)
- 53, two-term and current Governor of Montana, former state Attorney General, lawyer
https://stevebullock.com/


nebish - 5/14/2019 at 02:59 PM

From last week:

quote:

May 10, 2019, at 10:30 AM

Here’s How The Democrats Will Limit The Debate Field If Too Many People Qualify

By Geoffrey Skelley

Filed under 2020 Democratic Primary

Andrew Burton / Getty Images

The Democratic presidential primary debate stage is filling up fast: By our count, 18 candidates — including newly qualified Rep. Eric Swalwell and self-help author Marianne Williamson — are now eligible for the first two debates, at the end of June and July. But with participation in the first two debates capped at 20 candidates,1 the Democratic National Committee could soon need a tiebreaker to decide who gets a spot on the stage.

On Thursday, the DNC updated its debate qualification rules to outline how it will handle tiebreakers. If more than 20 candidates qualify under the first set of debate rules, then meeting both the polling and donor requirements will become very important — candidates who do so will get first dibs on debate lecterns. After that, though, things start to get complicated.

If more than 20 candidates hit both the polling and donor thresholds, the 20 candidates with the highest polling average would be included in the debate. Although 18 candidates appear to have qualified for the debate so far, only 11 have done so by meeting both criteria, so there’s still some wiggle room there.





For candidates deemed “major” by FiveThirtyEight.

To qualify via polling, a candidate must reach 1 percent in at least three national or early-state polls from qualifying polling organizations. To qualify via donors, a candidate must have at least 65,000 unique donors with at least 200 donors in at least 20 states. Information released by campaigns is used to determine whether a candidate has hit the donor threshold. If a campaign reached 65,000 donors but did not say whether it had at least 200 donors in 20 states, we assumed that it had met the latter requirement as well. Candidates will have to prove to the DNC that they have met the donor requirements.

Sources: Polls, Media reports


If fewer than 20 candidates meet both standards but more than 20 qualify via the polling method, those who meet both criteria would qualify first and the remaining spots would be filled by those with the highest polling average. To calculate this, the DNC is planning to average the top three survey results for each candidate,2 rounded to the nearest tenth of a percentage point. That is, the tiebreaker will be calculated using the polls where a candidate performed best, not necessarily the most recent polls. If that average results in a tie for the last spot(s) on the stage, the tied candidates will be ranked by the total number of qualifying polls they submitted to the DNC.

However, if fewer than 20 candidates hit both qualifying criteria and fewer than 20 qualify via the polling method, the DNC and its media partners (NBC and Telemundo in June and CNN in July) would first invite all candidates who reach both the polling and donor thresholds and then any others who meet the polling requirement. After that, the remaining debate slots would be filled by those who have the highest number of unique donors.

As things stand, our research shows that 17 candidates have qualified via the polling threshold, which requires candidates to earn at least 1 percent of the vote in three national or early-primary-state polls conducted by qualifying pollsters since the start of 2019.3 So if three more people hit this mark, no candidate will qualify based solely on having met the fundraising threshold. This could be a challenge for Williamson, who has built her campaign largely on grassroots support — she’s the only candidate so far who has qualified on fundraising alone. On Thursday, she announced that she had met the DNC’s fundraising criteria by receiving donations from at least 65,000 unique donors, including at least 200 individual donors in at least 20 states,4 but she has earned 1 percent of the vote in just one qualifying survey.

But Williamson is not the only contender who may wind up on the bubble. Two other candidates have not hit either threshold: Sen. Michael Bennet has earned 1 percent support in only one survey, and Rep. Seth Moulton has yet to hit that mark in any qualifying poll. Neither campaign has reported hitting the 65,000-donor threshold either. In fact, a total of eight candidates considered “major” by FiveThirtyEight’s standards haven’t met the donor threshold, so it remains to be seen if 20 people can meet both criteria. If not, the final debate participants will be decided by the polling average.

With so many candidates hovering around 1 percent or so in the polls, a few tenths of a percentage point could make or break a candidate’s chances of qualifying. The debates give candidates a vital chance to distinguish themselves in a crowded field, so these narrow margins could decide who still has any shot at winning the 2020 Democratic presidential nomination.

https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/heres-how-the-democrats-will-limit-the -debate-field-if-too-many-people-qualify/


nebish - 5/17/2019 at 01:40 AM

Bill de Blasio (announced 5/16/19)
-58, two-term current Mayor of New York City, former NYC Public Advocate, NYC City Council.
https://billdeblasio.com/



Some April de Blasio NYC voter approval numbers from Quinnipiac:
https://poll.qu.edu/new-york-city/release-detail?ReleaseID=2613


gina - 5/17/2019 at 08:41 PM

Bill DeBlasio has no real following nationwide. Few have even heard of him outside NYC and many there do not like him. The entire NYPD is against him. He already called Trump a "blow hard" and said since Trump gives names to candidates he has a name for Trump, Con Don. The debates will definitely be even funnier than the last ones. I don't know who the Reublicans will throw into the Bear cage to challenge Trump but it will be interesting.


Jerry - 5/20/2019 at 07:57 PM

quote:



And---according to Cory Booker, toy guns are more regulated than real guns.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/videos/are-toy-guns-more-regulated-than-real -guns/vi-AABh856


Jerry - 5/20/2019 at 08:12 PM

quote:
Andrew Yang -Declared Candidate for the Democratic Party, office of the President of the United States

"I’d start fining gun manufacturers $1 million for each person killed by their weapons. That would get more companies focused on how to keep guns out of the hands of those who would do others harm".

Genius!...Maybe we can fine the manufacturers of spoons too! (They make people fat)


How much is he planning to fine car manufacturers when a vehicular homicide occurs. How about those who make knives, baseball bats, iron pipe, ice picks, rope, plastic bags, and other items used to kill people. Does he know that hands and fists were used in more murders than rifles? What's the penalty for using those?


nebish - 5/21/2019 at 12:17 AM

Beto O'Rourke is very sorry, for everything apparently. Sorry for saying jokes about being away from his wife, sorry for being white, sorry for being on a magazine cover, sorry for being a man.


crazyjoe - 6/9/2019 at 04:13 PM

The ticket I am looking at right now would be Bernie/Buttigieg, or Harris/Buttigieg???.............Peace......joe



StratDal - 6/10/2019 at 03:56 PM

I'd like Biden/Buttigieg. My bet is its will be Biden/Harris.

The bottom line is the Democrats better find an electable ticket or it's going to be another 4 years of the same jive.


MartinD28 - 6/10/2019 at 04:16 PM

quote:
I'd like Biden/Buttigieg. My bet is its will be Biden/Harris.

The bottom line is the Democrats better find an electable ticket or it's going to be another 4 years of the same jive.


I would agree at this stage on Biden/Harris.

The big question is if those independents who gave Trump the benefit of the doubt now have buyers' remorse. They will make the difference.


nebish - 6/26/2019 at 01:15 PM

Joe Sestak (announced 6/23/19)
- 67, member of US House 2007-2011, Naval Academy with 31 years of service, National Security Council Director for President Clinton, beat Arlen Specter in 2010 Senate primary but lost general.
https://www.joesestak.com/


nebish - 6/26/2019 at 01:25 PM

Debate Night!

20 candidates are qualified for the first debate which was broke into two nights:

Wedesday's lineup -

Cory Booker
Julián Castro
Bill de Blasio
John Delaney
Tulsi Gabbard
Jay Inslee
Amy Klobuchar
Beto O’Rourke
Tim Ryan
Elizabeth Warren

Thursday's lineup -

Michael Bennet
Joe Biden
Pete Buttigieg
Kirsten Gillibrand
Kamala Harris
John Hickenlooper
Bernie Sanders
Eric Swalwell
Marianne Williamson
Andrew Yang


9:00 eastern both nights on NBC and MSNBC

[Edited on 6/27/2019 by nebish]


nebish - 6/27/2019 at 03:00 AM

So what did we think of the first debate?

The 3 Senators on stage are very strong candidates, their policies and positions are polished. All 3 will be relevant in this race for a long time. I thought Julian Castro and John Delany were impressive, especially Castro, but I was surprised that Delany came through as well as he did given my low expectations. Castro really showed well for himself tonight. Beto and Tulsi took their first question and answered with an opening statement rather than answering the question. Beto didn't move any needle, I just don't see it...Tulsi's back-and-forth with Ryan on Afghanistan was right in her wheelhouse, otherwise her days are numbered. de Blasio did a good job of getting himself some time when he otherwise wouldn't have and he likes to fight. I can't remember anything Inslee said. Tim Ryan should suspend his campaign tomorrow.


nebish - 6/27/2019 at 03:47 AM

MSNBC pundits are mad the candidates didn't attack Trump enough.

I thought the candidates handled themselves they way they should...talk about yourself, what you have done and what you can and will do.


BIGV - 6/27/2019 at 06:30 AM



Yep


nebish - 6/27/2019 at 03:01 PM

quote:
Yep


Acutally...nope. The talked policy last night for pretty much the entire event.


porkchopbob - 6/27/2019 at 04:24 PM

quote:
Yep


Yeah no. You can stop posting this cartoon now since it's not really true.


BrerRabbit - 6/27/2019 at 04:26 PM

Not only that, but now we gotta scroll half a mile left to right to read the thread.


porkchopbob - 6/27/2019 at 05:20 PM

Also, also, considering we had 8 years of "Thanks, Obama" ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thanks_Obama) and a 2016 Republican Convention that literally could only muster "Anyone but HER" mantra, I think you can give this over-simplified doodle a rest.

[Edited on 6/27/2019 by porkchopbob]


porkchopbob - 6/27/2019 at 06:06 PM

quote:
Tim Ryan should suspend his campaign tomorrow.

Haha, agreed. DIS-ENGAGE!


nebish - 6/27/2019 at 08:06 PM

quote:
quote:
Tim Ryan should suspend his campaign tomorrow.

Haha, agreed. DIS-ENGAGE!


The stage and moment is just too big for him. He had a deer in headlights look at times and after repeated failed attempts to butt into the conversation and, he basically just gave up trying.

From what I heard last night, if I had to cast a vote for one of those candidates on stage it would be Delaney.

The heavy weights are up tonight!


BIGV - 6/27/2019 at 08:59 PM

quote:
quote:
Yep


Yeah no. You can stop posting this cartoon now since it's not really true.


Disagree wholeheartedly, this is all they have.


porkchopbob - 6/27/2019 at 09:45 PM

quote:
Yeah no. You can stop posting this cartoon now since it's not really true.

Disagree wholeheartedly, this is all they have.

No, clearly it's all you choose to want to hear. Partisan cartoons are all you seem to have.


BIGV - 6/27/2019 at 10:05 PM

quote:
quote:
Yeah no. You can stop posting this cartoon now since it's not really true.

Disagree wholeheartedly, this is all they have.

No, clearly it's all you choose to want to hear. Partisan cartoons are all you seem to have.


You Sir are certainly entitled to your opinion, thanks for sharing.


BIGV - 6/27/2019 at 10:08 PM

Bill de Blasio (announced 5/16/19)
-58, two-term current Mayor of New York City, former NYC Public Advocate, NYC City Council.
https://billdeblasio.com/

"There's plenty of money inn this world, There's plenty of money in this country, it's just in the wrong hands. We Democrats have to fix that"

What a good little Communist!


MartinD28 - 6/27/2019 at 10:21 PM

quote:
quote:
Yeah no. You can stop posting this cartoon now since it's not really true.

Disagree wholeheartedly, this is all they have.

No, clearly it's all you choose to want to hear. Partisan cartoons are all you seem to have.


I've got to agree with PCB.

Instead of posting cartoons, it would be more telling to post your views and any supporting substance of the four components of the cartoon; the policies that have been advanced, impacts, success vs failure.

Border security - possibly speak to Mexico paying for the wall, executive order after temper tantrum and shutting down the gov't, Trump policies that support children in cages and the many deaths experienced due to his policies.

Boom economy - impact to the highest earners and corporations as opposed to the middle class. Also the impact to the debt.

Better trade deals - the success or failures of tariffs and the results to our economy; specifically to the midwest and farmers.

Infrastructure - Speak to the bills presented so far by Trump and the GOP.


BIGV - 6/27/2019 at 10:40 PM

quote:
Border security - possibly speak to Mexico paying for the wall, executive order after temper tantrum and shutting down the gov't, Trump policies that support children in cages and the many deaths experienced due to his policies.


"Children in cages".....The system is flat out overwhelmed, they can not build shelters fast enough, 80,000 a month are flooding the border. Who pays for this? And what are the solutions offered by Democrats?..Besides blaming Trump?....(lol) Sanctuary cities, driver's licences for Illegals, education, health care and some are even pushing for right to Vote to be afforded to those crossing illegally. And who is going to pay?...The Dems feel taxation cures everything, that the burden is all of ours to bear..."F" that. I am responsible for my family, myself and my friends, no more no less. You wanna help? You want to see this administration stop doing the exact same thing the Obama Admin did in regards to these children?...Donate your $, donate your house, your time. But stop trying to guilt others into thinking this is a USA problem, because it is not.


BrerRabbit - 6/27/2019 at 10:56 PM

Birth rates way down, lots of jobs most of us are incapable of doing, we need them.


BIGV - 6/27/2019 at 10:59 PM

quote:
Birth rates way down, lots of jobs most of us are incapable of doing, we need them.


Then they can enter legally.

Problem solved.


BrerRabbit - 6/27/2019 at 11:07 PM

Then make it legal to enter. Problem solved.


BIGV - 6/27/2019 at 11:12 PM

quote:
Then make it legal to enter. Problem solved.


It is legal to enter, when you follow the rules, Evidently that is too much to ask and punishing those who break the Law is mean!

Therefore, according to the Democrats, we should roll out the red carpet and all Americans should be elated at the prospect of digging into their wallets to help!

If not?..Well. you are just a racist!


BrerRabbit - 6/28/2019 at 12:26 AM

Biggest humanitarian crisis in US history, maybe if not elated, at least willing to help out some.


OriginalGoober - 6/28/2019 at 01:42 AM


who's tuning in to the "Great American Give-away, Part II"?


OriginalGoober - 6/28/2019 at 01:51 AM

Democrats pledge to not deport illegals, criminals included.


OriginalGoober - 6/28/2019 at 01:55 AM


Democrats China policy leans hard to end tariffs and trade wars. Every answer was a version of get back to Kumbaya with this oppressive regime.


BrerRabbit - 6/28/2019 at 01:58 AM

Conservatives sounding kinda cranky round here today.


OriginalGoober - 6/28/2019 at 02:08 AM

Democrats lean hard to say cops all suffer from systemic racism. Reparations are being dangled to the black community. The old white guys on the stage are doing the " I'm not racist " dance. Kamala Harris wins the race segment.


BIGV - 6/28/2019 at 02:10 AM

quote:
Democrats lean hard to say cops all suffer from systemic racism. Reparations are being dangled to the black community. The old white guys on the stage are doing the " I'm not racist " dance. Kamala Harris wins the race segment.


She just kicked Joe's butt all over that stage, the man is going to have a hard time out running his past...


OriginalGoober - 6/28/2019 at 02:12 AM

Bernie rants about capitalism. Democrats pledge to end a bunch of stuff that has no impact on the average American.


BIGV - 6/28/2019 at 02:15 AM

quote:
Bernie rants about capitalism. Democrats pledge to end a bunch of stuff that has no impact on the average American.


I love all the talk about what they are going to do with absolutely no mention as to where the money is going to come from.....


BrerRabbit - 6/28/2019 at 02:16 AM

Thank god I dont have cable.


OriginalGoober - 6/28/2019 at 02:18 AM

Democrats all stand firm on roe vs wade. K. Gillibrand wins the round.


OriginalGoober - 6/28/2019 at 02:30 AM

Democrats talk climate change. All Pledge to restart the Paris agreement. Buttipleg wants a carbon tax. Hickenlooper's makes some good points. Doesn't condemn fossil fuels to the horror of his stage mates.

Biden is jumbling the talking points. Bernie wants a global kumbaya on co2 emissions. No clear climate change leader on stage. No original thought just reciting the same platitudes.






BIGV - 6/28/2019 at 02:31 AM

quote:
Thank god I dont have cable.


I am watching this comedy show on-line...


OriginalGoober - 6/28/2019 at 02:43 AM

Gun reform. Swalwell is coming for your ar15...literally. the NRA's is evil and the 2nd amendment is trampled on by all on the stage.



OriginalGoober - 6/28/2019 at 02:46 AM

Biden has lost his veep swagger. Bernie wants kumbaya with the ayatollah.


OriginalGoober - 6/28/2019 at 02:58 AM

Democrats dont need a fresh new face, they need a moderate. The Colorado older guy seemed to get the closest to the left of center. The others are far left.


BIGV - 6/28/2019 at 03:02 AM


goldtop - 6/28/2019 at 05:42 AM

quote:



If a undocumented person is hit by a car while walking across the street and has several broken bones. do you just let them lie there or do you call for help?

If you call for help who do you think is paying when they're taken to the hospital? Right now who do you think pays for it??

If you don't call for help I'd have to question your lack of ethics, moral and humanity. Just wondering if you consider yourself a christian?


MartinD28 - 6/28/2019 at 11:22 AM

quote:
Democrats all stand firm on roe vs wade. K. Gillibrand wins the round.


Are you against a woman's right to choose?


MartinD28 - 6/28/2019 at 11:31 AM

quote:
quote:
Thank god I dont have cable.


I am watching this comedy show on-line...

If you like comedy, you'd probably have gotten much more comedic entertainment out of Trump at the G20 yesterday where "Trump tells Putin playfully: 'Don't meddle in the election.' Putin laughs".

Comedy gold. What a riot. Not sure why Trump & Putin would even mention Russian meddling. After all, Trump takes the side of all his intel agencies over a former KGB chief, doesn't he?

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2019/06/27/donald-trump-tells- putin-playfully-dont-meddle-election/1581694001/


MartinD28 - 6/28/2019 at 11:32 AM

quote:
Democrats dont need a fresh new face, they need a moderate. The Colorado older guy seemed to get the closest to the left of center. The others are far left.


You seem very informed of who the candidates are - "the Colorado older guy".


MartinD28 - 6/28/2019 at 11:44 AM

quote:
quote:
Democrats lean hard to say cops all suffer from systemic racism. Reparations are being dangled to the black community. The old white guys on the stage are doing the " I'm not racist " dance. Kamala Harris wins the race segment.


She just kicked Joe's butt all over that stage, the man is going to have a hard time out running his past...


Not really.

By the way, what % of the non-white vote did Trump take in the previous election? Do you think he can expand upon that minute %? Any thought as to why he gets so little support from non-whites?

He will have have a hard time running from his past, present, and future racist thoughts & statements.

Remember Charlottesville and "good people on both sides"?

Remember The Central Park 5? "After their arrests, the five were violently interrogated and deprived of food and sleep, and they ultimately offered a coerced confession. Trump then took out a full-page ad in a number of newspapers calling for their execution. More than a decade after the exoneration of five black and Latino teens accused of raping a woman in Central Park, President Donald Trump indicated on Tuesday that he still doesn’t accept their innocence. Nor does he think he owes them an apology for publicly calling for their executions."

https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2019/6/18/18684217/trump-central-pa rk-5-netflix


nebish - 6/28/2019 at 12:02 PM

quote:
quote:
Bernie rants about capitalism. Democrats pledge to end a bunch of stuff that has no impact on the average American.


I love all the talk about what they are going to do with absolutely no mention as to where the money is going to come from.....


Kamala got mad when she was asked about how proposals would be paid for, responding to the effect 'Republicans didn't have to say how they would pay for their plan(s)'...and still didn't explain where the money comes from.

I didn't make it through this whole debate, I wanted to, but fell asleep with maybe 30 minutes to go.

Just like Wednesday evening, the current Senators give the appearance of being most prepared, experienced and knowledgeable on the issues, which shouldn't be surprising, but unlike the first debate where I thought that Castro really broke through, I didn't see any non-Senator have a moment like that. The 3 Senators, Buttigieg and Biden made is extremely difficult for anyone else to get much time in. Nobody throws elbows and buts in like de Blasio so for the 5 underdogs last night I didn't see one that made a mark. I was interested to see how Hickenlooper would do, he just didn't get much time. 4 of the 6 candidates who spoke under 1000 words were in the second debate (Yang, Inslee, de Blasio, Hickenlooper, Swallwell, Williamson). Yang said 594 words. He had 2 minutes 56 seconds I believe. That is really a shame, to meet the criteria to make it into a 2 hour debate and you get less than 3 minutes.


MartinD28 - 6/28/2019 at 12:49 PM

quote:
quote:
quote:
Bernie rants about capitalism. Democrats pledge to end a bunch of stuff that has no impact on the average American.


I love all the talk about what they are going to do with absolutely no mention as to where the money is going to come from.....


Kamala got mad when she was asked about how proposals would be paid for, responding to the effect 'Republicans didn't have to say how they would pay for their plan(s)'...and still didn't explain where the money comes from.

I didn't make it through this whole debate, I wanted to, but fell asleep with maybe 30 minutes to go.

Just like Wednesday evening, the current Senators give the appearance of being most prepared, experienced and knowledgeable on the issues, which shouldn't be surprising, but unlike the first debate where I thought that Castro really broke through, I didn't see any non-Senator have a moment like that. The 3 Senators, Buttigieg and Biden made is extremely difficult for anyone else to get much time in. Nobody throws elbows and buts in like de Blasio so for the 5 underdogs last night I didn't see one that made a mark. I was interested to see how Hickenlooper would do, he just didn't get much time. 4 of the 6 candidates who spoke under 1000 words were in the second debate (Yang, Inslee, de Blasio, Hickenlooper, Swallwell, Williamson). Yang said 594 words. He had 2 minutes 56 seconds I believe. That is really a shame, to meet the criteria to make it into a 2 hour debate and you get less than 3 minutes.




Good perspective.

The Dems need to pair the numbers down quickly so viewers / audience can get a bit more focus on issues than having 20 on stage and a few in the wings. Realistically, there are probably only 4 or 5 with the money & support to mount serious campaigns. Most of the others are looking to expand name recognition and play for the future.


BIGV - 6/28/2019 at 01:22 PM

quote:
quote:



quote:
If a undocumented person is hit by a car while walking across the street and has several broken bones. do you just let them lie there or do you call for help?


You and I are not cut from the same cloth. Obviously no one deserves to suffer, but one should not be rewarded for breaking the law. Billed in full for services provided; wages attached to secure payment for services provided, then deported.

quote:
If you call for help who do you think is paying when they're taken to the hospital? Right now who do you think pays for it??


Taxpayer money and don't hand me this "He pays taxes" routine. He is here illegally and therefore all of the actions said individual is "participating" in are illegal.

quote:
If you don't call for help I'd have to question your lack of ethics, moral and humanity. Just wondering if you consider yourself a christian?


Nicely played, the old guilt trip argument. Either the Law means something or it does not and by the show of hands from last night's debate, the law means zero.


BIGV - 6/28/2019 at 01:25 PM

quote:
quote:
quote:
Democrats lean hard to say cops all suffer from systemic racism. Reparations are being dangled to the black community. The old white guys on the stage are doing the " I'm not racist " dance. Kamala Harris wins the race segment.


She just kicked Joe's butt all over that stage, the man is going to have a hard time out running his past...


Not really.

By the way, what % of the non-white vote did Trump take in the previous election? Do you think he can expand upon that minute %? Any thought as to why he gets so little support from non-whites?

He will have have a hard time running from his past, present, and future racist thoughts & statements.

Remember Charlottesville and "good people on both sides"?

Remember The Central Park 5? "After their arrests, the five were violently interrogated and deprived of food and sleep, and they ultimately offered a coerced confession. Trump then took out a full-page ad in a number of newspapers calling for their execution. More than a decade after the exoneration of five black and Latino teens accused of raping a woman in Central Park, President Donald Trump indicated on Tuesday that he still doesn’t accept their innocence. Nor does he think he owes them an apology for publicly calling for their executions."

https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2019/6/18/18684217/trump-central-pa rk-5-netflix


Was President Trump a participant in last night's debate?..Or was it Joe Biden on stage with egg all over his face and his feet on fire after Kamala Harris took him to task about his voting past?

And btw, even though I disagree with almost all of her politics, she certainly looks like the new front runner to me.


MartinD28 - 6/28/2019 at 02:25 PM

quote:
quote:
quote:
quote:
Democrats lean hard to say cops all suffer from systemic racism. Reparations are being dangled to the black community. The old white guys on the stage are doing the " I'm not racist " dance. Kamala Harris wins the race segment.


She just kicked Joe's butt all over that stage, the man is going to have a hard time out running his past...


Not really.

By the way, what % of the non-white vote did Trump take in the previous election? Do you think he can expand upon that minute %? Any thought as to why he gets so little support from non-whites?

He will have have a hard time running from his past, present, and future racist thoughts & statements.

Remember Charlottesville and "good people on both sides"?

Remember The Central Park 5? "After their arrests, the five were violently interrogated and deprived of food and sleep, and they ultimately offered a coerced confession. Trump then took out a full-page ad in a number of newspapers calling for their execution. More than a decade after the exoneration of five black and Latino teens accused of raping a woman in Central Park, President Donald Trump indicated on Tuesday that he still doesn’t accept their innocence. Nor does he think he owes them an apology for publicly calling for their executions."

https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2019/6/18/18684217/trump-central-pa rk-5-netflix


Was President Trump a participant in last night's debate?..Or was it Joe Biden on stage with egg all over his face and his feet on fire after Kamala Harris took him to task about his voting past?

And btw, even though I disagree with almost all of her politics, she certainly looks like the new front runner to me.


The existing incumbent is always onstage in an opposing party's debate. This is especially the case of a racist president supported by the likes of David Duke. In addition, hate crimes are up during the Trump presidency...coincidence or cause and effect? Do you believe Trump to be a racist...simple answer - yes or no?

Kamala Harris - the new front runner? I give you a 1 in a 100 chance of that. Watch the numbers and see them prove you wrong.


BIGV - 6/28/2019 at 03:14 PM

quote:
The existing incumbent is always onstage in an opposing party's debate. This is especially the case of a racist president supported by the likes of David Duke. In addition, hate crimes are up during the Trump presidency...coincidence or cause and effect? Do you believe Trump to be a racist...simple answer - yes or no?

Kamala Harris - the new front runner? I give you a 1 in a 100 chance of that. Watch the numbers and see them prove you wrong.


I do not and will never by into the Liberal hyperbole that to disagree with them places you in a category.....So, no, I do not believe he is a racist.

Biden is old and is dragging his past around with him like an ankle bracelet weighing close to a ton. Harris is a bulldog who has drawn blood and will become even more aggressive as these debates increase in frequency.

I will take that wager and place a $5 on it.


nebish - 6/28/2019 at 09:21 PM

I tend to think that Kamala can and will elevate.

Martin, why do you think she will not become a front-runner? Are you taking the angle that "America" isn't ready for a black woman President? I think if we limited poll respondents to "likely Democrat voters" that she has potential to poll quite well, perhaps a leading role at some point.

I don't have anything against Biden, I think he could be fine in the role of POTUS. One thing that really seemed odd last night, 3x I believe, there must be some kind of light that the candidates can see when their time is up or when a commercial break is coming, 3 times I think, Biden stopped talking dead in his tracks and yielded - almost like he was relieved to be "saved by the bell" or something. It was really odd. Not a great night for Joe and I am kind of pessimistic that these debates are going to help him much.


MartinD28 - 6/28/2019 at 09:58 PM

quote:
I tend to think that Kamala can and will elevate.

Martin, why do you think she will not become a front-runner? Are you taking the angle that "America" isn't ready for a black woman President? I think if we limited poll respondents to "likely Democrat voters" that she has potential to poll quite well, perhaps a leading role at some point.

I don't have anything against Biden, I think he could be fine in the role of POTUS. One thing that really seemed odd last night, 3x I believe, there must be some kind of light that the candidates can see when their time is up or when a commercial break is coming, 3 times I think, Biden stopped talking dead in his tracks and yielded - almost like he was relieved to be "saved by the bell" or something. It was really odd. Not a great night for Joe and I am kind of pessimistic that these debates are going to help him much.


I'm one of those who choose words carefully. The original question by bigv was "Kamala Harris - the new front runner?" To me this is <> to your question, "why do you think she will not become a front-runner?" There is a difference here between "a front runner" and "the front runner". My initial response was an implication that as a result of this debate she will not overtake Biden. In time...maybe...we'll see.

Your next question - "Are you taking the angle that "America" isn't ready for a black woman President?" Response - no, or at least I hope not. She is quite skilled in prosecuting issues as witnessed when she took apart Attorney General Barr when he testified before the Senate as well as her performance last night. Quite frankly, it would be better than reality TV to see her eat Trump's lunch in a debate. She appears to be quite strong, and I doubt Trump could handle her. She's too quick & too smart for him. I suspect she would be much much stronger on stage opposing Trump than HC. If she is the nominee, she certainly has my vote. I would like to see her on the ticket as prez or VP nominee.

We'll see where the next polls take us. Who knows as dynamics potentially shift as result of events such as debates. They evolve. My gut tells me Biden remains at the top possibly dropping a few % points, Warren gains maybe enough to surpass Bernie, and that Harris gains. The actual numbers in the next polls (plural) will be interesting.


BIGV - 6/29/2019 at 04:00 AM


goldtop - 6/29/2019 at 04:22 AM

quote:



I guess you don't realize how racist that is but I'll just allow you to think you're trying to be funny...sad example of American values and brings your credibility level to minus numbers


nebish - 6/29/2019 at 12:29 PM

quote:
I'm one of those who choose words carefully. The original question by bigv was "Kamala Harris - the new front runner?" To me this is <> to your question, "why do you think she will not become a front-runner?" There is a difference here between "a front runner" and "the front runner". My initial response was an implication that as a result of this debate she will not overtake Biden. In time...maybe...we'll see.

Your next question - "Are you taking the angle that "America" isn't ready for a black woman President?" Response - no, or at least I hope not. She is quite skilled in prosecuting issues as witnessed when she took apart Attorney General Barr when he testified before the Senate as well as her performance last night. Quite frankly, it would be better than reality TV to see her eat Trump's lunch in a debate. She appears to be quite strong, and I doubt Trump could handle her. She's too quick & too smart for him. I suspect she would be much much stronger on stage opposing Trump than HC. If she is the nominee, she certainly has my vote. I would like to see her on the ticket as prez or VP nominee.

We'll see where the next polls take us. Who knows as dynamics potentially shift as result of events such as debates. They evolve. My gut tells me Biden remains at the top possibly dropping a few % points, Warren gains maybe enough to surpass Bernie, and that Harris gains. The actual numbers in the next polls (plural) will be interesting.


Good explanation behind your answer.


BIGV - 6/29/2019 at 12:47 PM

quote:
I guess you don't realize how racist that is but I'll just allow you to think you're trying to be funny...sad example of American values and brings your credibility level to minus numbers


"Don't realize"?...or simply disagree?...and you are correct, I think it's hilarious and speaks directly to what these people feel they are attempting to project.


BIGV - 6/29/2019 at 02:00 PM

quote:
If the democrats launch into a steady stream of trump-bashing, they are sure to lose again.


Agreed. Rise above it, sell and market your ideas and beliefs. Weave new thoughts into a more centrist core.


MartinD28 - 6/29/2019 at 03:31 PM

quote:
i have to be honest that i have not watched the debates yet. politics got way too ugly for me halfway through the obama administration, and i haven't been able to get back into it since. if the democrats launch into a steady stream of trump-bashing, they are sure to lose again. they'd be wise to take a page from obama's playbook by paying no mind to the tantrum-throwing child. but i don't have faith that a strong enough democratic candidate will emerge. it will take something special to defeat trump, and i'm not sure that anyone in this pack is that special.




[Edited on 6/29/2019 by Skydog32103]


I've mentioned before but applicable here again. My belief is that the 2018 midterms which were a referendum will carry over to the general election. Voters came out in record numbers to show their disdain for Trump & his policies. He said he was on the ballot at many stump speeches until his backed candidates lost. Then, of course he distanced himself from the losers. The amount of anti Trump sentiment across multiple sectors of the population from suburban women, to Latinos, to LGBT, to pro choice, to etc. will hopefully mobilize and turn out in record numbers to deprive him of a second term.

I believe that the Democrats need a good candidate but they don't even need a great candidate to defeat Trump. The theory is that Trump's words and actions are the best candidate that the Democrats have. With polarization already baked in, there is only a thin slice of voters that need to be flipped to show Trump an exit. He won 3 mid-western / similar states by < 100K votes total. That alone is doable to make a difference.

If the country has not seen enough of him - his lack of character, his affinity to dictators, his bigotry, his misogyny, his white nationalism, his conflicts of interest, his cesspool of an inner circle, and his self-created daily chaos, then we deserve what we get if the voters put him back in office for a second term.


2112 - 6/29/2019 at 05:59 PM

quote:
quote:
i have to be honest that i have not watched the debates yet. politics got way too ugly for me halfway through the obama administration, and i haven't been able to get back into it since. if the democrats launch into a steady stream of trump-bashing, they are sure to lose again. they'd be wise to take a page from obama's playbook by paying no mind to the tantrum-throwing child. but i don't have faith that a strong enough democratic candidate will emerge. it will take something special to defeat trump, and i'm not sure that anyone in this pack is that special.

[Edited on 6/29/2019 by Skydog32103]


I've mentioned before but applicable here again. My belief is that the 2018 midterms which were a referendum will carry over to the general election. Voters came out in record numbers to show their disdain for Trump & his policies. He said he was on the ballot at many stump speeches until his backed candidates lost. Then, of course he distanced himself from the losers. The amount of anti Trump sentiment across multiple sectors of the population from suburban women, to Latinos, to LGBT, to pro choice, to etc. will hopefully mobilize and turn out in record numbers to deprive him of a second term.

I believe that the Democrats need a good candidate but they don't even need a great candidate to defeat Trump. The theory is that Trump's words and actions are the best candidate that the Democrats have. With polarization already baked in, there is only a thin slice of voters that need to be flipped to show Trump an exit. He won 3 mid-western / similar states by < 100K votes total. That alone is doable to make a difference.

If the country has not seen enough of him - his lack of character, his affinity to dictators, his bigotry, his misogyny, his white nationalism, his conflicts of interest, his cesspool of an inner circle, and his self-created daily chaos, then we deserve what we get if the voters put him back in office for a second term.


I don't think the Democrats need anyone special, they just need to keep from shooting themselves in the foot, as they are prone to do. The Republicans are great about showing up and voting for whoever has an (R) behind their name. Democrats, not so much. The Bernie or bust type voters are far more common in the Democratic party. Lots of Democrats seem to decide not to show up if their candidate isn't exactly what they are hoping for. The hack on the DNC is what cost Hillary the last election. It could happen again. Never, ever underestimate the Democrats ability to blow an election. Keep in mind, we are only talking about a handful of states that matter here. If the Democratic candidate appeals to Florida, Pennsylvania, Ohio, Wisconsin, Michigan, and Virginia, they win. Otherwise, Trump gets another 4 more years. It matters not if Trump gets less than 40% of the vote, as he is most popular in states where nobody lives.


MartinD28 - 6/29/2019 at 08:24 PM

quote:
quote:
quote:
i have to be honest that i have not watched the debates yet. politics got way too ugly for me halfway through the obama administration, and i haven't been able to get back into it since. if the democrats launch into a steady stream of trump-bashing, they are sure to lose again. they'd be wise to take a page from obama's playbook by paying no mind to the tantrum-throwing child. but i don't have faith that a strong enough democratic candidate will emerge. it will take something special to defeat trump, and i'm not sure that anyone in this pack is that special.

[Edited on 6/29/2019 by Skydog32103]


I've mentioned before but applicable here again. My belief is that the 2018 midterms which were a referendum will carry over to the general election. Voters came out in record numbers to show their disdain for Trump & his policies. He said he was on the ballot at many stump speeches until his backed candidates lost. Then, of course he distanced himself from the losers. The amount of anti Trump sentiment across multiple sectors of the population from suburban women, to Latinos, to LGBT, to pro choice, to etc. will hopefully mobilize and turn out in record numbers to deprive him of a second term.

I believe that the Democrats need a good candidate but they don't even need a great candidate to defeat Trump. The theory is that Trump's words and actions are the best candidate that the Democrats have. With polarization already baked in, there is only a thin slice of voters that need to be flipped to show Trump an exit. He won 3 mid-western / similar states by < 100K votes total. That alone is doable to make a difference.

If the country has not seen enough of him - his lack of character, his affinity to dictators, his bigotry, his misogyny, his white nationalism, his conflicts of interest, his cesspool of an inner circle, and his self-created daily chaos, then we deserve what we get if the voters put him back in office for a second term.


It matters not if Trump gets less than 40% of the vote, as he is most popular in states where nobody lives.


Good point. Now we're talking. This all makes perfectly good sense. Trump wins and "is most popular in states where nobody lives." That leaves the millions of illegals in remaining states that voted against Trump. These are the illegals that Trump kept telling us about, and the only reason he didn't win the popular vote. Not gonna happen this time, as the wall he promised will keep them out this time. Fewer illegals = less votes for the Dems.


Chain - 6/29/2019 at 09:01 PM

Did anyone catch any of the debates this past week? I didn't but of course heard Kamala Harris garnered the most attention by most accounts...I don't agree with her entire platform, but like her intelligence and toughness. I'm also glad she called out Biden (who I'm not a big fan of) on some of his past stances on issues.


BIGV - 6/29/2019 at 09:18 PM

quote:
Did anyone catch any of the debates this past week? I didn't but of course heard Kamala Harris garnered the most attention by most accounts...I don't agree with her entire platform, but like her intelligence and toughness. I'm also glad she called out Biden (who I'm not a big fan of) on some of his past stances on issues.


I have watched every minute. My honest take is that these Candidates are going to keep trying to pound a square peg into a round hole because " this is what we do"


MartinD28 - 6/29/2019 at 09:31 PM

quote:
quote:
Did anyone catch any of the debates this past week? I didn't but of course heard Kamala Harris garnered the most attention by most accounts...I don't agree with her entire platform, but like her intelligence and toughness. I'm also glad she called out Biden (who I'm not a big fan of) on some of his past stances on issues.


I have watched every minute. My honest take is that these Candidates are going to keep trying to pound a square peg into a round hole because " this is what we do"


The bigger question is who is Trump's next victim of pounding his peg into a hole. Remember, he never met any of his victims.


BIGV - 6/30/2019 at 08:27 PM

quote:
quote:
quote:
Did anyone catch any of the debates this past week? I didn't but of course heard Kamala Harris garnered the most attention by most accounts...I don't agree with her entire platform, but like her intelligence and toughness. I'm also glad she called out Biden (who I'm not a big fan of) on some of his past stances on issues.


I have watched every minute. My honest take is that these Candidates are going to keep trying to pound a square peg into a round hole because " this is what we do"


The bigger question is who is Trump's next victim of pounding his peg into a hole. Remember, he never met any of his victims.


Once again, I have watched every minute of the debates and feel the leadership of the democratic party is lost for this reason in particular (among many)..If you've watched, there was a moment in the last debate where the question was asked "Should everyone, including illegal aliens receive medical benefits"? ALL of them raised their hands. Does the democratic Party represent all of their constituents? or just the extreme left? Their are zero voting democrats who do not agree with this? Think that show of hands alienated ......anyone? The Dems have so far to go in realizing that not everyone votes in a straight line.

Biggest mistake they can make?...Nominating another "older" hard liner in Joe Biden. Obama won with youth and change, everything Biden is not.

I predict right now that Kamala Harris will be the nominee and that she will talk HC into being her V.P.

That, is change.


MartinD28 - 6/30/2019 at 08:52 PM

quote:
quote:
I tend to think that Kamala can and will elevate.

Martin, why do you think she will not become a front-runner? Are you taking the angle that "America" isn't ready for a black woman President? I think if we limited poll respondents to "likely Democrat voters" that she has potential to poll quite well, perhaps a leading role at some point.

I don't have anything against Biden, I think he could be fine in the role of POTUS. One thing that really seemed odd last night, 3x I believe, there must be some kind of light that the candidates can see when their time is up or when a commercial break is coming, 3 times I think, Biden stopped talking dead in his tracks and yielded - almost like he was relieved to be "saved by the bell" or something. It was really odd. Not a great night for Joe and I am kind of pessimistic that these debates are going to help him much.


I'm one of those who choose words carefully. The original question by bigv was "Kamala Harris - the new front runner?" To me this is <> to your question, "why do you think she will not become a front-runner?" There is a difference here between "a front runner" and "the front runner". My initial response was an implication that as a result of this debate she will not overtake Biden. In time...maybe...we'll see.

Your next question - "Are you taking the angle that "America" isn't ready for a black woman President?" Response - no, or at least I hope not. She is quite skilled in prosecuting issues as witnessed when she took apart Attorney General Barr when he testified before the Senate as well as her performance last night. Quite frankly, it would be better than reality TV to see her eat Trump's lunch in a debate. She appears to be quite strong, and I doubt Trump could handle her. She's too quick & too smart for him. I suspect she would be much much stronger on stage opposing Trump than HC. If she is the nominee, she certainly has my vote. I would like to see her on the ticket as prez or VP nominee.

We'll see where the next polls take us. Who knows as dynamics potentially shift as result of events such as debates. They evolve. My gut tells me Biden remains at the top possibly dropping a few % points, Warren gains maybe enough to surpass Bernie, and that Harris gains. The actual numbers in the next polls (plural) will be interesting.


Here's the Morning Consult Poll narrative following the debate.

https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2019/6/30/20611577/kamala-harris-el izabeth-warren-2020-primary-third-post-debate-poll


MartinD28 - 6/30/2019 at 08:58 PM

quote:
quote:
quote:
quote:
Did anyone catch any of the debates this past week? I didn't but of course heard Kamala Harris garnered the most attention by most accounts...I don't agree with her entire platform, but like her intelligence and toughness. I'm also glad she called out Biden (who I'm not a big fan of) on some of his past stances on issues.


I have watched every minute. My honest take is that these Candidates are going to keep trying to pound a square peg into a round hole because " this is what we do"


The bigger question is who is Trump's next victim of pounding his peg into a hole. Remember, he never met any of his victims.


Once again, I have watched every minute of the debates and feel the leadership of the democratic party is lost for this reason in particular (among many)..If you've watched, there was a moment in the last debate where the question was asked "Should everyone, including illegal aliens receive medical benefits"? ALL of them raised their hands. Does the democratic Party represent all of their constituents? or just the extreme left? Their are zero voting democrats who do not agree with this? Think that show of hands alienated ......anyone? The Dems have so far to go in realizing that not everyone votes in a straight line.

Biggest mistake they can make?...Nominating another "older" hard liner in Joe Biden. Obama won with youth and change, everything Biden is not.

I predict right now that Kamala Harris will be the nominee and that she will talk HC into being her V.P.

That, is change.


Your prediction is laughable. HC is done as prez or VP candidate. I will bet you $100.00 or even $1000.00 right here right now that HC will not be on the ticket. Will you step up to the plate and back your prediction?


pops42 - 6/30/2019 at 10:22 PM

The election is a long way off, Biden could croak, Mayor Pete could get caught getting a tuggie from Beto?, lots of time folks!.


BIGV - 7/1/2019 at 06:04 AM

quote:
Your prediction is laughable.


OK, point taken, you disagree with my prediction. Let's laugh together!...Ready? Hahahahaha!

Now, do you feel like addressing the hands being raised in support of medical benefits for Illegal Immigrants?


MartinD28 - 7/1/2019 at 03:24 PM

quote:
quote:
Your prediction is laughable.


OK, point taken, you disagree with my prediction. Let's laugh together!...Ready? Hahahahaha!

Now, do you feel like addressing the hands being raised in support of medical benefits for Illegal Immigrants?


I didn't surprise me that you wouldn't have the fortitude to step up and back your prediction with anything more than deflection.

To answer your deflection - I don't support providing medical benefits to illegal immigrants.

I also don't condone Trump's policy of family separation.


MartinD28 - 7/1/2019 at 04:23 PM

quote:
i would hope every single one of us here would call 911 if an illegal alien was dying in front of our eyes. in this scenario the alien would receive free medical benefits, then be arrested and deported, and we taxpayers would foot the bill. while an unfortunate reality, this is the humane thing to do, and it’s how Jesus wants Christians to be.

i pray I live long enough to see our country rise above these click bait distractions.



I don't disagree here. So let me clarify my position - I don't have a problem with necessary medical care which is not the same as medical benefits. There is a difference. That is an entire discussion unto itself.

These are complicated issues from multiple angles - compassion, social, economic, political, legal, etc. Somehow society needs to figure the best and acceptable / reasonable solutions.


BIGV - 7/1/2019 at 09:14 PM

quote:
I didn't surprise me that you wouldn't have the fortitude to step up and back your prediction with anything more than deflection.


Fortitude ? Are you serious?...That's your choice of verbiage for one who predicts the outcome of a Political Parties nomination process?

quote:
I don't support providing medical benefits to illegal immigrants.


We agree here

quote:
I also don't condone Trump's policy of family separation.


Did you throw your support behind this policy when the Obama administration did the exact same thing?


MartinD28 - 7/1/2019 at 09:48 PM

quote:
quote:
I didn't surprise me that you wouldn't have the fortitude to step up and back your prediction with anything more than deflection.


Fortitude ? Are you serious?...That's your choice of verbiage for one who predicts the outcome of a Political Parties nomination process?

quote:
I don't support providing medical benefits to illegal immigrants.


We agree here

quote:
I also don't condone Trump's policy of family separation.


Did you throw your support behind this policy when the Obama administration did the exact same thing?


"Fortitude ? Are you serious?...That's your choice of verbiage for one who predicts the outcome of a Political Parties nomination process?"

No - not the prediction. The challenge to your prediction. Sorry you wouldn't accept a challenge. I put hard $ behind it because I'm more than convinced that you will be proven dead wrong and was thinking you might back your belief in a friendly bet. I was prepared to donate the $ to charity. Several years ago an acquaintance bet me that Obama would not be reelected. I donated the $100.00 that he lost to an inner city school here.

You like to make your points then move on to do a follow up & unrelated question. I guess I could do the same and ask you about Trump's G-20 meetings kissing ass to Putin & MBS and giving accolades & kind words to these dictators, murderers, and abusers of human rights violations, but I won't waste my time.

Re: Obama - do a google search on family separation Obama. Below are just the start of many hits for context and perspective.

https://www.factcheck.org/2018/06/did-the-obama-administration-separate-fam ilies/

Donald Trump, again, falsely says Obama had family separation policy ...
https://www.politifact.com/.../donald-trump-again-falsely-says-obama-had-fa mily-s/

Claim: "When I became president, President Obama had a separation policy. I didn’t have it. He had it."
Claimed by: Donald Trump
Fact check by PolitiFact: False
Feedback
Trump again falsely says Obama started family separation policy
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/.../06/...obama...family-separation/154 0733001/
Jun 23, 2019 - Trump said Obama initiated the policy of separating those children from their caregivers, even though fact checkers have found that claim to be ...
Trump Falsely Claims Obama Began Migrant Family Separations | Time
https://time.com › Politics › White House

Jun 23, 2019 - President Donald Trump dismissed the plight of migrant children housed in U.S. detention centers and falsely claimed that his predecessor enacted a policy to separate kids from their caregivers after they illegally cross the border. Asked in an interview broadcast Sunday about ...


BIGV - 7/2/2019 at 02:54 AM

quote:
Jun 23, 2019 - President Donald Trump dismissed the plight of migrant children housed in U.S. detention centers and falsely claimed that his predecessor enacted a policy to separate kids from their caregivers after they illegally cross the border. Asked in an interview broadcast Sunday about ...


quote:
It isn't the fault of law enforcement that people get separated. It's the fault of the perpetrator. If someone enters this country illegally and knows he's in the country illegally and is found to be in the country illegally and is ordered removed from the country and chooses to have a child in this country that's a U.S. citizen by virtue of birth, he put himself in that position, so ICE is not separating that family.


Thomas Homan, Obama’s executive associate director of Immigration and Customs Enforcement


BIGV - 7/2/2019 at 03:53 AM

quote:
quote:
It isn't the fault of law enforcement that people get separated. It's the fault of the perpetrator. If someone enters this country illegally and knows he's in the country illegally and is found to be in the country illegally and is ordered removed from the country and chooses to have a child in this country that's a U.S. citizen by virtue of birth, he put himself in that position, so ICE is not separating that family.


a classic “if x then z” charade by Homan, who conveniently made that comment after Obama left office. “if it’s not law enforcement’s fault, it must be the migrants.” what fool believes there are no other options? the leader should also be in the discussion, especially since one chose to decriminalize migrants, and the other chose to criminalize them.


Here's my issue with that sentiment.

"Are illegal immigrants breaking the Law"?

Then they have zero right to complain about the consequences


BIGV - 7/2/2019 at 01:19 PM

quote:
quote:
Here's my issue with that sentiment.

"Are illegal immigrants breaking the Law"?

Then they have zero right to complain about the consequences


migrants seeking asylum are not illegal immigrants. that’s a pretty big distinction that we must make if we want to be responsible.




Think "seeking asylum" has become a "loophole"?....Now they have to be processed and tell me, where do you keep this many "asylum seekers"? That is over 140,000 in one month. Only a Democrat would argue that is our "obligation" to care for these people and every Candidate at that debate raised their hand in support of these "asylum seekers" receiving free health care.....

Way to hand the WH right back to them man you despise

Btw, thae above graph is from the Dept of Homeland security/U.S. customs and border protection. But as you Dems like to say "It's a manufactured crises"!


BrerRabbit - 7/2/2019 at 02:34 PM

If they are in US custody they are entitled to humane treatment.


MartinD28 - 7/2/2019 at 04:21 PM

quote:
If they are in US custody they are entitled to humane treatment.


You are correct, but Trumpco would take exception. Compassion at its best.

http://www.fox5dc.com/news/trump-administration-argues-detained-migrant-chi ldren-may-not-necessarily-need-soap-toothbrushes

"Trump administration argues detained migrant children may not necessarily need soap, toothbrushes"


BIGV - 7/2/2019 at 04:27 PM

quote:
quote:
Only a Democrat would argue that is our "obligation" to care for these people


good grief. i think I’ll exit the conversation now.

to clarify for everyone on the board Obama in no way did the same things Trump is doing regarding family separations. anyone suggesting this is irresponsibly failing to acknowledge a major distinction in policy, in an attempt to deflect and smear.


Wrong, the Obama policy was to separate children from adults when there was no documentation stating the accompanying adults were the Parents. As time has passed and the border and its facilities continue to be overwhelmed, this is just one more loophole illegal immigrants are exploiting.


BIGV - 7/2/2019 at 04:28 PM

quote:
If they are in US custody they are entitled to humane treatment.


Agreed, until they can be humanely returned to the border


BrerRabbit - 7/2/2019 at 04:36 PM

They should and will be afforded basic comfort, adequate nutrition and medical care while detained on US soil. Even our prisons provide this.

Playing the blame game and arguing about legal status does not change the reality that is occurring. The US has to care for these people when they are detained.

The only obvious alternative is immoral, inhumane, unAmerican, and anyone who supports it is a dirty nazi.


BrerRabbit - 7/2/2019 at 04:55 PM

If children are separated from their parents and unable to be reunited then they are wards of the US. Automatic citizenship. You break it, you buy it.

[Edited on 7/2/2019 by BrerRabbit]


porkchopbob - 7/2/2019 at 05:02 PM

I'm not really sure why this is an issue or a even a question. Any home owner knows that if something is on your property, you're likely responsible for it. That's why the U.S. has been deporting illegal immigrants consistently under every administration.

So, if you're an illegal immigrant and you end up at the hospital, you'll most likely be reported to INS and deported because they take your information upon admittance. That means it's not like there are illegal immigrants getting comfortable long-term stays while receiving expensive cancer treatment or liver transplant surgeries and sending the bill to tax payers/insurance companies. They are avoiding hospitals and clinics if they can because they get documented

But, if an illegal immigrant is in a car wreck, he's going to be treated because that's the humane, hippocratic thing to do. Once healed, likely deported, so it's not likely we can give him (or his country of origin) a hospital bill on his way out. It happened on our property, you mitigate the damage.

Sadly, thanks to the profit-driven U.S. Health Insurance industry, there are plenty of citizens who can't afford their emergency medical bills, which should be the actual issue.

[Edited on 7/2/2019 by porkchopbob]


BrerRabbit - 7/2/2019 at 05:16 PM

quote:
I'm not really sure why this is an issue or a even a question.


Same here. But conditions for detainees are deteriorating, so reality is kicking in - if we don't like the idea of concentration camps then we are going to have to regard this situation as a necessary expense.


BrerRabbit - 7/2/2019 at 06:11 PM


That's right, no way around it. It is a crisis. It is real. It is happening. We either handle it with justice and compassion, incurring expense in the process, or we incur expense in "final solution" tactics that will cost plenty too, and infinitely more costly in loss of national character.


BrerRabbit - 7/2/2019 at 08:37 PM

Incompetent leadership did not create this situation, it didn't start last year, or ten years ago or twenty, this is the end result of a century of Banana Republic economies tanking and gangster rule. These people are running for their lives, not just coming here to rip us off.

I was referring to the very real ongoing humanitarian crisis of influx of people, worsening conditions for detainees, this is going to get a lot worse if remedial action isn't taken.

These are human beings going down, right now, they need help and the USA is paralyzed by debate.


MartinD28 - 7/2/2019 at 09:52 PM

quote:
quote:
That's right, no way around it. It is a crisis. It is real. It is happening.


the earlier graphic shows an increase in apprehensions. it does not represent the number of people attempting to cross. this means the administration stormed into battle without an adequate plan. if they want to lead a surge in apprehensions i’m all for it, but a good leader would’ve implemented the proper infrastructure first in an attempt to be humane. incompetent leadership, which lead to the deaths of several children, is the only crisis.


Strategic planning is not the way Trump manages. Good planning in support of policy is a given but not for a president that manages by impulse and by tweet. Leadership does not mean waking up in the A.M. and taking cues from the Fox & Friends Morning Show lackeys nor from bedtime chats with Sean Hannity - seriously. Real management is not nepotism & does not come from the input of your closest advisors - your daughter & son in law who have no background in domestic nor global issues other than making photo ops.

Look at the constant turnover in Trump's cabinet and the unprecedented number of positions unfilled at this point in an administration. What do people expect from a guy who ran a family real estate business that got elected on bluster and raising fears built on racism and nationalism? You certainly couldn't have expected more if you voted for or support Trump. MAGA = caveat emptor.


BIGV - 7/2/2019 at 10:30 PM

quote:
if we don't like the idea of concentration camps


Really?...You're going to take it that far and compare the situation at the border to Treblinka & Mauthausen?


BIGV - 7/2/2019 at 10:32 PM

quote:
These are human beings going down, right now, they need help and the USA is paralyzed by debate.


There are homeless U.S. Veterans sleeping in the streets who need our help.

Priorities?


Bhawk - 7/2/2019 at 10:52 PM

quote:
quote:
These are human beings going down, right now, they need help and the USA is paralyzed by debate.


There are homeless U.S. Veterans sleeping in the streets who need our help.

Priorities?


Sure are. Have been for decades now. What is being done about that?


BrerRabbit - 7/2/2019 at 11:13 PM

quote:
Really?...You're going to take it that far and compare the situation at the border to Treblinka & Mauthausen?


Don't mind me. Just viewing the situation objectively and doing some simple arithmetic. As it stands at the present moment of course not. It's called extrapolation - looking at a situation and projecting with known factors. The way it is going, lots and lots of people requiring lockup, absolutely yes, it will require concentration camps to handle. They won't necessarily be as harsh as Treblinka, but could easily be comparable to past US concentration camps such as the Japanese holding facilities, or early Indian reservations - which btw is where Hitler got the idea for wholesale roundup and detention of entire populations. Lots and lots of people, mass incarceration, simple really.

Children separated from parents living in stinking cages with no protection and no rights, what do you think is happening right now to them? You know what, I don't care if you don't care, but I want to see America come through for these people.

Re your homeless veterans, yes, extremely important as well, it is a big country, sometimes we have to deal with more than one thing at a time.

Or just go into deep denial have endless arguments and vent on politicians, that's always good.


BrerRabbit - 7/2/2019 at 11:20 PM

What are you going to tell St. Peter when he asks you what you supported in response to this?


BIGV - 7/2/2019 at 11:21 PM

"They won't necessarily be as harsh as Treblinka"

I still do not understand how you can even mention these horrific places in comparison to what is happening at the border....

You ought to be ashamed


BIGV - 7/2/2019 at 11:29 PM

https://youtu.be/aMSmoNOZJ9Y

This is why Trump will be re-elected and I'm guessing you'll see this in more than a few re-election commercials....

Fools


BrerRabbit - 7/2/2019 at 11:30 PM

Yeah, this is why I avoid you. I'm posting here out of genuine concern and get told to be ashamed.

Just wait, mark my words, this is heading towards concentration camps. Germans who were saying that death camps existed or might exist during WW2 were probably greeted with similar shock. If it is shameful to look directly at reality and put two and two together, then I guess I am shameless.

Way I see it, right now America has a golden opportunity to make good on its reputation, show the world that we are still heroes, and we take care of ourselves and others. Or go down in history as a bunch of heartless bastards like Nazi Germany and Stalinist Russia.


BIGV - 7/2/2019 at 11:35 PM

quote:
Yeah, this is why I avoid you. I'm posting here out of genuine concern and get told to be ashamed.


Your "genuine concern" compared the plight of 6 Million Jews who were put to death in gas chambers with people who have overwhelmed our resources at the border. If that needs to be explained to you at all, I stand by my words, you ought to be ashamed.


quote:
Just wait, mark my words, this is heading towards concentration camps.


Thought we should save this gem


BrerRabbit - 7/2/2019 at 11:36 PM

Anyway, you brought up Treblinka. So don't go after me for saying concentration camps. You put a lot of people in detention without due process its a concentration camp. The US has done it before, with the Japanese in WW2, like I said the early Indian reservations, those were concentration camps. I didn't say they were going to be full on death camps.


BrerRabbit - 7/2/2019 at 11:40 PM

You're starting to sound like Muleman. You can't run from your conscience so easy, you know there is some bad stuff going on down there.




BrerRabbit - 7/2/2019 at 11:42 PM

Also I didn't go for your throat and disrespect you. So back off.


BIGV - 7/2/2019 at 11:42 PM

quote:
Anyway, you brought up Treblinka. So don't go after me for saying concentration camps. You put a lot of people in detention without due process its a concentration camp. The US has done it before, with the Japanese in WW2, like I said the early Indian reservations, those were concentration camps. I didn't say they were going to be full on death camps.


You could have used ANY term...please


BIGV - 7/2/2019 at 11:46 PM

quote:
Anyway, you brought up Treblinka. So don't go after me for saying concentration camps.


And this was your response: "Just wait, mark my words, this is heading towards concentration camps. Germans who were saying that death camps existed or might exist during WW2 were probably greeted with similar shock"

You can't have it both ways


BrerRabbit - 7/2/2019 at 11:57 PM

Sorry if the term concentration camp bugs you, but that doesn't change the reality. The images out there of these so-called "detention facilities" look a lot like concentration camps to me.

from Merriam Webster:

Definition of concentration camp
: a place where large numbers of people (such as prisoners of war, political prisoners, refugees, or the members of an ethnic or religious minority) are detained or confined under armed guard


[Edited on 7/3/2019 by BrerRabbit]


OriginalGoober - 7/4/2019 at 01:50 AM

[Quote]

Your prediction is laughable. HC is done as prez or VP candidate. I will bet you $100.00 or even $1000.00 right here right now that HC will not be on the ticket. Will you step up to the plate and back your prediction?




I really, really like this confidence.. how about 2 : 1 vp odds and 4 :1 Odds on her thinking she she can wipe the stage with this crop of crybaby candidates, with the exception of Joe Biden.


MartinD28 - 7/4/2019 at 02:42 PM

quote:
[Quote]

Your prediction is laughable. HC is done as prez or VP candidate. I will bet you $100.00 or even $1000.00 right here right now that HC will not be on the ticket. Will you step up to the plate and back your prediction?


I really, really like this confidence.. how about 2 : 1 vp odds and 4 :1 Odds on her thinking she she can wipe the stage with this crop of crybaby candidates, with the exception of Joe Biden.


goob - Would you like to take the original bet offered on your love crush running as VP? You going to the Trump gala today...sitting in VIP donor section?


BIGV - 7/7/2019 at 02:39 PM

quote:
if trump supporters want to increase gun sales, strengthen the nra, and lower illegal border crossings, they should vote for Obama. since he left office the nra is in shambles and border crossings are at an all time high.


So, the increase in ILLEGAL border crossing and the amount of asylum fillings has ZERO to do with the countries of origin and their failure to provide for their own citizens?

This is President Trump's fault?

Dude


BIGV - 7/7/2019 at 02:59 PM

quote:
quote:
So, the increase in ILLEGAL border crossing and the amount of asylum fillings has ZERO to do with the countries of origin and their failure to provide for their own citizens?

This is President Trump's fault?

Dude


relax. im only pointing out the irony of those two facts, so that’s just your interpretation of it.


You are noting my "interpretation" of your misuse of facts....

Interesting logic...


BrerRabbit - 7/7/2019 at 05:19 PM

quote:
Dude


Don't say dude


BIGV - 7/7/2019 at 06:39 PM

quote:
quote:
Dude


Don't say dude


My bad


nebish - 7/11/2019 at 12:13 AM

OUT 7/8 - Eric Swalwell

IN 7/9 - Tom Steyer
- 62, billionaire and former hedge fund manger with time spent at Goldman Sachs and founder of Farallon Capital. Also founder of political lobbying and advocacy groups NextGen America and Need to Impeach.
https://www.tomsteyer.com/


OriginalGoober - 7/12/2019 at 01:26 AM

quote:
OUT 7/8 - Eric Swalwell

IN 7/9 - Tom Steyer
- 62, billionaire and former hedge fund manger with time spent at Goldman Sachs and founder of Farallon Capital. Also founder of political lobbying and advocacy groups NextGen America and Need to Impeach.
https://www.tomsteyer.com/


Has the Democratic party has found their version of John Kasich? As an old white guy he has a tough row to hoe this year... Diversity and anger will get all the attention from the MSM.


pops42 - 7/12/2019 at 01:41 AM

quote:
quote:
OUT 7/8 - Eric Swalwell

IN 7/9 - Tom Steyer
- 62, billionaire and former hedge fund manger with time spent at Goldman Sachs and founder of Farallon Capital. Also founder of political lobbying and advocacy groups NextGen America and Need to Impeach.
https://www.tomsteyer.com/


Has the Democratic party has found their version of John Kasich? As an old white guy he has a tough row to hoe this year... Diversity and anger will get all the attention from the MSM.
A smart guy, and a "real" self made billionaire. Unlike the "orange blubber baby".


MartinD28 - 7/12/2019 at 11:37 AM

quote:
quote:
OUT 7/8 - Eric Swalwell

IN 7/9 - Tom Steyer
- 62, billionaire and former hedge fund manger with time spent at Goldman Sachs and founder of Farallon Capital. Also founder of political lobbying and advocacy groups NextGen America and Need to Impeach.
https://www.tomsteyer.com/


Has the Democratic party has found their version of John Kasich? As an old white guy he has a tough row to hoe this year... Diversity and anger will get all the attention from the MSM.


goob - Do you have a problem with diversity in the Democratic Party as opposed to a mostly homogeneous GOP?


nebish - 7/12/2019 at 12:33 PM

I'm looking forward to hearing from Steyer. I generally like different, and being outside of Washington still has appeal to me - even though in some people's view the current President's lack of political experience might be a negative for any other "outsiders". Even though it is not where my positions lie, I'm not automatically against far left views, it depends on the implementation and execution really. So at this point, I am anticipating his entrance into the debates more than hearing more from any of the other existing candidates.

I did donate Delaney $20.20 last go around to help him out a little, hope he makes it into the next round.


nebish - 7/12/2019 at 12:40 PM

Back to the question of where Harris would be in the polls, an NBC/WSJ poll I saw today had her 3rd with Biden and Harris ahead of her and I think she was in 5th in terms of 2nd qrt fund raising.


Jerry - 7/28/2019 at 03:26 AM

quote:
Back to the question of where Harris would be in the polls, an NBC/WSJ poll I saw today had her 3rd with Biden and Harris ahead of her and I think she was in 5th in terms of 2nd qrt fund raising.


I wouldn't put too much stock in the polls.


Jerry - 7/29/2019 at 11:01 PM

quote:
Biggest mistake they can make?...Nominating another "older" hard liner in Joe Biden. Obama won with youth and change, everything Biden is not.

I predict right now that Kamala Harris will be the nominee and that she will talk HC into being her V.P.


Big V, I agree that this is laughable, but in a different way.
If Kamala Harris gets by with voters knowing she is a descendant of Hamilton Brown, who owned a Jamaican sugar plantation. and quite a few slaves.

An account of the treatment of his slaves is recorded in a pamphlet named "Three Months In Jamaica"
https://books.google.com/books?id=7uATZj4RrIUC&pg=PA3#v=onepage&q&a mp;f=false


BIGV - 7/29/2019 at 11:22 PM

quote:
If Kamala Harris gets by with voters knowing she is a descendant of Hamilton Brown, who owned a Jamaican sugar plantation. and quite a few slaves.

An account of the treatment of his slaves is recorded in a pamphlet named "Three Months In Jamaica"
https://books.google.com/books?id=7uATZj4RrIUC&pg=PA3#v=onepage&q&a mp;f=false


My guess is that this will not escape the President come debate day


Jerry - 7/30/2019 at 11:29 PM

I'd also like to say that I believe none of the candidates would choose Clinton as a Vice Presidential running mate.

My feeling is that they would probably like to serve out their term.


BIGV - 8/1/2019 at 02:51 AM

quote:

Joe Biden (announced 4/25/19)
- 76, 2009-2017 Vice President, US Senator from Delaware 1973-2009, two-time POTUS candidate in 1988 and 2008.
https://joebiden.com/


Fade away Joe...please

quote:
Steve Bullock (announced 5/14/19)
- 53, two-term and current Governor of Montana, former state Attorney General, lawyer
https://stevebullock.com/


Common sense guy

quote:
Tulsi Gabbard (announced 1/11/19)
-37 years old, current US House member from Hawaii, member of National Guard and served in Iraq, former vice-chair DNC who stepped down to endorse Bernie Sanders
https://www.tulsi2020.com/


Articulate wisdom

quote:
Kamala Harris (announced 1/21/19)
-54 years old, current US Senator from California, former District Attorney and Attorney General of California
https://kamalaharris.org/


Fading

quote:
Beto O'Rourke (announced 3/14/19)
- 46 years old, former US House member from Texas 2013-2019, lost 2018 US Senate election, formerly served on El Paso city council
https://betoorourke.com/


Way out his league

quote:
Bernie Sanders (announced 2/19/2019)
- 77, current US Senator from Vermont, self described Democratic Socialist, serving as elected representative in Washington since 1991, former Mayor of Burlington, lost Democrat Nomination 2016
https://berniesanders.com/


Go away Bernie, please

quote:
Elizabeth Warren (announced 2/9/19)
- 69, current US Senator from Massachusetts, former law professor with appointments for advising and oversight on bankruptcy and consumer protections
https://elizabethwarren.com/


Meh

quote:
Marianne Williamson (announced 1/28/2019)
-66 years old, author, teacher and activist, lost California Congressional election in 2014 as an Independent
https://marianne.com/


Fresh ideas, bright

quote:
Andrew Yang (announced 11/6/2017)
-43 years old, venture capitalist and entrepreneur, Ambassador of Global Entrepreneurship for Obama
https://www.yang2020.com/


Sadly, free money will appeal to many



BIGV - 8/2/2019 at 12:31 AM

Kamala Harris as accused by Rep. Tulsi Gabbard:

In February, California Gov. Gavin Newsom ordered new DNA testing in the 1983 murder case of Kevin Cooper. Cooper came within hours of execution in 2004 after being charged with the murders of an adult couple and two children. Harris opposed the testing when she was the state’s attorney general.

She has since said she supports DNA testing and encouraged Newsom to approve Cooper’s clemency request. She did not offer specifics on why she did not approve the testing during her tenure.

In response to a request for comment, Harris’s campaign pointed to a past statement where the senator called a New York Times columnist last year, telling him, “I feel awful about this.”

Another claim against Harris — this time, by former vice president Joe Biden — that a federal judge freed 1,000 inmates after it discovered that a San Francisco crime lab had misused evidence, and that then-District Attorney Harris had failed to reveal that the evidence had possibly been tainted.

The Washington Post recalled earlier this year: “It was revealed in March 2010 that Harris and her staff had not informed defense lawyers that evidence from the police-run crime lab might have been tainted. A judge ruled in May 2010 that Harris had failed to inform defendants as required by law. Harris said … she took responsibility and made ‘no excuses’ for the failure.”

Harris is now running on a platform that includes criminal justice reform and she says she opposes the death penalty.


nebish - 8/3/2019 at 07:15 PM

I'm on a few of the email lists, only open a couple occasionally. I do find it interesting the angles the candidates take in their messages. Bernie is always playing the underdog card, and surprisingly he seems to be taking the "we are behind, other candidates are out fund raising us" - I just thought he might try and come across as "we are succeeding, more and more people are backing our message".

On the other hand, some of the dark horse candidates come out and broadcast their support (or atleast that is what they are saying).

Tulsi says that she has just "blown past" the 130,000 unique donor requirement for the September debate.

I only watched the first hour of the first debate last week. Busy.


OriginalGoober - 9/6/2019 at 12:52 AM

So whose next to drop out? Deblasio, Cumbya girl, or Sparticus?


nebish - 9/6/2019 at 02:17 PM

I stopped paying attention but updated the list (not like it isn't available elsewhere) and will contribute this.

quote:

Here's Who Has Qualified for the September Democratic Presidential Primary Debate — And Who Hasn't


For the first time, all the Democratic presidential primary candidates who qualified for the next debate will be on the same stage, on the same night.

Only 10 candidates hit the Democratic National Committee’s polling and fundraising threshold by the Aug. 28 deadline. On Wednesday, billionaire hedge-fund founder Tom Steyer failed to reach a minimum of 2% in two polls, which would have put him over the edge to qualify for the third primary debate. Steyer has invested millions of dollars into ads to meet the Democratic National Committee’s polling requirement, and had hit the threshold in three of four required polls.

The third Democratic presidential primary debate will take place on Thursday, Sept. 12, in Houston, Texas. ABC News and Univision will host the debate, which will be moderated by George Stephanopoulos, David Muir, Linsey Davis and Jorge Ramos. The DNC has said that if more than 10 candidates qualified, it would hold a second debate on Sept. 13.

Effectively cutting out half of the field, the third debate will feature many of the primary’s front runners facing each other on national television for the first time: Former Vice President Biden, Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders, Massachusetts Sen. Elizabeth Warren, California Sen. Kamala Harris and South Bend, Ind. Mayor Pete Buttigieg will all appear on the stage together.

Facing the likelihood that she didn’t qualify for the September debates, New York Sen. Kirstin Gillibrand announced Wednesday afternoon that she was ending her campaign for President.

How candidates had to qualify for the September Democratic debate

The DNC raised the polling and fundraising thresholds from the first two debates in an attempt to narrow its still sizable field of candidates.

To qualify for the September debate stage, each candidate needed to have received 2% or more support in at least four DNC approved polls released between June 28 and Aug. 28.

The candidates also needed at least 130,000 unique donors, with 400 unique donors per state in at least 20 states. The donations must have been received by 11:59 p.m. Aug. 28.

Ten candidates qualified. Here’s who’ll grace the Houston stage:
Candidates who met both requirements and qualified

Former Vice President Joe Biden
New Jersey Sen. Cory Booker
South Bend, Ind., Mayor Pete Buttigieg
Former HUD Sec. Julián Castro
California Sen. Kamala Harris
Minnesota Sen. Amy Klobuchar
Former Texas Rep. Beto O’Rourke
Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders
Massachusetts Sen. Elizabeth Warren
Entrepreneur Andrew Yang

Candidates who didn’t qualify because they only met donor requirements

Hawaii Rep. Tulsi Gabbard
Billionaire executive Tom Steyer
Self-help author Marianne Williamson

Candidates who met no requirements

Colorado Sen. Michael Bennet
Montana Gov. Steve Bullock
New York, N.Y., Mayor Bill de Blasio
Former Maryland Rep. John Delaney
Miramar, Florida, Mayor Wayne Messam
Ohio Rep. Tim Ryan
Former Pennsylvania Rep. Joe Sestak

Candidates who have dropped out of the race

New York Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand
Former Alaska Sen. Mike Gravel
Former Colorado Gov. John Hickenlooper
Washington Gov. Jay Inslee
Massachusetts Rep. Seth Moulton
California Rep. Eric Swalwell

Write to Madeleine Carlisle at madeleine.carlisle@time.com.

https://time.com/5661886/who-qualified-september-democratic-debate/



OriginalGoober - 9/19/2019 at 02:35 AM

Corn-pop for VP 2020


BIGV - 9/19/2019 at 02:41 AM

quote:
Hawaii Rep. Tulsi Gabbard


The most articulate, common sense one in the group and she was not there in the last debate....


cyclone88 - 9/19/2019 at 02:12 PM

I haven't been paying attention to what I consider noise until the 2020 conventions, but my one issue has been and remains age. I finally have an ally in a man who has actually held the office - Carter - who at 96 thinks anyone pushing 80 is too old for the job.

https://www.cnn.com/2019/09/18/opinions/jimmy-carter-wants-presidency-to-ha ve-an-age-limit-zelizer/index.html

I recall Reagan's age being an issue on the table during his campaign. His abilities were questioned as Alzheimer's disease crept in during his second term but dismissed mostly by the First Lady's iron grip on PR (much like Edith Wilson hiding the President's incapacity by stroke in his mid-60s).

Should he win re-election, Trump would be pushing 80 by the end of his term but that's the least of my problems w/him. At any rate, he's not starting at that age.

IMO, age shouldn't be kept in the closet but debated in public forums in addition to ideology.


Jerry - 9/19/2019 at 07:36 PM

Questions: With all the "gun control" talk, how are they going to get the illegally possessed firearms out of the hands of criminals who, by laws already passed, should not even be around a firearm?
Are they promising to enforce laws to prosecute those who use firearms to commit crimes?
What are they proposing to help regular citizens to keep them from being prevented to purchase and keep firearms?


Stephen - 10/6/2019 at 10:36 AM

Another POTUS candidate, (didn’t see him mentioned/haven’t read the whole thread) is former Mass. Gov. Bill Weld - he’s 74 & IMO that’s too advanced an age to seek the WH - he’s vocally joined the cause for impeachment, but who hasn’t

Bill is trying to get his name out there by suggesting Donald Trump should/could face the death penalty - for treason & other crimes against the US

Stay in retirement, Bill


[Edited on 10/6/2019 by Stephen]


OriginalGoober - 10/9/2019 at 11:27 PM

Is she (Hillary ) back?

I fear her jumping back in the most out of this crop of looney tunes, believe it or not.

Hillary Clinton to Trump: 'Don't tempt me' into entering the 2020 presidential race


Stephen - 10/10/2019 at 09:21 AM

If it’s still a hohum crowd of anonymous wannabes by early-next year or so - yes Hillary might declare - to how much fanfare, anyone’s guess - she would bring ‘name recognition’ to the table tho


BIGV - 10/10/2019 at 03:47 PM

quote:
HC is done as prez or VP candidate. I will bet you $100.00 or even $1000.00 right here right now that HC will not be on the ticket. Will you step up to the plate and back your prediction?


I still feel Mrs. Clinton will somehow find her way back to the limelight.....


Bhawk - 10/10/2019 at 07:15 PM

quote:
Questions: With all the "gun control" talk, how are they going to get the illegally possessed firearms out of the hands of criminals who, by laws already passed, should not even be around a firearm?
Are they promising to enforce laws to prosecute those who use firearms to commit crimes?
What are they proposing to help regular citizens to keep them from being prevented to purchase and keep firearms?


Nothing will ever change in regards to gun control. Ever. Your arsenal is safe and it always will be.


Stephen - 10/11/2019 at 03:35 AM

Thankfully that’s where Everyone - Repub/Dem, liberal/consrvtv, young/old etc.......
Is on the same page

NO ONE Wants To See Guns In The Hands Of The Wrong People - it’s a straight common-sense non-political thing -

I agree w/Skydog32103, whether legally or on the black market, as long as you flash the cash Anyone, dirtbags included, can buy one - no point in trying to regulate that aspect of it, it’s free enterprise


[Edited on 10/11/2019 by Stephen]


cyclone88 - 10/11/2019 at 12:06 PM

quote:
age shouldn't be kept in the closet but debated in public forums in addition to ideology.

Can we talk age after Sander's heart attack (that was kept secret for 3 days)? Worse, his stonewalling to admit it?


BIGV - 10/11/2019 at 02:53 PM

quote:
But stopping the black market? I'd say that's impossible.


quote:
Democrats are eager to pass measures to keep guns out of the hands of the wrong people


Herein lies the quandary Democrats find themselves entangled in.....To do "Nothing" looks bad if not cataclysmic the people who want guns banned, so the leadership feels the need to do "something" even when it means a Law that affects the Law abiding citizen. It is the illusion of action that drives the narrative. When we can all sit down and admit that the first statement here is the core of the issue and the one that should be addressed, we'll be on the road to a "solution", until then everything else is a band-aid on a severed artery.


Stephen - 10/11/2019 at 05:34 PM

quote:
quote:
But stopping the black market? I'd say that's impossible.


quote:
Democrats are eager to pass measures to keep guns out of the hands of the wrong people


Herein lies the quandary Democrats find themselves entangled in.....To do "Nothing" looks bad if not cataclysmic the people who want guns banned, so the leadership feels the need to do "something" even when it means a Law that affects the Law abiding citizen. It is the illusion of action that drives the narrative. When we can all sit down and admit that the first statement here is the core of the issue and the one that should be addressed, we'll be on the road to a "solution", until then everything else is a band-aid on a severed artery.


Assuming that “the first statement here is the core of the issue and the one that should be addressed,” refers to Skydog32103’s statement in this post about the black market.....

I would agree that it’s the core of the issue & where most gun violence originates from
Addressing it is what seems so impossible to do - at least via politics/legislation - again, $$$ talks


BIGV - 10/12/2019 at 03:02 AM

quote:
quote:
To do "Nothing" looks bad if not cataclysmic the people who want guns banned, so the leadership feels the need to do "something" even when it means a Law that affects the Law abiding citizen.


Protecting innocent lives from mass slaughter is, and should always be, a higher priority than how some people might feel "affected" by a few extra steps in the gun purchase process.

quote:
It is the illusion of action that drives the narrative. When we can all sit down and admit that the first statement here is the core of the issue and the one that should be addressed, we'll be on the road to a "solution", until then everything else is a band-aid on a severed artery.


Until we can all admit that your statement is the core, then.....


Ooops!..I forgot Mental Health! #1...with the "Black Market" (Obtained other than through a legal purchase) for guns running in at #2

quote:
a few extra steps in the gun purchase process.


How does this solve the problem of Felons/people w/the intent to harm obtaining guns on the street?


Stephen - 10/15/2019 at 03:56 PM

She’s not an officially declared POTUS Democratic candidate
However, story in today’s paper says Michelle Obama emerged tops in a poll of NH voters (“1 in 4 Granite State voters”) voted for her

I find this amazing - first I’ve heard her name mentioned as a possible political candidate
If it’s any indication of a national trend, then the mood of the electorate is real fickle - certainly speaks loud & clear about what NH voters think of the Declared crop of Dems

[Edited on 10/15/2019 by Stephen]


kevdab - 10/17/2019 at 03:09 PM

All these candidates and I have no one to vote for on either side. I prefer someone in the middle, who can work with both sides. Romney, Kasich ?
We're going to get stuck with President Bone Spurs for 4 more years. Just what Putin wants. The rest of the world is laughing at US.
Very discouraging to see good people still drinking this guy's kool-aid.How anyone with any respect for their fellow humans, and has any compassion for people with less, can support this guy is mind blowing.
I love my country, but this two party system blows. Both parties are becoming to extreme for me.

I don't post too much, ( have gotten schooled a couple times ) , but I had to get this out.


BrerRabbit - 10/17/2019 at 04:18 PM

quote:
have gotten schooled a couple times


School em back


Jerry - 10/21/2019 at 04:47 PM

quote:
quote:
Questions: With all the "gun control" talk, how are they going to get the illegally possessed firearms out of the hands of criminals who, by laws already passed, should not even be around a firearm?
Are they promising to enforce laws to prosecute those who use firearms to commit crimes?
What are they proposing to help regular citizens to keep them from being prevented to purchase and keep firearms?


Nothing will ever change in regards to gun control. Ever. Your arsenal is safe and it always will be.


You must not be listening to your candidates.


Jerry - 10/21/2019 at 05:25 PM

quote:
quote:
how are they going to get the illegally possessed firearms out of the hands of criminals who, by laws already passed, should not even be around a firearm?


What you're really asking is how to dismantle and destroy the black market, which seems like an impossible task - unless a state passes laws that allow them to conduct random house raids on convicted felons' homes, or routine traffic stop and searches. But stopping the black market? I'd say that's impossible.

quote:
Are they promising to enforce laws to prosecute those who use firearms to commit crimes?
What are they proposing to help regular citizens to keep them from being prevented to purchase and keep firearms?


These are all questions for your Republican leaders in your state and in Washington. Democrats are eager to pass measures to keep guns out of the hands of the wrong people.


Actually it's a question for all legislators no matter what party affiliation they have.

There are so many thousands of firearm laws and regulations on the books. I have seen several times legislation passed that shows "see, we're doing something" that is already on the books. Nothing really gets done, just a feel good knee jerk deed done.
laws need to be passed that would get the attention of criminals, and would be criminals, that actually mean something.
Why pass a law or regulation that restricts the rights of a law abiding citizen? Why not pass laws that could hurt the ones breaking the law?
How about a prison sentence of about 20 years if you use a firearm in a crime, to be served BEFORE starting the sentence for the crime? Armed robbery should get 10 to 20 years. Serve the 20 years of use of a firearm in the commission of a crime, then the 10 to 20 for the armed robbery. No plea down on the 20 years, no good behavior clause, no parole adjustments, no nothing. You serve the 20 years. When you start to serve the time for the crime, then starts the time off for good behavior, chance for parole, and all the other programs to shorten time served. BUT, the 20 years served for the firearms charge does not count toward them.
We don't need more laws to restrict the constitutional rights of those who wish to own a firearm.


Stephen - 10/21/2019 at 08:20 PM

Such legislation would be impossible to enact IMO
Gun shop owners gotta stay in business - if they can’t sell to people w/no criminal records, health records & meet other criteria, how can they do that - how are they supposed to know that the customer they’re selling to has a twisted mind & murderous intent, clean background & all

It’s a tough problem, one which decades & decades of discussion has yet to solve


Bhawk - 10/21/2019 at 08:27 PM

quote:
quote:
quote:
Questions: With all the "gun control" talk, how are they going to get the illegally possessed firearms out of the hands of criminals who, by laws already passed, should not even be around a firearm?
Are they promising to enforce laws to prosecute those who use firearms to commit crimes?
What are they proposing to help regular citizens to keep them from being prevented to purchase and keep firearms?


Nothing will ever change in regards to gun control. Ever. Your arsenal is safe and it always will be.


You must not be listening to your candidates.


Been hearing about gun control my whole life. Nothing has changed, nor will it. There's more guns than ever.


BrerRabbit - 10/21/2019 at 09:28 PM

quote:
Nothing has changed, nor will it. There's more guns than ever.


It is a win win for all ! Psychos go ballistic create fear and chaos so folks freak out and need brain meds then buy guns they shoot people creating more mayhem so more people flip and so on. Meanwhile weapons industry thrives, pharma thrives, prison industry thrives, the system WORKS.


BIGV - 10/22/2019 at 05:08 PM

Democratic "Front-Runner" Elizabeth Warren on being asked to comment on the Death of Mollite Tibbets:

quote:
Berman: I want to get one last question in here, because it is a story, a very important story in the news, it has to do with Mollie Tibbetts, the young woman in Iowa who was murdered, her body believed to be found yesterday. A person has been charged with it, this person is an undocumented immigrant. Mike Pence and the president have suggested the immigration laws need to be stronger so that people like this man, who was accused of this murder, were not in the country. Your reaction?

Warren: I’m so sorry for the family here, and I know this is hard, not only for her family but for the people in her community, the people throughout Iowa. But one of the things we have to remember is we need an immigration system that is effective, that focuses on where real problems are. Last month, I went down to the border and I saw where children had been taken away from their mothers. I met with those mothers — who had been lied to, who didn’t know where their children were, hadn’t had a chance to talk to their children — and there was no plan for how they would be reunified with their children. I think we need immigration laws that focus on people who pose a real threat, and I don’t think mamas and babies are the place that we should be spending our resources. Separating a mama from a baby does not make this country safer.


Thanks Elizabeth, let's compare an accused Murderer to border policy. She seems to excel at not answering the question asked her.

" I'm so sorry, but..."


BrerRabbit - 10/22/2019 at 05:55 PM

At least with Dems you can enjoy freely criticizing. It is fun. Liberals rip on other libs all the time. I have openly criticized Obama's corporate whoring, have trashed Al Gore, any validity he might have is killed by his fat ass and mansions and his fascist music censorship wife Tipper.

Never a whisper from conservatives against the dominant consevatives - only allowed to pile up on dissenters like McCain, Rubio. Gotta close ranks against those demon liberals! Closest I ever hear to criticism of Trump is "He's not Hilary".

It must be very difficult to recognize, let alone accept, that you are voluntarily forfeiting your liberty.


[Edited on 10/22/2019 by BrerRabbit]


BrerRabbit - 10/22/2019 at 06:00 PM


BIGV - 10/22/2019 at 08:56 PM

quote:
At least with Dems you can enjoy freely criticizing. It is fun. Liberals rip on other libs all the time. I have openly criticized Obama's corporate whoring, have trashed Al Gore, any validity he might have is killed by his fat ass and mansions and his fascist music censorship wife Tipper.

Never a whisper from conservatives against the dominant consevatives - only allowed to pile up on dissenters like McCain, Rubio. Gotta close ranks against those demon liberals! Closest I ever hear to criticism of Trump is "He's not Hilary".

It must be very difficult to recognize, let alone accept, that you are voluntarily forfeiting your liberty.



I will freely "Criticize" any Politician or Party that espouses beliefs and ideals that are in direct contrast with mine. So, I guess I am FAR closer to identifying with the right than the left.

Your mileage may vary.


BrerRabbit - 10/22/2019 at 09:27 PM

quote:
I will freely "Criticize" any Politician or Party that espouses beliefs and ideals that are in direct contrast with mine


You won't. And don't. Nary a whisper of dissent from any of you on issues you pretend to stand for, if at odds with the hard line. You can't utter a sound or you will be reviled by your peers.


[Edited on 10/23/2019 by BrerRabbit]


Bhawk - 10/22/2019 at 11:16 PM

quote:
quote:
At least with Dems you can enjoy freely criticizing. It is fun. Liberals rip on other libs all the time. I have openly criticized Obama's corporate whoring, have trashed Al Gore, any validity he might have is killed by his fat ass and mansions and his fascist music censorship wife Tipper.

Never a whisper from conservatives against the dominant consevatives - only allowed to pile up on dissenters like McCain, Rubio. Gotta close ranks against those demon liberals! Closest I ever hear to criticism of Trump is "He's not Hilary".

It must be very difficult to recognize, let alone accept, that you are voluntarily forfeiting your liberty.



I will freely "Criticize" any Politician or Party that espouses beliefs and ideals that are in direct contrast with mine. So, I guess I am FAR closer to identifying with the right than the left.

Your mileage may vary.


That certainly leaves quite the list of things you agree with, but that was no secret anyway.


Bhawk - 10/22/2019 at 11:20 PM

Wonder if the resident “constitutionalists” agree with the President’s belief that a clause of the Constitution is “phony.”

Bah. They don’t care.

Wonder if they’d care if someone said the same thing about the 2nd Amendment.

They’d probably care.


Jerry - 10/24/2019 at 12:28 AM

quote:
quote:
and would be criminals, that actually mean something.


Now you are onto something. "Would be" criminals....I agree, so what type of law are you proposing that would prevent these millennial psychopath mass shooters who have no criminal record and no health records, from purchasing a firearm? I'll support just about anything that accomplishes this.




I take it that you didn't read the entire post?


Jerry - 10/24/2019 at 01:05 AM



Nothing will ever change in regards to gun control. Ever. Your arsenal is safe and it always will be.


You must not be listening to your candidates.


Been hearing about gun control my whole life. Nothing has changed, nor will it. There's more guns than ever.


Bhawk, I've worked against "gun control" since the late 60's. Back then it was the "Ban the Saturday Night Special" mantra, except that none of that group could define what a Saturday Night Special was. The most heard answer was the "cheap" handguns. Define "cheap" since what might be cheap to those crying out for the ban could be a months' pay to most blue collar workers.
Later, when they came out with a list of the "cheap" handguns, it listed the Colt Python, Cobra, S&W M&p Model 10, S&W Model 29, and listed many handguns carried by police departments. I wonder why?
Over the years I've seen the rights of those who wish to purchase firearms eroded and sometimes outright banned due to a local regulation that as far as I'm concerned is actually un-Constitutional.
The Form 4473 that you fill out when purchasing a firearm has to have all NO answers in all question blocks.
All questions under Question 11, except 11a, direct you to violate your 5th Amendment rights (It even asks about your Marijuana use, past and present.) If you don't answer the questions correctly, you just committed a felony. If you lie on the form, you've just committed a felony. You can spend at least a year in prison and be subjected to a $25,000 fine.
I did go along with the 1968 GCA ban on mail order firearms, I did agree with the tightening of issuing FFL certificates to so called "basement dealers".
The current furor over banning magazines and black rifles is just another knee jerk reaction just to show "see, we're doing something".

Also LISTEN TO YOUR CANDIDATES about where they stand on gun bans and confiscation. You might find out who wants to abrogate the Constitution.


Bhawk - 10/24/2019 at 02:02 AM

quote:


Nothing will ever change in regards to gun control. Ever. Your arsenal is safe and it always will be.


You must not be listening to your candidates.


Been hearing about gun control my whole life. Nothing has changed, nor will it. There's more guns than ever.


Bhawk, I've worked against "gun control" since the late 60's. Back then it was the "Ban the Saturday Night Special" mantra, except that none of that group could define what a Saturday Night Special was. The most heard answer was the "cheap" handguns. Define "cheap" since what might be cheap to those crying out for the ban could be a months' pay to most blue collar workers.
Later, when they came out with a list of the "cheap" handguns, it listed the Colt Python, Cobra, S&W M&p Model 10, S&W Model 29, and listed many handguns carried by police departments. I wonder why?
Over the years I've seen the rights of those who wish to purchase firearms eroded and sometimes outright banned due to a local regulation that as far as I'm concerned is actually un-Constitutional.
The Form 4473 that you fill out when purchasing a firearm has to have all NO answers in all question blocks.
All questions under Question 11, except 11a, direct you to violate your 5th Amendment rights (It even asks about your Marijuana use, past and present.) If you don't answer the questions correctly, you just committed a felony. If you lie on the form, you've just committed a felony. You can spend at least a year in prison and be subjected to a $25,000 fine.
I did go along with the 1968 GCA ban on mail order firearms, I did agree with the tightening of issuing FFL certificates to so called "basement dealers".
The current furor over banning magazines and black rifles is just another knee jerk reaction just to show "see, we're doing something".

Also LISTEN TO YOUR CANDIDATES about where they stand on gun bans and confiscation. You might find out who wants to abrogate the Constitution.


There are literally hundreds of millions of firearms in this country. I don’t care who says what or what party they belong to. You will always have your guns.


Jerry - 10/24/2019 at 03:03 AM

.


I don’t care who says what or what party they belong to. You will always have your guns.


So thought the Jews in Germany.


Jerry - 10/25/2019 at 02:36 AM

quote:
quote:
I take it that you didn't read the entire post?


Wrong assumption. Your ideas didn’t seem to address the issue of stopping “would be” mass shooters, so that’s why I asked. They aren’t ever getting out of prison, so how do your tough sentences deter them?


OK, I get it. You read it but didn't understand the words written.

Quote: How about a prison sentence of about 20 years if you use a firearm in a crime, to be served BEFORE starting the sentence for the crime? Quote

Someone who is thinking about committing a crime with a firearm, such as robbing a store, might think twice about it when presented with the fact that he would have to serve 20 years-no parole-no time off for good behavior-no release for time served-could possibly think twice before doing so.
A career criminal probably wouldn't think much of it.
BUT, it would be a start.


BIGV - 11/2/2019 at 01:24 AM

Beto O'Rourke (announced 3/14/19)
- 46 years old, former US House member from Texas 2013-2019, lost 2018 US Senate election, formerly served on El Paso city council
https://betoorourke.com/

Quitter.

I guess people didn't really gravitate towards his "We are coming for your guns" idea....


Chain - 11/2/2019 at 09:45 PM

quote:
Beto O'Rourke (announced 3/14/19)
- 46 years old, former US House member from Texas 2013-2019, lost 2018 US Senate election, formerly served on El Paso city council
https://betoorourke.com/

Quitter.

I guess people didn't really gravitate towards his "We are coming for your guns" idea....


Or maybe his stance on guns is actually rather minor for many voters and his lack of life experience is a far more important factor in deciding whether to support his candidacy.


BIGV - 11/3/2019 at 02:48 AM

quote:
quote:
Beto O'Rourke (announced 3/14/19)
- 46 years old, former US House member from Texas 2013-2019, lost 2018 US Senate election, formerly served on El Paso city council
https://betoorourke.com/

Quitter.

I guess people didn't really gravitate towards his "We are coming for your guns" idea....


Or maybe his stance on guns is actually rather minor for many voters and his lack of life experience is a far more important factor in deciding whether to support his candidacy.


Combination of both, his lack of "life experience" led him to naively believe that, "We are coming for your guns" was a major point that would garner votes....

Either way, he is gone. Kamala is next.


Chain - 11/3/2019 at 12:07 PM

quote:
quote:
quote:
Beto O'Rourke (announced 3/14/19)
- 46 years old, former US House member from Texas 2013-2019, lost 2018 US Senate election, formerly served on El Paso city council
https://betoorourke.com/

Quitter.

I guess people didn't really gravitate towards his "We are coming for your guns" idea....


Or maybe his stance on guns is actually rather minor for many voters and his lack of life experience is a far more important factor in deciding whether to support his candidacy.


Combination of both, his lack of "life experience" led him to naively believe that, "We are coming for your guns" was a major point that would garner votes....

Either way, he is gone. Kamala is next.


And good riddance....I felt from the first day of his candidacy that he was not qualified to be President. Ms. Harris, however, very qualified and while most likely will drop out soon as well, may well yet be on the Democratic ticket or possibly end up as Attorney General should the Democratic party take the White House.


Jerry - 11/5/2019 at 12:19 AM

quote:
quote:
Over the years I've seen the rights of those who wish to purchase firearms eroded and sometimes outright banned due to a local regulation that as far as I'm concerned is actually un-Constitutional.


Where’s the problem?
_____________________________________________________________

What's YOUR problem with the Constitution? Are you defending things that go against the Constitution?
_______________________________________________________________

quote:
The Form 4473 that you fill out when purchasing a firearm has to have all NO answers in all question blocks.
All questions under Question 11, except 11a, direct you to violate your 5th Amendment rights (It even asks about your Marijuana use, past and present.) If you don't answer the questions correctly, you just committed a felony. If you lie on the form, you've just committed a felony. You can spend at least a year in prison and be subjected to a $25,000 fine.


You are showing us all how foolish and ineffective this process is. Relying on the honor system? How stupid.
___________________________________________________________________________ ____________

Not really since the info is then sent to the NCIC to do the background check.
if you answer incorrectly, you've just committed a felony. The person doing the background check is to try to delay you leaving while the LEOs are on their way.
___________________________________________________________________________ ____________

quote:
The current furor over banning magazines and black rifles is just another knee jerk reaction just to show "see, we're doing something".


It’s intended to reduce casualties in a mass shooting - why is that confusing?

___________________________________________________________________________ ____________

Sorry, but no it isn't. Haven't you noticed that the legislators KEEP banning the black rifles and magazines over and over?


BIGV - 11/5/2019 at 12:54 AM

quote:
quote:
Over the years I've seen the rights of those who wish to purchase firearms eroded and sometimes outright banned due to a local regulation that as far as I'm concerned is actually un-Constitutional.


Where’s the problem?

quote:
The Form 4473 that you fill out when purchasing a firearm has to have all NO answers in all question blocks.
All questions under Question 11, except 11a, direct you to violate your 5th Amendment rights (It even asks about your Marijuana use, past and present.) If you don't answer the questions correctly, you just committed a felony. If you lie on the form, you've just committed a felony. You can spend at least a year in prison and be subjected to a $25,000 fine.


You are showing us all how foolish and ineffective this process is. Relying on the honor system? How stupid.

quote:
The current furor over banning magazines and black rifles is just another knee jerk reaction just to show "see, we're doing something".


It’s intended to reduce casualties in a mass shooting - why is that confusing?


"Intention"...vs.... "results"


BIGV - 11/5/2019 at 04:47 AM

quote:
quote:
"Intention"...vs.... "results"


quote:
If you think these clueless deranged millennial shooters


"clueless deranged" as in "Mental Health issues"?

quote:
To object to a ban on these weapons is the height of irresponsibility.


I object to a "ban" of any kind. All this grandstanding and you, nor ANYONE on the Democratic side of the fence can offer a solution about how to keep these weapons OUT of the hands of CRIMINALS.


BIGV - 11/5/2019 at 10:46 AM

quote:
quote:
I object to a "ban" of any kind. All this grandstanding and you, nor ANYONE on the Democratic side of the fence can offer a solution about how to keep these weapons OUT of the hands of CRIMINALS.


Are you aware we ban tons of things? And sorry that I, nor the Democrats, can figure out how to stop the black market, lol. Can you? Or Trump? No civilization since the beginning of time has stopped it, wake up.


Therein lies the dilemma; the knee jerk reaction of the Democratic party with this image that doing "something" (a 'ban') is better than doing nothing. As long as there is a 'Black market", banning weapons is just a band aid on an amputation.

Wake up.


2112 - 11/5/2019 at 03:29 PM

quote:
quote:
quote:
I object to a "ban" of any kind. All this grandstanding and you, nor ANYONE on the Democratic side of the fence can offer a solution about how to keep these weapons OUT of the hands of CRIMINALS.


Are you aware we ban tons of things? And sorry that I, nor the Democrats, can figure out how to stop the black market, lol. Can you? Or Trump? No civilization since the beginning of time has stopped it, wake up.


Therein lies the dilemma; the knee jerk reaction of the Democratic party with this image that doing "something" (a 'ban') is better than doing nothing. As long as there is a 'Black market", banning weapons is just a band aid on an amputation.

Wake up.


Can we use that same argument when we talk about abortions? Why bother to make them illegal, since people will still get them on the black market.


BIGV - 11/5/2019 at 03:38 PM

quote:
quote:
quote:
quote:
I object to a "ban" of any kind. All this grandstanding and you, nor ANYONE on the Democratic side of the fence can offer a solution about how to keep these weapons OUT of the hands of CRIMINALS.


Are you aware we ban tons of things? And sorry that I, nor the Democrats, can figure out how to stop the black market, lol. Can you? Or Trump? No civilization since the beginning of time has stopped it, wake up.


Therein lies the dilemma; the knee jerk reaction of the Democratic party with this image that doing "something" (a 'ban') is better than doing nothing. As long as there is a 'Black market", banning weapons is just a band aid on an amputation.

Wake up.


Can we use that same argument when we talk about abortions? Why bother to make them illegal, since people will still get them on the black market.


You certainly could simply because that is the History here. Remember Prohibition? The paradigm on guns must change, until it does, we'll have this issue. Add, this is (Paradigm) exactly what the "Global warming" crowd is attempting, is it not?


Stephen - 11/5/2019 at 03:48 PM

Booze was illegal during Prohibition, people still found a way to tie one on
Drugs, same thing - heck even music, w/all the underground bootleg recordings etc
I’ve participated in the latter 2 - & was glad I did
But as long as the call for it is there, the black market will always thrive (always has) - just be ready to flash-e the Cash

[Edited on 11/5/2019 by Stephen]


nebish - 11/6/2019 at 03:33 AM

I was going through my spam folder and was surprised that John Delaney is still in the race! He is accepting donations via Alexa now.

quote:
Our campaign is excited to announce that we’re now accepting donations via Amazon Alexa!

In just 2 easy steps, you can contribute to our campaign to elect a strong leader who has a proven track record of taking REAL action in Washington.

Here’s how to set it up:

Make sure you’ve turned on voice purchasing. You can read all about how to do that here >>
Say “Alexa, donate $15 to John Delaney.” Alexa can process all gifts up to $200!

John believes that as a nation, we must continue to invest in advancing technology, like AI. Those investments today will build a stronger America for our children.

That’s why we’re so excited to start accepting donations via Amazon Alexa.

If you don’t have an Alexa device or if you’re not ready to chip in to our campaign via smart home, you can still donate online by just clicking one of the buttons below!


Stephen - 11/6/2019 at 03:48 AM

Maybe he’ll be the candidate Dems have been searching for
One thing is $ure

“He wants money (yes he does)
He Wants money! (yes he does)
Money Money
MOney money-money...”
From The Mars Hotel

[Edited on 11/6/2019 by Stephen]


BIGV - 11/6/2019 at 04:08 AM

quote:
If you think it’s wise to sell AR-15s to anyone without a criminal record, then feel free.


I do think that and... it is the largest selling rifle in the U.S.

Without looking it up, can you explain what it is?


2112 - 11/6/2019 at 06:08 AM

quote:
quote:
If you think it’s wise to sell AR-15s to anyone without a criminal record, then feel free.


I do think that and... it is the largest selling rifle in the U.S.

Without looking it up, can you explain what it is?


Because it is the best tool for shooting up schools and churches.


Jerry - 11/7/2019 at 12:42 AM

quote:
quote:
What's YOUR problem with the Constitution? Are you defending things that go against the Constitution?


Nowhere in the Constitution does it mandate types of arms to bear, therefore, there is nothing in the Constitution that gives citizens the right to own high-powered military weapons, such as the AR-15, in the same principle that citizens cannot own bombs and bazookas. Citing the Constitution as the reason why citizens can and should own AR-15s doesn't hold any water.


Actually, there is a provision in the main body of the Constitution that allows citizens to own what is used by the armed forces.
There also is nothing in the Constitution that says the people cannot own any arms they wish.
Plus, the AR-15 is not a military weapon. It is a civilian (semi-auto) weapon which was then developed for military use in combat situation (full auto and later 3 round burst).
Finally, If you pass the background checks, and have enough money, you can purchase almost anything the military uses, and not just the US.
Do a Google search for these items for sale, the MA-2, BAR, Sherman tank, M48 tank, bazooka, recoiless rifle,
AK-47, full auto firearms, Minuteman missiles (yes, you can buy one), warplanes such as the A-4, the F-4, F-5, F-20, Migs, Harriers, you name it, it's for sale.

Last several times I went over this I posted links, but I'll let ya'll look it up from here on out.


Jerry - 11/7/2019 at 01:17 AM

quote:
quote:
Therein lies the dilemma; the knee jerk reaction of the Democratic party with this image that doing "something" (a 'ban') is better than doing nothing. As long as there is a 'Black market", banning weapons is just a band aid on an amputation.

Wake up.


If you think it’s wise to sell AR-15s to anyone without a criminal record, then feel free.

You take any topic being discussed and turn it into “its the Democrats.” Is that all you got?


First, why not. I would not sell one to someone WITH a criminal record.

Second, because in this instance, I haven't found any Republicans calling for forced gun confiscation such as ones proposed by several of the Democratic presidential candidates, one has said that she would use executive action to "enact" new gun laws.
Not to mention the plans of outrageous taxes on firearms and ammunition.

AGAIN, listen to your candidates.


Jerry - 11/7/2019 at 01:22 AM

quote:
quote:
I object to a "ban" of any kind. All this grandstanding and you, nor ANYONE on the Democratic side of the fence can offer a solution about how to keep these weapons OUT of the hands of CRIMINALS.


Are you aware we ban tons of things? And sorry that I, nor the Democrats, can figure out how to stop the black market, lol. Can you? Or Trump? No civilization since the beginning of time has stopped it, wake up.


Since you just admitted that nothing can be done about the black market, why do keep wanting legislation that goes against the general public?

That's like creating legislation banning people from owning a car, except those who meet the criteria set up by the "elite legislators".


nebish - 11/7/2019 at 11:56 PM

Most recent email from Bernie..."new immigration plan - the most progressive ever" - oh boy!

quote:
Bernie Sanders’ father came to America at 17 years old as a refugee, hoping to escape widespread anti-Semitism and to find a better life. He had no money and knew almost no English. He didn’t have much of an education and no real skills. But he built a life for himself and his family through determination and hard work.

Millions of immigrant families in the United States today are doing the same thing. That is the story of Bernie’s family and that is the story of America.

Today we released our immigration policy plan — and it is the most progressive plan ever released by a presidential candidate.

Not only are we going to reverse ALL of Donald Trump’s harmful immigration policies on day one of Bernie’s presidency, but we will transform immigration into a humane, lawful process that protects families and respects human rights.

We are asking you today if you can lend your name to say that you support Bernie’s immigration plan, because every person who stands up in support will make clear that this is the kind of change needed to truly transform our country.

Add your name to say you support Bernie’s immigration plan to support refugees, asylum-seekers, and families who come to the United States in search of the American Dream.

Donald Trump is a racist, a xenophobe, and a demagogue. He has tried, as all demagogues do, to divide us by demonizing immigrants and blaming them for society’s problems. He has used hateful and disgusting rhetoric to try to dehumanize an entire group of people, and he has used the power of the federal government to mistreat and terrorize immigrants at the border and in our communities.

That ends when Bernie is president. As president, Bernie will:

+ Use executive authority to reverse Trump’s harmful actions on immigration, including ensuring asylum seekers can make their claims in the United States, ending family detention and separation, reuniting families, reversing the Muslim ban and halting construction on Trump’s racist border wall.

+ Place a moratorium on deportations and end ICE raids.

+ Restore and expand DACA and use advance parole, parole in place, and hardship waivers to remove barriers to legal status and citizenship for as many undocumented immigrants as possible.

+ Push Congress to enact a fair, swift, and inclusive path to citizenship for the 11 million undocumented people living in the United States.

+ Restructure the bloated, dysfunctional Department of Homeland Security, break up ICE and CBP and return their core functions to their previous departments, and begin treating immigration outside the context of national security.

+ Decriminalize and demilitarize the border, ensure migrants due process, and fully fund and staff independent immigration courts.

+ Strengthen and protect immigrant labor rights, including for historically excluded and underregulated occupations such as farmworkers and domestic workers, ensure employers are held accountable for mistreating immigrant workers, and reform work visas.

+ Renegotiate disastrous trade deals, develop a humane foreign policy, and lead the world in addressing climate change, including taking in those forced from their homes due to climate change.

+ Ensure immigrants in the United States get the support and benefits they need, including healthcare and education, and streamline immigration and naturalization.

We must stand up for our values and accept refugees, asylum-seekers, and families who come to the United States in search of the American Dream. This is how America was built and it has made our country strong.

Say you support Bernie’s immigration plan — add your name now.

Thank you for all you do.

In solidarity,

Team Bernie


BIGV - 11/8/2019 at 02:43 AM

quote:
No, it's like allowing cars and trucks, but banning owning a tank.


Hahaha!...Yep, just like it!...I mean all cars and trucks are currently armed with small caliber arms mounted on the hood, so I understand how you see the similarities.


BIGV - 11/8/2019 at 02:44 AM

quote:
Say you support Bernie’s immigration plan — add your name now.


Absolutely not.


nebish - 11/8/2019 at 03:00 AM

Bloomberg considering a run...again?

quote:
Bloomberg makes preparations for 2020 run



By ALEX THOMPSON , ELENA SCHNEIDER and MARC CAPUTO

11/07/2019 05:38 PM EST

Updated: 11/07/2019 07:13 PM EST

Facebook

Twitter
Link
More

Former New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg is preparing to file paperwork to qualify for the Democratic presidential primary in Alabama, ahead of a Friday deadline. The move would be a first step toward a national campaign, though Bloomberg has not made a final decision to run.

"We now need to finish the job and ensure that Trump is defeated — but Mike is increasingly concerned that the current field of candidates is not well positioned to do that," longtime Bloomberg aide Howard Wolfson said in an email. "If Mike runs he would offer a new choice to Democrats built on a unique record running America’s biggest city, building a business from scratch and taking on some of America’s toughest challenges as a high-impact philanthropist."

Bloomberg has engaged in a will-he-or-won't-he routine for over a decade about running for president, but declined to jump in each time. Earlier this year he was exploring a bid, only to bow out after former Vice President Joe Biden made clear he would run.

Story Continued Below

"I believe I would defeat Donald Trump in a general election," Bloomberg wrote in March. "But I am clear-eyed about the difficulty of winning the Democratic nomination in such a crowded field."

"He's tired of being the almost-ran," said one former Bloomberg adviser on Thursday after the New York Post reported news of his moves. "Mortality is weighing heavily on him. This is the last time that he can run."

Bloomberg will almost certainly not qualify for the next debate in Atlanta on Nov. 20 and he will likely have to spend tens of millions of dollars in the next few weeks to make the debate stage in December, potentially setting a record for campaign spending in a short amount of time. His current wealth is estimated at $52 billion, per Forbes.

Bloomberg and his money have the potential to scramble the Democratic field, where no clear frontrunner has emerged. He is most similar ideologically with candidates like Biden and South Bend (Ind.) Mayor Pete Buttigieg and could threaten their candidacies or divide their potential voters.



Asked why Bloomberg changed his mind and whether he was underwhelmed by Biden's performance on the trail, an aide said that "it's not about any one candidate." But the aide added: "He is worried about the state of the Democratic primary campaign and the possibility that we could lose in November. He wants to avoid that more than anything else."

Bloomberg's money also could further sharpen the existing divisions in the field between the left-wing, populist candidates and more moderate, pragmatic ones. While advisers to Biden and Buttigieg declined to comment on Bloomberg's entry, Warren's team and Sanders himself reacted with near glee at the potential contrast he would offer.

"More billionaires seeking more political power surely isn't the change American needs," said Sanders campaign manager Faiz Shakir. Sanders weighed in on Twitter, saying "[t]he billionaire class is scared and they should be scared."

Warren welcomed Bloomberg to the race on Twitter and linked to a page about her wealth tax, adding: "If you're looking for policy plans that will make a huge difference for working people and which are very popular, start here."

Democratic strategist and longtime Barack Obama aide David Axelrod said concerns about Biden clearly contributed to Bloomberg's change of heart.

“There’s no question that Bloomberg’s calculus was that Biden was occupying a space, and the fact that he’s getting in is a clear indication that he’s not convinced Biden has the wherewithal to carry that torch," Axelrod said. "So yeah, I don’t think this is a positive development for Joe Biden."

Bloomberg has poured hundreds of millions of dollars into Democratic causes in recent years, earning him goodwill among many progressive activists and especially those connected with climate change and gun control. His funding of the gun control advocacy group Moms Demand Action has given the left a powerful counter to the National Rifle Association. But Bloomberg, who ran as a Republican in his first mayoral bid in 2001 before becoming an independent and then a Democrat, also faces vulnerabilities on the left on criminal justice and the regulation of Wall Street.



Last year, he defended the stop-and-frisk policing tactics during his mayoralty as helping decrease the murder rate without violating civil rights. "I think people, the voters, want low crime,” Bloomberg told the New York Times. “They don’t want kids to kill each other.”

He has also repeatedly criticized Warren's wealth tax proposal and suggested her policies toward the rich could lead the United States on a path to becoming Venezuela.

Bloomberg would be the second billionaire to make a late entry in the contest, after investor Tom Steyer jumped in over the summer. Steyer spent tens of millions in advertising to get on the debate stage but has failed to rise from the bottom of polls.

Longtime Democratic strategist Joe Trippi said it's possible Bloomberg could follow a similar trajectory. But Trippi said that he didn't think the former New York City mayor would enter the race without a realistic path to victory.

"I don’t think Wolfson or those folks would do this if they haven’t polled," Trippi said. "It’s not like they woke up and decided to do this. I’m sure they have data.”

Michael Nutter, the former Philadelphia mayor who wanted Bloomberg to run and then endorsed Biden, echoed that sentiment Thursday evening. “He doesn’t make rash decisions. This is serious," Nutter said. "Bloomberg has his own serious record of achievement in politics, philanthropy and certainly business. It’s kind of a triple threat.”

Bloomberg's deep pockets may allow him to chart an unconventional path to the nomination that is less dependent on the early states of Iowa and New Hampshire. Candidates often rely on making a splash in those contests to gain momentum and raise more money, but Bloomberg will likely be able to stay in the race as long as he wants without such pressure.

“It’s tough in Iowa," said Matt Paul, who ran Hillary Clinton's caucus operation in the state in 2016. "It’s tough with 90 days away. If he does this, this is not going to be an Iowa-centered campaign. If he does this, this is going to be a very unorthodox campaign."

Steve Benjamin, the mayor of Columbia, South Carolina, sat next to Bloomberg at an event in Washington last month and came away with an inkling of what might come.

“I sensed that he was still very interested in the race,” Benjamin said. “I gave him the lay of the land in South Carolina ... He wanted to hear more about it.”

Sally Goldenberg contributed to this report.


https://www.politico.com/news/2019/11/07/bloomberg-preparing-to-file-for-al abama-presidential-primary-000322


Stephen - 11/8/2019 at 03:26 AM

It doesn’t just apply to players
You can’t tell the field of Dem POTUS candidates w/out a scorecard either
Best of luck to the newest one, Mayor Bloomberg - if Alabamans vote for him it could give him momentum for the more familiar northern states
still think Hillary will throw her hat in the ring too at some point - as some of the ‘weaker sisters’ end their campaigns


MartinD28 - 11/8/2019 at 01:33 PM

quote:
It doesn’t just apply to players
You can’t tell the field of Dem POTUS candidates w/out a scorecard either
Best of luck to the newest one, Mayor Bloomberg - if Alabamans vote for him it could give him momentum for the more familiar northern states
still think Hillary will throw her hat in the ring too at some point - as some of the ‘weaker sisters’ end their campaigns


For the umpteenth time, neither HC nor Michelle Obama will run for prez this cycle.

Bloomberg will come & go.

[Edited on 11/8/2019 by MartinD28]


nebish - 11/8/2019 at 02:15 PM

quote:
Bloomberg will come & go.


Maybe. I could see myself voting for him potentially.

Wasn't there some skeletons in the closet that came out earlier when he was rumored to be looking at running?

I suppose I feel like some other people....I can't vote for Trump, so I would like to try an find a candidate on the other side that I could vote for who is more in the mold of a moderate - or atleast not far left. And, perhaps like some people, the more I see and hear of Biden I'm just not very into it.


MartinD28 - 11/8/2019 at 03:40 PM

quote:
I don't see how Bloomberg is helping the Democrats with this nonsense. Seems like another narcissist billionnaire who needs the spotlight to feel relevant.


Totally agree. He most likely takes votes from the moderate wing leaving Bernie & Warren in better shape. That is not good because those 2 have views that need to evolve over years, and the country is not ready for those 2, and that only serves to benefit the Russian loving candidate with greater chance of being reelected. Bloomberg should be more strategic and help the party in other ways other than injecting himself into the mix.


Jerry - 11/9/2019 at 12:31 AM

quote:
quote:
If you think it’s wise to sell AR-15s to anyone without a criminal record, then feel free.

______________________________________________________________


First, why not.


Because those are incredibly low standards to have for operating such a machine. I'm for giving any Joe w/out a record his basic pistol or shotgun, but such a weapon should be reserved for those who qualify through a process, and prove first that they are physically and mentally fit for one. It's the responsible thing to do, and that's all I really care about. We won't agree, and that's fine.

quote:
Since you just admitted that nothing can be done about the black market, why do keep wanting legislation that goes against the general public?

That's like creating legislation banning people from owning a car, except those who meet the criteria set up by the "elite legislators".


No, it's like allowing cars and trucks, but banning owning a tank.

Let me be clear, I don't care if a gun owner is slightly inconvenienced if they want to register to buy advanced weaponry. I don't think taking a few extra steps to own an AR-15 is infringing on any right, if you can always buy your pistol and shotgun at Walmart. And I believe less people would die in our mass shootings. To allow one's own irritation with a little extra work to get in the way of preventing less murders, is hard to comprehend.



!) What type tank would you like to buy? Do a google search for who sells them.
2) The AR-15 is a semi-auto rifle, no different that a Glenfield Model 60, Mossberg 702, Remington 7400, Henry AR-7, and hundreds of other semi-auto rifles. I fervently hope you know the difference between semi-auto and full auto.
3) Walmart recently announced that certain stores will no longer carry firearms and ammunition. I haven't seen the list of what locations yet.


Look up and see how many, never mind, you probably wouldn't, so here are the 2017 figures from the FBI.
Rifles (Note: no breakdown on what type used) 403 murders
blunt objects-Clubs, hammers, and such 467 murders
Personal (hands, feet, fist, etc.) 692 murders
Knives (Again no breakdown) 1,591 murders

Wow, why aren't you out campaigning for the banning of knives since they are used in almost 400% more murders than rifles?
Should we go about cutting off feet, hands, and fists off everyone since they are used in 170% more murders than rifles?
What about baseball bats, clubs, hammers, tire irons, iron pipe, and other heavy objects than can be used in a murder.


Do you think people should undergo a psychiatric test before getting a drivers license? A car is a big dangerous item that causes more deaths than firearms every year, and some are murders.


BIGV - 11/9/2019 at 02:35 AM

quote:
quote:
quote:
If you think it’s wise to sell AR-15s to anyone without a criminal record, then feel free.

______________________________________________________________


First, why not.


Because those are incredibly low standards to have for operating such a machine. I'm for giving any Joe w/out a record his basic pistol or shotgun, but such a weapon should be reserved for those who qualify through a process, and prove first that they are physically and mentally fit for one. It's the responsible thing to do, and that's all I really care about. We won't agree, and that's fine.

quote:
Since you just admitted that nothing can be done about the black market, why do keep wanting legislation that goes against the general public?

That's like creating legislation banning people from owning a car, except those who meet the criteria set up by the "elite legislators".


No, it's like allowing cars and trucks, but banning owning a tank.

Let me be clear, I don't care if a gun owner is slightly inconvenienced if they want to register to buy advanced weaponry. I don't think taking a few extra steps to own an AR-15 is infringing on any right, if you can always buy your pistol and shotgun at Walmart. And I believe less people would die in our mass shootings. To allow one's own irritation with a little extra work to get in the way of preventing less murders, is hard to comprehend.



!) What type tank would you like to buy? Do a google search for who sells them.
2) The AR-15 is a semi-auto rifle, no different that a Glenfield Model 60, Mossberg 702, Remington 7400, Henry AR-7, and hundreds of other semi-auto rifles. I fervently hope you know the difference between semi-auto and full auto.
3) Walmart recently announced that certain stores will no longer carry firearms and ammunition. I haven't seen the list of what locations yet.


Look up and see how many, never mind, you probably wouldn't, so here are the 2017 figures from the FBI.
Rifles (Note: no breakdown on what type used) 403 murders
blunt objects-Clubs, hammers, and such 467 murders
Personal (hands, feet, fist, etc.) 692 murders
Knives (Again no breakdown) 1,591 murders

Wow, why aren't you out campaigning for the banning of knives since they are used in almost 400% more murders than rifles?
Should we go about cutting off feet, hands, and fists off everyone since they are used in 170% more murders than rifles?
What about baseball bats, clubs, hammers, tire irons, iron pipe, and other heavy objects than can be used in a murder.


Do you think people should undergo a psychiatric test before getting a drivers license? A car is a big dangerous item that causes more deaths than firearms every year, and some are murders.



Stop using logic, it does not fit the narrative.


Jerry - 11/9/2019 at 03:48 AM

quote:
quote:
quote:
quote:
If you think it’s wise to sell AR-15s to anyone without a criminal record, then feel free.

______________________________________________________________


First, why not.


Because those are incredibly low standards to have for operating such a machine. I'm for giving any Joe w/out a record his basic pistol or shotgun, but such a weapon should be reserved for those who qualify through a process, and prove first that they are physically and mentally fit for one. It's the responsible thing to do, and that's all I really care about. We won't agree, and that's fine.

quote:
Since you just admitted that nothing can be done about the black market, why do keep wanting legislation that goes against the general public?

That's like creating legislation banning people from owning a car, except those who meet the criteria set up by the "elite legislators".


No, it's like allowing cars and trucks, but banning owning a tank.

Let me be clear, I don't care if a gun owner is slightly inconvenienced if they want to register to buy advanced weaponry. I don't think taking a few extra steps to own an AR-15 is infringing on any right, if you can always buy your pistol and shotgun at Walmart. And I believe less people would die in our mass shootings. To allow one's own irritation with a little extra work to get in the way of preventing less murders, is hard to comprehend.



!) What type tank would you like to buy? Do a google search for who sells them.
2) The AR-15 is a semi-auto rifle, no different that a Glenfield Model 60, Mossberg 702, Remington 7400, Henry AR-7, and hundreds of other semi-auto rifles. I fervently hope you know the difference between semi-auto and full auto.
3) Walmart recently announced that certain stores will no longer carry firearms and ammunition. I haven't seen the list of what locations yet.


Look up and see how many, never mind, you probably wouldn't, so here are the 2017 figures from the FBI.
Rifles (Note: no breakdown on what type used) 403 murders
blunt objects-Clubs, hammers, and such 467 murders
Personal (hands, feet, fist, etc.) 692 murders
Knives (Again no breakdown) 1,591 murders

Wow, why aren't you out campaigning for the banning of knives since they are used in almost 400% more murders than rifles?
Should we go about cutting off feet, hands, and fists off everyone since they are used in 170% more murders than rifles?
What about baseball bats, clubs, hammers, tire irons, iron pipe, and other heavy objects than can be used in a murder.


Do you think people should undergo a psychiatric test before getting a drivers license? A car is a big dangerous item that causes more deaths than firearms every year, and some are murders.



Stop using logic, it does not fit the narrative.


Their narrative doesn't fit anything, and their "facts" are quickly disproved, but---they keep using them, which is silly.
That makes me laugh at them.

Anybody seen BoytonBro? He still owes me 12 AR-15s.


BIGV - 11/9/2019 at 01:11 PM

quote:
Calm down. Show proof of your 400% bullsh*t, or stay at the kids table.


quote:
If you think it’s smart to sell them, be my guest, no need to get so defensive.


I love this!


Bhawk - 11/9/2019 at 03:41 PM

No one is taking all the guns away. Ever.

There continues to be zero realistic intention by any person of power to confiscate America’s guns.

No one is taking all the guns away.

Ever.


Bhawk - 11/9/2019 at 03:46 PM

quote:
Most recent email from Bernie..."new immigration plan - the most progressive ever" - oh boy!


I’m not down with all those bullet points, but some are worthy of discussion and have been for decades now.

Just vote for Trump again, man. That way you don’t have to think about stuff. He’s got it handled.


BrerRabbit - 11/9/2019 at 04:40 PM

quote:
The sad reality is that there are millions of adults in this country who suffer from mental illness . . .


And to top it off, an even more sad reality is they even managed to get one of their number elected POTUS.

The inmates are running the asylum.


Jerry - 11/9/2019 at 05:26 PM

quote:
The sad reality is that there are millions of adults in this country who suffer from mental illness and go completely undetected and undiagnosed. Obviously this is the root, but because of this unfortunate reality, I think it’s the height of irresponsibility to give them such easy paths to obtain high powered artillery. If you are in the group of people that wants to leave this path wide open for them to purchase one, then own it proud boys!

[Edited on 11/9/2019 by Skydog32103]


I proudly, proudly claim that I back the Constitution. No doubt about it.

How do you predict FUTURE mental illness? Do you just deny everyone the right to purchase firearms?

Do you back mental health checks for those running for political office?
Would you back legislation that would take armed protection details away from the politicians that would deny a law abiding American citizen the right to own a firearm to protect themselves and their family?
Would you vote for a politician whose concept of reality has him/her believe that it's easier to purchase an AR-15 than a cap gun?
https://twitter.com/CoreyBooker/status/1125891720632307715/photo/1

There is no easy path to own high powered artillery. You have to undergo a full FBI background check, local investigation, and quite a few other legal hoops to purchase artillery. It takes a long time (years) and costs a lot of money too.

Why bring in the subject of artillery in a discussion on AR-15 rifles?


Jerry - 11/9/2019 at 07:22 PM

quote:
quote:
Look up and see how many, never mind, you probably wouldn't, so here are the 2017 figures from the FBI.
Rifles (Note: no breakdown on what type used) 403 murders
blunt objects-Clubs, hammers, and such 467 murders
Personal (hands, feet, fist, etc.) 692 murders
Knives (Again no breakdown) 1,591 murders


That’s about 3,000 murders...what about the other 30,000 plus that aren’t mentioned? Why mention only a small portion of murders? Maybe you ought to post a link. And it doesn’t even specify type of rifle! Good one Jerry!

quote:
Wow, why aren't you out campaigning for the banning of knives since they are used in almost 400% more murders than rifles?
Should we go about cutting off feet, hands, and fists off everyone since they are used in 170% more murders than rifles?
What about baseball bats, clubs, hammers, tire irons, iron pipe, and other heavy objects than can be used in a murder.


Calm down. Show proof of your 400% bullsh*t, or stay at the kids table.

quote:
Their narrative doesn't fit anything, and their "facts" are quickly disproved, but---they keep using them, which is silly.
That makes me laugh at them.


I posted an opinion, and you seem to have an issue with it. You’ve shown no stats, no links, nothing but your own narrative based on silly fictional stats. (I won’t hold my breath for a link to those stats).

If you think it’s smart to sell them, be my guest, no need to get so defensive.



Let's see 403 murders by rifles, 1,591 murders by knives. 403 goes into 1,591 almost 4 times (3.947890818858564 to be exact). That means there were almost an increase of 400% in murders with knives than rifles. Third grade math, and who was your third grade teacher?
All you have to do is look up FBI murder statistics for 2017
https://ucr.fbi.gov/crime-in-the-u.s/2017/crime-in-the-u.s.-2017/tables/exp anded-homicide-data-table-11.xls

Reason other murder weapons weren't mentioned? We weren't discussing those, but I included ones that had a higher ratio than rifles to give you some idea of what else was used to murder people.

Your opinion is fine, and I'll defend your Constitutional right to voice it. Posting non-existent "facts" brings out the teacher in me and I try to inform posters how they are misinformed.
Ask anyone who has been here for a while.

Please don't become like these people:



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=02bIxJc8CHY


Jerry - 11/9/2019 at 07:38 PM

quote:
quote:
I proudly, proudly claim that I back the Constitution. No doubt about it.


Making it harder to purchase AR-15s has nothing to do with the Constitution.

quote:
How do you predict FUTURE mental illness? Do you just deny everyone the right to purchase firearms?


What does this have to do with anything? We already know they are out there!

quote:
Do you back mental health checks for those running for political office?


Bizarre to compare AR-15s to politicians.

quote:
Would you back legislation that would take armed protection details away from the politicians that would deny a law abiding American citizen the right to own a firearm to protect themselves and their family?
Would you vote for a politician whose concept of reality has him/her believe that it's easier to purchase an AR-15 than a cap gun?
https://twitter.com/CoreyBooker/status/1125891720632307715/photo/1


This is irrelvant gibberish, that has nothing to do with what I'm discussing. If you have a point, I suggest you make it.

quote:
There is no easy path to own high powered artillery. You have to undergo a full FBI background check, local investigation, and quite a few other legal hoops to purchase artillery. It takes a long time (years) and costs a lot of money too.

Why bring in the subject of artillery in a discussion on AR-15 rifles?


Good, lets do the same for AR-15s. I think it's a good idea to make it harder to purchase an AR-15, and you don't.......good for you.

What, no response to your ridiculous 3,000 murders and 400% silliness?

[Edited on 11/9/2019 by Skydog32103]


Limiting access to any law abiding citizen to any firearm they wish to own IS against the Constitution, or don't you believe in "the right of THE PEOPLE to keep and bear arms" as a fundamental right given in the Constitution?

Politicians should be held to a higher standard than others. They are the ones who vote in the laws, as you well know.
A mentally deranged politician can cause more potential devastation than any mass shooter.
You don't think it would be important that they have knowledge of what they are voting on, and have a good mental grasp of what is real and what is fantasy?

Shouldn't those who don't want the American citizen the right of "Equal Protection Under The Law" have to follow their own rules?

Who is WE, and how do they know who is going to have future mental illness?

I'd like to meet up with them and get the Powerball winning numbers for the next billion dollar jackpot.

Concerning the rest, see previous post.


Jerry - 11/9/2019 at 11:04 PM

quote:
quote:
Do you think people should undergo a psychiatric test before getting a drivers license? A car is a big dangerous item


This is beyond stupid. Most states require drivers ed, and all require a thorough written exam to get a license, followed by a physical demonstration with an instructor, followed by license renewal every 4 years, and involves public traffic laws that are heavily monitored by police, with regulated speed limits, etc. I could only HOPE that gun laws become as diligent as our autmotive laws - thank you for pointing that out.


BUT, how do you know that person isn't one of your unverified "millions" of adults who are undergoing undetected mental illness? How many people could one of your "undetected" maniacs kill on a downtown street in say NYC during New Years Eve?

ALSO, could you post a link that gives the number of "undetecteds", what region (Washington, DC when Congress is in session is a given) they live in, and age, description, race, gender, and income so those of us who are sane can stay away from those areas.

I would also like to see instruction in gun safety and marksmanship in every school. Too bad it isn't offered like it used to be with all those "liberal parents" not wanting their child touching a firearm that stopped even the Eddie Eagle program being offered in grade schools.


Stephen - 11/10/2019 at 01:40 AM

quote:
quote:
It doesn’t just apply to players
You can’t tell the field of Dem POTUS candidates w/out a scorecard either
Best of luck to the newest one, Mayor Bloomberg - if Alabamans vote for him it could give him momentum for the more familiar northern states
still think Hillary will throw her hat in the ring too at some point - as some of the ‘weaker sisters’ end their campaigns


For the umpteenth time, neither HC nor Michelle Obama will run for prez this cycle.

Bloomberg will come & go.

[Edited on 11/8/2019 by MartinD28]


On your mention of Michelle, yes, she has stated that she’s not a candidate (altho that was before her win in NH)
Hillary has not made that definitive statement
She could still be smarting from the last election &, seeing the nondescript candidates in her own party along with the low opinion of Trump - wouldn’t be surprising to see her take another try at it -
But you’re right, she’s 72 years old, might just decide to leave well enough alone & enjoy her retirement w/Bill
You never know - the public mood is fickle, fluctuating frequently

[Edited on 11/10/2019 by Stephen]


BrerRabbit - 11/14/2019 at 01:52 AM

I have noticed Yang standing out from the Democratic herd. I like what I'm hearing there. It is a mystery to me that an upstart Republican or Independent, or has not leapt into the moderate breach - huge windfall opportunity there, could so easily.steal the field from the extremists.


BIGV - 11/14/2019 at 02:00 AM

quote:
For the umpteenth time, neither HC nor Michelle Obama will run for prez this cycle.


Worthy of a quote, because you never know.....


BrerRabbit - 11/14/2019 at 02:38 AM

Why all the Hilary and Michelle campfire ghost tales? So what if they do run? Is this a cause for concern? You guys seem kinda spooked about it. Kinda like in horror movies at the end where you think the monster was dead but it comes back.

So yeah, Hilary Shmilary. Other than the prospect of the progressive novelty of a woman president, which I thought was great in terms of women's rights and a long overdue symbolic boost for young women - I really don't see how Hilary Clinton warranted so much attention, negative or positive. She was pretty bland and lackluster, standard middle of the road corporate US political issue. Not much to love or hate. Why you all hate her so much is beyond me. I even started a thread on it, page after page of not one articulate response. Had to draw the conclusion that it was simply some gut level anti-fem thing. A lot of guys just really dislike and distrust women deep down I've noticed.


[Edited on 11/14/2019 by BrerRabbit]


Stephen - 11/14/2019 at 04:20 PM

Bill Weld is not alone
Newest “officially declared Democratic 2020 POTUS candidate” is former Mass governor Deval Patrick - crazy - guessing more will declare - including, but not limited to, Hillary (not to creep you out brer, just sayin) - since I dislike & distrust women : - good laugh

Mayb Gov Patrick sees & is attempting to seize moderate-ground voters, someone mentioned that in a previous post - he seemed liked & respected as governor

[Edited on 11/14/2019 by Stephen]


MartinD28 - 11/14/2019 at 05:02 PM

quote:
Bill Weld is not alone
Newest “officially declared Democratic 2020 POTUS candidate” is former Mass governor Deval Patrick - crazy - guessing more will declare - including, but not limited to, Hillary (not to creep you out brer, just sayin) - since I dislike & distrust women : - good laugh

Mayb Gov Patrick sees & is attempting to seize moderate-ground voters, someone mentioned that in a previous post - he seemed liked & respected as governor

[Edited on 11/14/2019 by Stephen]


I like Gov Patrick. Not sure what makes him think he can enter now, put together an organization, and actually challenge. He will come and go similar to de Blasio - puff of smoke, non-contender, and gone.

I also doubt Bloomberg will make much inroads. Previously he was polling 2% in Iowa.

There's enough to choose from in the existing pool, and several poll over Russian Don.

But for those who clamor, there's always Hillary. The betting window is open for $100 bets that says she won't run. Anybody still posting that she will, back your posts. All winnings go to charity.


Stephen - 11/14/2019 at 05:45 PM

Odds are too long right now - she’s still got 2-3 mos. to decide - in the intemperate political climate, a lot can happen between now & then
She has name recognition & already has her team of people from the 2016 campaign still in place - she made a good run at it then, if the field remains anonymous she might be urged to run yet - whether she would, who knows

[Edited on 11/14/2019 by Stephen]


BrerRabbit - 11/14/2019 at 06:33 PM

I hope Nurse Ratchet doesn't run again. Getting sick of all these fossilized 20th century throwbacks. Would really like to see some young blood on deck, new ideas, new style. This oldschool kremlin hardline krap is beyond stale by now.


BIGV - 11/14/2019 at 07:19 PM

quote:
I hope Nurse Ratchet doesn't run again


quote:
Odds are too long right now - she’s still got 2-3 mos. to decide


quote:
But for those who clamor, there's always Hillary.


quote:
guessing more will declare - including, but not limited to, Hillary


quote:
Hillary has not made that definitive statement



This is a lot of Hillary talk for someone "Who will never run again"


BrerRabbit - 11/14/2019 at 08:22 PM

quote:
This is a lot of Hillary talk for someone "Who will never run again"


Classic trolling.

We were responding to all the noise you and Goober were making. Whatever! And why do you guys even give a crap if she runs or not? So you can still have your one reason you like Trump? Who cares?


BIGV - 11/14/2019 at 08:23 PM

quote:
quote:
This is a lot of Hillary talk for someone "Who will never run again"


Classic trolling.

We were responding to all the noise you and Goober were making. Whatever! And why do you guys even give a crap if she runs or not? So you can still have your one reason you like Trump? Who cares?


Because I believe she will run, she can't help it. Classic "I must be in the news"....


BrerRabbit - 11/14/2019 at 08:27 PM

Great! Whoopee!! You believe Hilary will run. So? Are you gonna take MartinD28's charity bet challenge? That would almost make the subject of Hilary interesting.

[Edited on 11/14/2019 by BrerRabbit]


Stephen - 11/14/2019 at 08:28 PM

They’re mostly mine, will stop beating that subject into the ground - didn’t wanna step up to the window just yet

Richard Nixon & Ronald Reagan succeeded in their second try at it - Hillary was quoted yesterday on Fox News that she’s “under enormous pressure to run”

All roads lead to NH in February, by way of the Iowa caucuses - then the campaigns heat up in anticipation of the DNC, while the fringe candidates throw in the towel - good Americans one & all


[Edited on 11/14/2019 by Stephen]


BIGV - 11/14/2019 at 09:08 PM

quote:
Great! Whoopee!! You believe Hilary will run. So? Are you gonna take MartinD28's charity bet challenge? That would almost make the subject of Hilary interesting.


Sure will and no charity here, I'll expect to be paid.


BrerRabbit - 11/14/2019 at 09:26 PM

quote:
quote:
Great! Whoopee!! You believe Hilary will run. So? Are you gonna take MartinD28's charity bet challenge? That would almost make the subject of Hilary interesting.


quote:
Sure will and no charity here, I'll expect to be paid.



Nice. Now this is getting interesting. I'd like to wager but I have no idea what may happen. How much you stake?


nebish - 11/21/2019 at 04:22 AM

Actually watched some of the debate tonight. I've heard the jokes about how often Biden brings up Obama's name even if it isn't related. It isn't a joke, he actually does that...a lot.


porkchopbob - 11/21/2019 at 01:44 PM

quote:
Actually watched some of the debate tonight. I've heard the jokes about how often Biden brings up Obama's name even if it isn't related. It isn't a joke, he actually does that...a lot.

Yeah, he is trying to ride that wave. He was pretty aggressive last night, not necessarily towards anyone, but in tone. He sounds as scatalogical as Trump at times, not sure where what he is saying is going and starts tripping over his own words. I don't think I could take a debate between Trump and Biden, none of it would make any sense.

It's definitely time for Gabbard to drop out. Wonder Woman didn't do herself any favors last night by trying to attack Pete and getting pie in her face. I'm not sure who is behind Klobuchar, but I'm surprised she is still hanging in there too - she speaks in platitudes and it's not enough.

Harris, Booker, Pete, Warren, all come out of these debates well as far as content and message, but name recognition will give Biden and Sanders a boost to casual voters early on.


Stephen - 11/21/2019 at 02:23 PM

quote:
quote:

Harris, Booker, Pete, Warren, all come out of these debates well as far as content and message, but name recognition will give Biden and Sanders a boost to casual voters early on.


Among elderly voters too - they count for a lot of votes, altho w/two of them, the votes would divide, helping neither - ‘debateable’ IMHO their long-term viability/voter value in the rigors of presidential race -

biggest ups to them too, Joe & Bernie are doing more than most regardless of age/politics/party affiliation, so-forth....


nebish - 11/21/2019 at 02:38 PM

With Booker, says he is danger of not making the next debate, and some of the other candidates who can't make the debates but are still in the race, I feel like it's all being funneled down way ahead of Iowa and New Hampshire. It's like the debate requirements are deciding who the choices are, why not just let the primaries in February determine who stays in moving forward?

At this point the debates are as much about TV ratings and selling advertising for the networks as anything else, but they are dictating the choices.

I know there is a need and a desire to let the real viable candidates have more air time - I just hate that actual voters aren't deciding who stays in or out moving forward.


Stephen - 11/21/2019 at 03:13 PM

It’s a real large field - guessing it’ll shake out as it usually does, w/midrange candidates dropping out after NH & the first few primaries - missed it last nite so don’t know but the debate format w/multiple candidates IMO aren’t much more than TV shows - not informative


Jerry - 11/23/2019 at 02:51 PM

quote:
With Booker, says he is danger of not making the next debate, and some of the other candidates who can't make the debates but are still in the race, I feel like it's all being funneled down way ahead of Iowa and New Hampshire. It's like the debate requirements are deciding who the choices are, why not just let the primaries in February determine who stays in moving forward?

At this point the debates are as much about TV ratings and selling advertising for the networks as anything else, but they are dictating the choices.

I know there is a need and a desire to let the real viable candidates have more air time - I just hate that actual voters aren't deciding who stays in or out moving forward.


Why don't they have "rotational" debates? Have the top eight with two from the lower tier of the qualifications?
The debates also need to have an open forum section that allows questions from the audience, not just the prepared ones that the candidates have probably been given to prepare for the debate.


Bhawk - 11/23/2019 at 04:38 PM

quote:
With Booker, says he is danger of not making the next debate, and some of the other candidates who can't make the debates but are still in the race, I feel like it's all being funneled down way ahead of Iowa and New Hampshire. It's like the debate requirements are deciding who the choices are, why not just let the primaries in February determine who stays in moving forward?

At this point the debates are as much about TV ratings and selling advertising for the networks as anything else, but they are dictating the choices.

I know there is a need and a desire to let the real viable candidates have more air time - I just hate that actual voters aren't deciding who stays in or out moving forward.


This part of the process is not about voters, it’s about donors and voters who donate.

Cory Booker is close to dropping out not because voters aren’t feeling his vibe or his message isn’t resonating...he’s about out of cash. That simple.

There are the huge mega donors and then there are the millions of donors who give $200 or less. Presidential campaigns are ridiculously, extensively, stunningly, idiotically expensive.

Don’t ever let yourself think that any of this or any other campaign by either party is all about issues and message.

I’ve always been intrigued by what people do and don’t blame media for. The manipulative way that “Fake News” has been utilized has been pure mass media genius. Donald Trump and the media are in the most highly addictive co-enabling relationship in the history of modern American culture. Neither one of them can live without the other...mutually shared oxygen.

Red, white and blue ain’t got chit to do with green.

https://www.politico.com/2020-election/president/democratic-primary/candida tes/fundraising-and-campaign-finance-tracker/


Chain - 11/23/2019 at 04:50 PM

The most articulate explanation of our dysfunctional election process I've read, Bhawk....Well said.


Chain - 11/23/2019 at 05:04 PM

A good example of Bhawk's explanation is Elize Stefanik, my representative. She has from day one of the election of Donald Trump walked a very fine line among the constituents of her district here in upstate, NY. She's careful to criticize him only when the polls favor such actions and supports him wholeheartedly when the polls suggest she should.

This district is very Republican and has been so forever. But Republican's who are of the traditional bent. Like myself and many traditional Republicans who reside in this district, she knows Trump is worthy of impeachment but chose in the past several weeks to sell her soul to his enablers and the Fox crowd. Her appearance this week on the tabloid news channel was purely self-serving.

Mostly to raise money from the Trumpies out there for her 2020 campaign and also to lay the ground work for a promising career as a very highly paid lobbyist and/or Fox news analyst should she lose in 2020 to Tedra Cobb.

Ms. Cobb incidentally raised over a million dollars last weekend alone after Stefanik made clear she's caste aside her soul to further her career. However, for Stefanik it's a win win as she either wins re-election or leaves politics for a brief time to make a fortune...Or serve in some capacity in the Trump administration given her obvious attempt to win the Presidents favor the past few weeks.

In the end, this behavior is pretty much what Bhawk described in his oh so eloquent post above....Stefanik's behavior during the hearings and on Fox News is her manipulation of the media and the media's manipulation of her. Sadly, the losers are once again the voters...


Jerry - 11/30/2019 at 04:38 PM

Kamala Harris might be in trouble
https://news.yahoo.com/kamala-harris-suffers-blow-aide-165844171.html

Her aide left with a scathing comment on how the staff has been treated and went to work for Bloomberg.


MartinD28 - 11/30/2019 at 06:24 PM

quote:
Kamala Harris might be in trouble
https://news.yahoo.com/kamala-harris-suffers-blow-aide-165844171.html

Her aide left with a scathing comment on how the staff has been treated and went to work for Bloomberg.




No big deal. Her polling numbers have been poor for months. She had one bright moment in the first debate when she threw a rehearsed line at Biden, got a bit of polling & news cycle traction, and then settled back into the mid/ bottom of the pack. She will NOT be the nominee but maybe a VP candidate mention.


Chain - 11/30/2019 at 06:46 PM

quote:
quote:
Kamala Harris might be in trouble
https://news.yahoo.com/kamala-harris-suffers-blow-aide-165844171.html

Her aide left with a scathing comment on how the staff has been treated and went to work for Bloomberg.




No big deal. Her polling numbers have been poor for months. She had one bright moment in the first debate when she threw a rehearsed line at Biden, got a bit of polling & news cycle traction, and then settled back into the mid/ bottom of the pack. She will NOT be the nominee but maybe a VP candidate mention.


I think she'd make an excellent Attorney General if the Dems. win the White House. But yes, a potential Vice President too.

I think she might be the only Democrat in the race that has the legal skills, chops, and experience as a prosecutor to actually bring some semblance of honor back to the AG position. Barr has disgraced the position to the point that it seems the sole purpose of his tenure is solely to provide cover for Trump.


BIGV - 12/1/2019 at 01:09 AM

quote:
actually bring some semblance of honor back to the AG position.


How has this "Lack of Honor" affected your day to day reality?


MartinD28 - 12/1/2019 at 01:24 AM

quote:
quote:
quote:
Kamala Harris might be in trouble
https://news.yahoo.com/kamala-harris-suffers-blow-aide-165844171.html

Her aide left with a scathing comment on how the staff has been treated and went to work for Bloomberg.




No big deal. Her polling numbers have been poor for months. She had one bright moment in the first debate when she threw a rehearsed line at Biden, got a bit of polling & news cycle traction, and then settled back into the mid/ bottom of the pack. She will NOT be the nominee but maybe a VP candidate mention.


I think she'd make an excellent Attorney General if the Dems. win the White House. But yes, a potential Vice President too.

I think she might be the only Democrat in the race that has the legal skills, chops, and experience as a prosecutor to actually bring some semblance of honor back to the AG position. Barr has disgraced the position to the point that it seems the sole purpose of his tenure is solely to provide cover for Trump.



Barr = Michael Cohen = Roy Cohn = fixers = inside guys protecting the boss politically & with personal problems. All great guys, treated unfairly, and not given proper credit by the fake media (especially the failing NY Times).


BrerRabbit - 12/1/2019 at 02:25 AM

quote:
I think she'd make an excellent Attorney General if the Dems. win the White House. But yes, a potential Vice President too.

I think she might be the only Democrat in the race that has the legal skills, chops, and experience as a prosecutor to actually bring some semblance of honor back to the AG position. Barr has disgraced the position to the point that it seems the sole purpose of his tenure is solely to provide cover for Trump.


She's got the Right Stuff.


Jerry - 12/1/2019 at 02:40 AM

quote:
quote:
quote:
Kamala Harris might be in trouble
https://news.yahoo.com/kamala-harris-suffers-blow-aide-165844171.html

Her aide left with a scathing comment on how the staff has been treated and went to work for Bloomberg.




No big deal. Her polling numbers have been poor for months. She had one bright moment in the first debate when she threw a rehearsed line at Biden, got a bit of polling & news cycle traction, and then settled back into the mid/ bottom of the pack. She will NOT be the nominee but maybe a VP candidate mention.


I think she'd make an excellent Attorney General if the Dems. win the White House. But yes, a potential Vice President too.

I think she might be the only Democrat in the race that has the legal skills, chops, and experience as a prosecutor to actually bring some semblance of honor back to the AG position. Barr has disgraced the position to the point that it seems the sole purpose of his tenure is solely to provide cover for Trump.




Are you sure you want her as the AG?

https://californiaglobe.com/local/san-francisco-/kamala-is-in/

Found several articles from as far back as 2010 about case dismissals due to not informing defense about misconduct by lab technicians, refusing to re-test DNA for a person that was almost executed before a judge ordered the tests (which Harris challenged), perjury by prosecutors under her, using her office to intimidate a whistle blower involved in the Planned Parenthood case of selling aborted fetus organs, and the list goes on---


Chain - 12/1/2019 at 10:26 AM

quote:
quote:
quote:
quote:
Kamala Harris might be in trouble
https://news.yahoo.com/kamala-harris-suffers-blow-aide-165844171.html

Her aide left with a scathing comment on how the staff has been treated and went to work for Bloomberg.




No big deal. Her polling numbers have been poor for months. She had one bright moment in the first debate when she threw a rehearsed line at Biden, got a bit of polling & news cycle traction, and then settled back into the mid/ bottom of the pack. She will NOT be the nominee but maybe a VP candidate mention.


I think she'd make an excellent Attorney General if the Dems. win the White House. But yes, a potential Vice President too.

I think she might be the only Democrat in the race that has the legal skills, chops, and experience as a prosecutor to actually bring some semblance of honor back to the AG position. Barr has disgraced the position to the point that it seems the sole purpose of his tenure is solely to provide cover for Trump.




Are you sure you want her as the AG?

https://californiaglobe.com/local/san-francisco-/kamala-is-in/

Found several articles from as far back as 2010 about case dismissals due to not informing defense about misconduct by lab technicians, refusing to re-test DNA for a person that was almost executed before a judge ordered the tests (which Harris challenged), perjury by prosecutors under her, using her office to intimidate a whistle blower involved in the Planned Parenthood case of selling aborted fetus organs, and the list goes on---


Yes, I still think she'd be a big improvement on the current occupant of the AG position. As well as the racist, bigot who held it prior to Barr.


Chain - 12/3/2019 at 09:48 PM

Kamala Harris officially ended her campaign today.....I suspect, as mentioned earlier in this thread, she may yet be on the ticket. Or in the Democratic administration in 2021....


nebish - 12/4/2019 at 04:41 AM

quote:
quote:
With Booker, says he is danger of not making the next debate, and some of the other candidates who can't make the debates but are still in the race, I feel like it's all being funneled down way ahead of Iowa and New Hampshire. It's like the debate requirements are deciding who the choices are, why not just let the primaries in February determine who stays in moving forward?

At this point the debates are as much about TV ratings and selling advertising for the networks as anything else, but they are dictating the choices.

I know there is a need and a desire to let the real viable candidates have more air time - I just hate that actual voters aren't deciding who stays in or out moving forward.


This part of the process is not about voters, it’s about donors and voters who donate.

Cory Booker is close to dropping out not because voters aren’t feeling his vibe or his message isn’t resonating...he’s about out of cash. That simple.

There are the huge mega donors and then there are the millions of donors who give $200 or less. Presidential campaigns are ridiculously, extensively, stunningly, idiotically expensive.

Don’t ever let yourself think that any of this or any other campaign by either party is all about issues and message.

I’ve always been intrigued by what people do and don’t blame media for. The manipulative way that “Fake News” has been utilized has been pure mass media genius. Donald Trump and the media are in the most highly addictive co-enabling relationship in the history of modern American culture. Neither one of them can live without the other...mutually shared oxygen.

Red, white and blue ain’t got chit to do with green.

https://www.politico.com/2020-election/president/democratic-primary/candida tes/fundraising-and-campaign-finance-tracker/


quote:
The most articulate explanation of our dysfunctional election process I've read, Bhawk....Well said.


Why are these candidates dropping out before the primaries though?

What is so different...in 4 years has it become that much more expensive than when all those Republicans were running? In early 2016 they still have the pre-debate with the lesser candidates and the main debate. Ben Carson and Rand Paul were still participating in 2016 debates, so was Christie. Maybe they had more money than Booker and Harris?

For the Demcorats this year, you still have guys like Michael Bennett in the race.

I just don't get why you run for POTUS and drop out before you actually get to when the first votes get counted.

Sure it's about money....maybe Booker and Harris and everyone else who dropped out don't know how to do it, and maybe Bennett and Delaney have it all firgured out? I mean, I find that hard to believe, but if you want to run for President and are serious about it stick around to see if people are going to pick you in Iowa and New Hampshire. Other people with less money are doing so, maybe one of them will splash at some point.


MartinD28 - 12/4/2019 at 05:43 PM

quote:
quote:
quote:
With Booker, says he is danger of not making the next debate, and some of the other candidates who can't make the debates but are still in the race, I feel like it's all being funneled down way ahead of Iowa and New Hampshire. It's like the debate requirements are deciding who the choices are, why not just let the primaries in February determine who stays in moving forward?

At this point the debates are as much about TV ratings and selling advertising for the networks as anything else, but they are dictating the choices.

I know there is a need and a desire to let the real viable candidates have more air time - I just hate that actual voters aren't deciding who stays in or out moving forward.


This part of the process is not about voters, it’s about donors and voters who donate.

Cory Booker is close to dropping out not because voters aren’t feeling his vibe or his message isn’t resonating...he’s about out of cash. That simple.

There are the huge mega donors and then there are the millions of donors who give $200 or less. Presidential campaigns are ridiculously, extensively, stunningly, idiotically expensive.

Don’t ever let yourself think that any of this or any other campaign by either party is all about issues and message.

I’ve always been intrigued by what people do and don’t blame media for. The manipulative way that “Fake News” has been utilized has been pure mass media genius. Donald Trump and the media are in the most highly addictive co-enabling relationship in the history of modern American culture. Neither one of them can live without the other...mutually shared oxygen.

Red, white and blue ain’t got chit to do with green.

https://www.politico.com/2020-election/president/democratic-primary/candida tes/fundraising-and-campaign-finance-tracker/


quote:
The most articulate explanation of our dysfunctional election process I've read, Bhawk....Well said.


Why are these candidates dropping out before the primaries though?

What is so different...in 4 years has it become that much more expensive than when all those Republicans were running? In early 2016 they still have the pre-debate with the lesser candidates and the main debate. Ben Carson and Rand Paul were still participating in 2016 debates, so was Christie. Maybe they had more money than Booker and Harris?

For the Demcorats this year, you still have guys like Michael Bennett in the race.

I just don't get why you run for POTUS and drop out before you actually get to when the first votes get counted.

Sure it's about money....maybe Booker and Harris and everyone else who dropped out don't know how to do it, and maybe Bennett and Delaney have it all firgured out? I mean, I find that hard to believe, but if you want to run for President and are serious about it stick around to see if people are going to pick you in Iowa and New Hampshire. Other people with less money are doing so, maybe one of them will splash at some point.


Some run to get their name out there knowing well they have no chance. Some are looking for future admin positions.

Bennett and Delaney are rarely mentioned and have practically no traction. They can hang around but will have next to zero impact.

Unfortunately money is much the name of the game. I've never given a dime to a candidate & never will. Way too much money in politics as it is. Money in politics breeds ownership & corruption. Thank you SCOTUS for Citizens United decision.


nebish - 12/5/2019 at 03:11 AM

I donated $20 to Delaney twice (once $20.20)....but he keeps asking for more


Bhawk - 12/6/2019 at 04:17 AM

quote:
Why are these candidates dropping out before the primaries though?



How do you pay a campaign staff, travel, lodging, food, signs, mailers, heaven forbid tv ads with no money?


nebish - 12/7/2019 at 04:30 AM

quote:
quote:
Why are these candidates dropping out before the primaries though?



How do you pay a campaign staff, travel, lodging, food, signs, mailers, heaven forbid tv ads with no money?




Some candidates are doing it. I guess the ones who dropped out aren't fit to oversee a federal budget anyway, they must've misspent their donations.


BIGV - 12/7/2019 at 04:38 AM

quote:
quote:
quote:
Why are these candidates dropping out before the primaries though?



How do you pay a campaign staff, travel, lodging, food, signs, mailers, heaven forbid tv ads with no money?




Some candidates are doing it. I guess the ones who dropped out aren't fit to oversee a federal budget anyway, they must've misspent their donations.


Or, the same leaders in the democratic party who "pre-determined" that Hillary would be the Candidate in '16 are at it again.....A little convincing here and there that you are not a viable candidate, narrows the field a little at a time doesn't it?


Chain - 12/7/2019 at 10:47 PM

quote:
quote:
quote:
quote:
Why are these candidates dropping out before the primaries though?



How do you pay a campaign staff, travel, lodging, food, signs, mailers, heaven forbid tv ads with no money?




Some candidates are doing it. I guess the ones who dropped out aren't fit to oversee a federal budget anyway, they must've misspent their donations.


Or, the same leaders in the democratic party who "pre-determined" that Hillary would be the Candidate in '16 are at it again.....A little convincing here and there that you are not a viable candidate, narrows the field a little at a time doesn't it?


Quick BigV, call the Trump campaign! They're scrambling for scandal to pin on the Dems....That Ukraine/Biden scandal idea seems to have got only minimal traction but your idea, well, it could save the day for the Trump syndicate in 2020.

It worked the last time, run that play again, I say!


Bhawk - 12/8/2019 at 02:25 PM

quote:
quote:
quote:
Why are these candidates dropping out before the primaries though?



How do you pay a campaign staff, travel, lodging, food, signs, mailers, heaven forbid tv ads with no money?




Some candidates are doing it. I guess the ones who dropped out aren't fit to oversee a federal budget anyway, they must've misspent their donations.


Dozens of failed businesses and bankrupting a casino five times didn’t seem to matter to...aw, forget it. I gotta stop expecting conservatives to actually own their s—t.

Anyway, the money...

TV ad spend so far...

Tom Steyer (Who?) $47 million
Michael Bloomberg (In two weeks) $35 million
All other Dem candidates combined... $15 million

I’m just as partisan as the next guy, but if anyone wants to discuss the swing to oligarchy we are looking at here on both sides of the ball, I’m game...


OriginalGoober - 12/24/2019 at 12:23 AM

Giving this a bump up....

I dont see much activity from the base that regularly checks in here to feast on the impeachment tidbits. There is an election coming and the impeachment gamble is all thats getting the base jazzed-up it seems.

I kinda liked Mayor Pete in the wine bunker with the billionaires. He has an Obama-like appeal, but not to the point of charming people into awarding Nobel Prizes based on appeal alone and not results based. The country wont survive another all-talk no- action style of governing (Obamas last term).


BrerRabbit - 12/24/2019 at 04:19 AM

quote:
The country wont survive another all-talk no- action style of governing (Obamas last term).


Yes it will too survive just fine. We are surviving the Trump fiasco, and will survive another four years, and will survive whatever after that.

I know the rent is in arrears
The dog has not been fed in years
It's even worse than it appears
but it's all right.









[Edited on 12/24/2019 by BrerRabbit]


nebish - 1/15/2020 at 01:06 AM

Iowa Caucus less than 3 weeks away.

Debate tonight.

Warren and Sanders turning on eachother?


OriginalGoober - 1/15/2020 at 02:09 AM

Trump is killing it in Milwaukee, Wisconsin tonite, the state Hillary never visited in 2016. The crowd even brought back the "Lock Her Up" chant. Nancy is supposed to be serving up the Articles of Impeachment as well. Number one economy, Number one oil & gas producer, Stock Market close to 30,000, record low unemployment. In contrast on this historic night to all this is the democratic debate with Sanders and Warren squaring off to see who can go further left.


BrerRabbit - 1/15/2020 at 03:50 AM

quote:
The crowd even brought back the "Lock Her Up" chant


@pops - we need green shirt guy on this


BrerRabbit - 1/15/2020 at 04:03 PM

We have passed the dumbdown failsafe. Unfortunately democracy requires a certain basic level of enlightenment of the citizenry to function. This is why it never could have existed before the Renaissance. And so we descend back into the status quo of elite tyranny. It was fun while it lasted, naught but an ephemeral pipe dream conjured up by a comfortable educated merchant class well versed in the Enlightenment thinkers. America was the crowning glory of the Age of Reason. The curtain of ignorance and superstition falls, close of play, The Age of Reason is over.

2020 will be the last election.


BIGV - 1/15/2020 at 05:02 PM

quote:
The biggest mistake Democrats are making is ignoring what made Obama so dominant - his cool composure and refusal to go low.


Disagree. president Obama was that one in a thousand type of diplomat, the right man at the right time. The lack of a Candidate of any caliber capable of attracting the type of popularity or media attention needed.....is on the Democratic leadership. What in the Hell was Tom Steyer doing out there? Where is Andrew Yang?....Elizabeth Warren?...Really?...Bernie Saunders?...These are the best this party has to offer?


BrerRabbit - 1/15/2020 at 05:09 PM

quote:
Where is Andrew Yang?


I am asking the same question - longshot dark horse but easily the best they have.


Rusty - 1/15/2020 at 05:21 PM

As much as I dislike the current administration, it looks like the Democrats are beginning to disintegrate.

The infighting seems to be turning off a lot of potential voters. Elizabeth Warren's new claim that Bernie told her that a woman couldn't become President reminds me of the Modern Family episode where the female real estate agent (played by Ellen Barkin) throws herself into the bushes (while the clients aren't looking) and then accuses Phil of pushing her in. Bernie denies making the comment ... leaving voters with a "he said - she said" dilemma.

With the exception of Bernie, the Dem's are really starting to unfold as gentler Republicans in Democrat clothing ... or what I'd call, "centrists".

Buckle up for four more years of the orange one.


BIGV - 1/15/2020 at 05:39 PM

quote:
Buckle up for four more years of the orange one.


And if this is the case, the blame will lie squarely on the shoulders of Democratic "leadership"....

My girlfriend commented last night that Biden looked like he "arose from his casket for this event"


Rusty - 1/15/2020 at 05:41 PM

quote:
quote:
Buckle up for four more years of the orange one.


And if this is the case, the blame will lie squarely on the shoulders of Democratic "leadership"....

My girlfriend commented last night that Biden looked like he "arose from his casket for this event"


If it's GOTTA be another old @$$ white man ... can it at least be Bernie?


Stephen - 1/15/2020 at 05:48 PM

Two ex-Massachusetts governors, Deval Patrick & Bill Weld, are in the race - like predecessor Michael Dukakis, they might move up the ranks toward nomination -
w/Trump being so unpopular, apparently, it’s surprising to see so many of his enemies conceding how imminent his his re-election is

Was there a debate last night? thought there was one scheduled


BrerRabbit - 1/16/2020 at 03:22 AM

quote:
My girlfriend commented last night that Biden looked like he "arose from his casket for this event"


Maybe that was just something said when Biden happened to be on screen. Are you sure she was talking about Biden and not your . . .


Jerry - 1/16/2020 at 04:00 AM

quote:
quote:
My girlfriend commented last night that Biden looked like he "arose from his casket for this event"


Maybe that was just something said when Biden happened to be on screen. Are you sure she was talking about Biden and not your . . .


Reminds me of a 1970s movie where a wedding night segment had the wife disrobing and telling her husband that nobody except her doctor had seen this. She didn't know that earlier in the day he was getting out of the backseat of a two door car when the best man slammed the door on his 'gentleman's' tackle".
He said got ya beat and threw open his robe revealing splints and surgical tape claiming, "Mines' still in the original packing crate."


OriginalGoober - 1/17/2020 at 01:45 AM

Looking back on the recent CNN debate, I didnt see a single candidate who could give President Trump a run for his money in a one on one debate AND be electable. I mean Bernie is seasoned enough to do well in a debate but he is a completely un-electable socialist with empty promises of a commune lifestyle. Warren, Snyder, Yang, Klobushar, Buttigieg I could not see them in the role of a commander in chief standing up to Iran or North Korea.




BrerRabbit - 1/17/2020 at 03:30 PM

quote:
I could not see them in the role of a commander in chief standing up to Iran or North Korea.


Just because they don't fit into your "Big Daddy" kinky roleplay doesn't mean any one of them would bend over for hostile nations.


BIGV - 1/17/2020 at 04:46 PM

quote:
quote:
I could not see them in the role of a commander in chief standing up to Iran or North Korea.


Just because they don't fit into your "Big Daddy" kinky roleplay doesn't mean any one of them would bend over for hostile nations.


What?!....His narrative does not match yours?


BrerRabbit - 1/17/2020 at 05:18 PM

quote:
What?!....His narrative does not match yours?


So any time anyone disagrees it means intolerance of "narrative"? How about we just plain old disagree? And what's with your constant repetition of the "narrative" buzzword? It is already a cliché.


Chain - 1/17/2020 at 06:01 PM

It doesn't matter who the Dem. nominee is, it's all about turn out and if the Dems. turn out like they did in the 2018 mid-terms Trump will be in trouble. I'm not saying he'll necessarily lose, but the Dems. will get behind the eventual nominee and make it a tight race. All this talk about the Dems. imploding is wishful thinking on the part of the Trump supporters.

One other interesting caveat is the money Bloomberg and Steyer have pledged to bring to the cause even if they not the nominee. And while Trump has a large and growing money count. The combined Democrat haul thus far has outpaced his fundraising and I suspect will continue to do so but soon all for the nominee.


2112 - 1/18/2020 at 06:58 PM

quote:
quote:
I could not see them in the role of a commander in chief standing up to Iran or North Korea.


Just because they don't fit into your "Big Daddy" kinky roleplay doesn't mean any one of them would bend over for hostile nations.


I don't see any of them saluting a North Korean general like Trump did.


2112 - 1/18/2020 at 07:17 PM

quote:
It doesn't matter who the Dem. nominee is, it's all about turn out and if the Dems. turn out like they did in the 2018 mid-terms Trump will be in trouble. I'm not saying he'll necessarily lose, but the Dems. will get behind the eventual nominee and make it a tight race. All this talk about the Dems. imploding is wishful thinking on the part of the Trump supporters.

One other interesting caveat is the money Bloomberg and Steyer have pledged to bring to the cause even if they not the nominee. And while Trump has a large and growing money count. The combined Democrat haul thus far has outpaced his fundraising and I suspect will continue to do so but soon all for the nominee.




People need to keep in mind, the winner is really dependent on the winner in about 5 states. The rest of the country doesn't matter. If the Democratic candidate can beat Trump in Pennsylvania, Michigan, Wisconsin, and Florida...that's all that matters. If the Democratic candidate doesn't appeal to voters in those states, Trump wins. Trump's favorability never changes. The cult loves their leader no matter what he does. All that matters is voter turnout in a few states.


nebish - 1/20/2020 at 02:56 PM

quote:
People need to keep in mind, the winner is really dependent on the winner in about 5 states. The rest of the country doesn't matter. If the Democratic candidate can beat Trump in Pennsylvania, Michigan, Wisconsin, and Florida...that's all that matters. If the Democratic candidate doesn't appeal to voters in those states, Trump wins. Trump's favorability never changes. The cult loves their leader no matter what he does. All that matters is voter turnout in a few states.


Mostly true in that the outcome of those states will go a long way in determining the overall winner. PA had been solidly blue, going Democrat in every election from Clinton through Obama, until Trump. Same for MI. WI hadn't voted Republican since Reagan, until Trump. So, Bush 41 and 43 were able to win their elections without the benefits of those states. Although the landscape has changed in other places. In 2016 Minnesota was fairly close....as were smaller states like NH and ME....it's hard for me to imagine Trump growing his support in those or most any places.


nebish - 1/20/2020 at 02:58 PM

NYT endorsement:

quote:
In a break with convention, the
editorial board has chosen to endorse two separate
Democratic candidates for president.

Amy Klobuchar and Elizabeth Warren

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2020/01/19/opinion/amy-klobuchar-elizab eth-warren-nytimes-endorsement.html



2112 - 1/20/2020 at 09:59 PM

quote:
quote:
People need to keep in mind, the winner is really dependent on the winner in about 5 states. The rest of the country doesn't matter. If the Democratic candidate can beat Trump in Pennsylvania, Michigan, Wisconsin, and Florida...that's all that matters. If the Democratic candidate doesn't appeal to voters in those states, Trump wins. Trump's favorability never changes. The cult loves their leader no matter what he does. All that matters is voter turnout in a few states.


Mostly true in that the outcome of those states will go a long way in determining the overall winner. PA had been solidly blue, going Democrat in every election from Clinton through Obama, until Trump. Same for MI. WI hadn't voted Republican since Reagan, until Trump. So, Bush 41 and 43 were able to win their elections without the benefits of those states. Although the landscape has changed in other places. In 2016 Minnesota was fairly close....as were smaller states like NH and ME....it's hard for me to imagine Trump growing his support in those or most any places.


I agree and I doubt Trump support has grown in those states. But, does Warren have a better chance in those states than Biden. or Bernie? Maybe I'm wrong, but I think Warren will have a tough time in the states that matter. Even though Sanders may be farther left than Warren, for some reason he seems to connect with the midwestern voters more than she does. However, even with all his faults, I think Biden has the best chance in the states that count in getting votes from the fencesitters.


nebish - 1/27/2020 at 03:17 PM

Des Moines Register endorsement:

quote:

Endorsement: Elizabeth Warren will push an unequal America in the right direction

The Register's editorial Published 6:00 p.m. CT Jan. 25, 2020 | Updated 7:10 p.m. CT Jan. 25, 2020

https://www.desmoinesregister.com/story/opinion/editorials/caucus/2020/01/2 6/elizabeth-warren-president-democrat-iowa-caucuses-des-moines-register-edi torial-board-endorsement/4562157002/



I can't begin to count how many Bloomberg commercial's I've seen. Good enough to push him to 4th in last week's polling.


nebish - 2/1/2020 at 03:18 PM

DNC changing debate requirements for the 2/19 Las Vegas debate. By dropping the donor requirement and doubling the polling requirement, Michael Bloomberg should be able to qualify for his first debate.


Chain - 2/1/2020 at 03:37 PM

quote:
DNC changing debate requirements for the 2/19 Las Vegas debate. By dropping the donor requirement and doubling the polling requirement, Michael Bloomberg should be able to qualify for his first debate.




I heard this tidbit earlier this morning....I must admit, I think a Bloomberg/Trump debate will make for an entertaining couple hours of television should Bloomberg get the nomination.

I wonder who Bloomberg would select as his running mate? Any guesses out there?


BIGV - 2/2/2020 at 01:21 AM

quote:
The rest of the country doesn't matter.


This comment was taken from what I believe to be a whining criticism of the Electoral College. Funny, the exact same peeps on this board complaining about President Trump's alleged lack of respect for the Constitution are the very same ones who are still pissing and moaning about Hillary's loss. The rest of the Country might take exception to the above "argument"....


What State do you live in?


I live in AZ, because I grew tired of the B.S. going on in California... Why don't these States have the same laws?...Because of that very reason, separation from what most would refer to as the "Nonsense going on the neighboring State" ....Each state has a say in the Presidential Election and I love it. Want every vote to be equal?..That formula exists on every level and platform in your local Gubmint, as it should. Why should people in Iowa, Maine and North Dakota be subject to the same ideals and thoughts as those in California and N.Y.?...Don't know?...Because the Forefathers had vision, the same vision that you claim to stand behind when exercising your thoughts on what denotes a valid impeachment. Oh, how that pendulum swings....


BrerRabbit - 2/2/2020 at 04:08 AM

quote:
I live in AZ, because I grew tired of the B.S. going on in California... Why don't these States have the same laws. . .


Because Arizona isn't much of a state, that's why. California is dealing with a population ten times larger. Arizona is basically Phoenix and Tucson with a few other towns scattered around in the middle of a vast US Govt territorial holding. 27% of the state is Native American reservation, 54% public lands, Natl Forest, BLM. Over 80% of the state is Federally managed. It is a few pockets of private commerce and residence surrounded by a hardline socialist govt land monopoly. Without the employment the Federal lands administration provides, and the reservation subsidies -Arizona would collapse. California is a private capitalist paradise compared to Arizona.

Funny thing, for all the anti-govt sentiment re public lands, nowhere do I feel liberty more than out where there are no private lands. Did you know in AZ you can get a permit for 60$ a year from the BLM and live on BLM land year round for free? Cant do that in California. Now THAT is what I call liberty.


BIGV - 2/2/2020 at 04:24 AM

quote:
The typical straw man argument


Jesus, find a new argument


BIGV - 2/2/2020 at 04:51 AM

quote:
jesus, stop doing it.


There is another option. Walk away.

I don't believe you to be capable of ignoring things you find noxious.

Prove me wrong.


nebish - 2/2/2020 at 05:02 AM

quote:
Funny thing, for all the anti-govt sentiment re public lands, nowhere do I feel liberty more than out where there are no private lands. Did you know in AZ you can get a permit for 60$ a year from the BLM and live on BLM land year round for free? Cant do that in California. Now THAT is what I call liberty.


Public land for public use. Let's keep it that way! For all to enjoy (hikers, bikers, atvers and OHVers, horseback riders) and there is even some appropriate and compatible industrial interests. Our public lands are very diverse and can serve the interest of many people. I love them. Let's protect them, but not exclude other positive interests as well. Some people don't want motorized travel on our public lands and seek to exclude them. Some people don't want timber industry on our public lands. It is big enough and we can all benefit from the resources. Like the Coexist bumper sticker for religion? Apply it to public lands.

Yes, I am a paying member of groups supporting motorized recreation on our public Forest Service and BLM lands. I am leaving Wednesday to snowmobile in Colorado's Pike and San Isabel National Forests. I'm thankful and grateful for the opportunity to do so.

Republicans who want to privatize or return these lands to the states are wrong in my opinion. As are those on the left who would want to turn it all into wilderness or national monuments. Public land for public use.


BrerRabbit - 2/2/2020 at 05:19 AM

It is truly one of our finest traditions. State parks all over the place, free or cheap, facilities, no other country has it, and the West has most. Out East was pretty much all locked up before the country went for public lands.

Zero sympathy for these ranchers who think public lands belong to them. Zero. When they get run off by the govt they are getting run off by ME - tax dollars well spent.




[Edited on 2/2/2020 by BrerRabbit]


nebish - 2/2/2020 at 05:30 AM

Yup, the west is the best! Ranchers might have grazing rights and they may've even maintained or improved the acreage leased to them, but it is not their's. Not surprised the act like it is though, if it has been leased to them for generations. Still not right.

I'm surprised Arizona allows camping permits for an entire year, but that is cool.

I have been to public lands in Arizona, California, Nevada in addition to Colorado where I spend most of my nature time. Magnificat places. Truly national treasures, not just the tourist attraction parks, all of it.


BrerRabbit - 2/2/2020 at 04:36 PM

quote:
I'm surprised Arizona allows camping permits for an entire year, but that is cool.


Only out on BLM land - not the more desirable Natl Forest land. And no permanent structures allowed. Very few people know about it. There are a lot of loopholes to where you can live on govt land for fee or even pull in some profit - I know folks who have lived on mining claims under the 1873 mining law. Or if town makes you ill and just visiting isn't enough - just work for the BLM, National Forest or Park Service, you get set up out there.



[Edited on 2/2/2020 by BrerRabbit]


nebish - 2/3/2020 at 09:13 PM

IOWA CAUCUS TONIGHT

Here it is, election season officially begins tonight!

In 5 of the last 7 contested Democrat primaries, the winner of Iowa has gone on to be the nominee.

Party establishment getting nervous about Bernie (again).


Bhawk - 2/3/2020 at 10:04 PM

quote:
quote:
The rest of the country doesn't matter.


This comment was taken from what I believe to be a whining criticism of the Electoral College. Funny, the exact same peeps on this board complaining about President Trump's alleged lack of respect for the Constitution are the very same ones who are still pissing and moaning about Hillary's loss. The rest of the Country might take exception to the above "argument"....


What State do you live in?


I live in AZ, because I grew tired of the B.S. going on in California... Why don't these States have the same laws?...Because of that very reason, separation from what most would refer to as the "Nonsense going on the neighboring State" ....Each state has a say in the Presidential Election and I love it. Want every vote to be equal?..That formula exists on every level and platform in your local Gubmint, as it should. Why should people in Iowa, Maine and North Dakota be subject to the same ideals and thoughts as those in California and N.Y.?...Don't know?...Because the Forefathers had vision, the same vision that you claim to stand behind when exercising your thoughts on what denotes a valid impeachment. Oh, how that pendulum swings....



Except that isn't true.

Win these states...

California
Texas
Florida
New York
Illinois
Pennsylvania
Ohio
Georgia
Michigan
North Carolina
New Jersey

...and you win the Presidency. You don't have to get one vote in the other 39 states to win.


nebish - 2/4/2020 at 12:09 AM

quote:
Except that isn't true.

Win these states...

California
Texas
Florida
New York
Illinois
Pennsylvania
Ohio
Georgia
Michigan
North Carolina
New Jersey

...and you win the Presidency. You don't have to get one vote in the other 39 states to win.


First of all, Jerry, congratulations on yesterday!

Second of all, the same person isn't winning all those states. Then you bring in well win Minnesota and you can lose x or win Virginia and you can lose y if you win z....

Now, it's caucus time!


nebish - 2/4/2020 at 03:52 AM

results delayed for unknown reasons...LOL maybe it's like " **** Bernie won, how can we make it look like Biden did better than he actually did?"


BIGV - 2/4/2020 at 04:10 AM

quote:
Because the Forefathers had vision, the same vision that you claim to stand behind when exercising your thoughts on what denotes a valid impeachment. Oh, how that pendulum swings....



Except that isn't true.

Win these states...

California
Texas
Florida
New York
Illinois
Pennsylvania
Ohio
Georgia
Michigan
North Carolina
New Jersey

...and you win the Presidency. You don't have to get one vote in the other 39 states to win.


Please tell us all just how many of the above states were in existence when the constitution was written? The forefathers new exactly what they were doing.


nebish - 2/4/2020 at 04:39 AM

It's official, the Iowa Caucus is a cluskerfvck!


nebish - 2/4/2020 at 02:31 PM

So everyone comes out of Iowa as a winner!

Sucks for whoever actually ends up getting the most delegates because there won't be any surge or momentum or all the immediate headlines that can help put wind in their sails and put doubt in the other candidates and their supporters.

The closest thing I could pick up on was that Bernie probably won, Mayor Pete might've also done very well, Amy did better than expected and Joe didn't do well...and I didn't get a pulse on where to guess Warren finished. Strange thing there was that CNN and MSNBC didn't carry Warren's speech live. Think it was Biden who they choose to go with who started at the same time, then Biden ended and both networks decided to have their panelists comment about it all while leaving a little box on screen without audio of Warren talking away. They did then go back and play it in it's entirety, but they could've cut in after Biden was done. Kinda feel like she got a little short changed on her air time.


Stephen - 2/4/2020 at 02:57 PM

Primaries begin a week from today, & headline in today’s paper datelined Des Moines IA reads “Weld gets top billing with anti Trump crowd,” & that Bill is concentrating his efforts on a big showing in NH

So maybe Bill Weld is becoming the front runner - impeachment vote comes in the interim, & you never know - Trump’s political enemies, not American citizens, might vote him out yet - it should be a heck of a primary season


Jerry - 2/5/2020 at 12:29 AM




First of all, Jerry, congratulations on yesterday!

Now, it's caucus time!


For what?


OriginalGoober - 2/5/2020 at 12:50 AM

quote:
So everyone comes out of Iowa as a winner!

Sucks for whoever actually ends up getting the most delegates because there won't be any surge or momentum or all the immediate headlines that can help put wind in their sails and put doubt in the other candidates and their supporters.

The closest thing I could pick up on was that Bernie probably won, Mayor Pete might've also done very well, Amy did better than expected and Joe didn't do well...and I didn't get a pulse on where to guess Warren finished. Strange thing there was that CNN and MSNBC didn't carry Warren's speech live. Think it was Biden who they choose to go with who started at the same time, then Biden ended and both networks decided to have their panelists comment about it all while leaving a little box on screen without audio of Warren talking away. They did then go back and play it in it's entirety, but they could've cut in after Biden was done. Kinda feel like she got a little short changed on her air time.


If this is your takeaway from Iowa the dems failed you. You are not remotely excited about anyone.


nebish - 2/5/2020 at 02:01 AM

quote:



First of all, Jerry, congratulations on yesterday!

Now, it's caucus time!


For what?


Bhawk Jerry. He’s a Chiefs fan.


nebish - 2/5/2020 at 02:02 AM

quote:
quote:
So everyone comes out of Iowa as a winner!

Sucks for whoever actually ends up getting the most delegates because there won't be any surge or momentum or all the immediate headlines that can help put wind in their sails and put doubt in the other candidates and their supporters.

The closest thing I could pick up on was that Bernie probably won, Mayor Pete might've also done very well, Amy did better than expected and Joe didn't do well...and I didn't get a pulse on where to guess Warren finished. Strange thing there was that CNN and MSNBC didn't carry Warren's speech live. Think it was Biden who they choose to go with who started at the same time, then Biden ended and both networks decided to have their panelists comment about it all while leaving a little box on screen without audio of Warren talking away. They did then go back and play it in it's entirety, but they could've cut in after Biden was done. Kinda feel like she got a little short changed on her air time.


If this is your takeaway from Iowa the dems failed you. You are not remotely excited about anyone.


You don’t know me at all. Probably a good thing. Doubt I vote for anyone who was in Iowa yesterday.


Jerry - 2/5/2020 at 09:33 PM

quote:
quote:



First of all, Jerry, congratulations on yesterday!

Now, it's caucus time!


For what?


Bhawk Jerry. He’s a Chiefs fan.


OK.


OriginalGoober - 2/7/2020 at 10:21 PM


Bumping up for the debate tonite. I think this is the one Lil' Mike bought his way into and the DNC bent the rules that ended Corey Bookers chances of competing.


OriginalGoober - 2/8/2020 at 01:38 AM

They're getting better at verbalizing their ideas. Andrew Yang is a contender. Listening to Joe is like hearing Al Bundy talking about his 4 touchdown game. Oh, am disappointed no lil' Mike yet.


Bhawk - 2/8/2020 at 02:43 AM

quote:
quote:
Because the Forefathers had vision, the same vision that you claim to stand behind when exercising your thoughts on what denotes a valid impeachment. Oh, how that pendulum swings....



Except that isn't true.

Win these states...

California
Texas
Florida
New York
Illinois
Pennsylvania
Ohio
Georgia
Michigan
North Carolina
New Jersey

...and you win the Presidency. You don't have to get one vote in the other 39 states to win.


Please tell us all just how many of the above states were in existence when the constitution was written? The forefathers new exactly what they were doing.


Purposely and obtusely avoiding the point, as usual.

Although it is inspirational that you feel the forefathers nailed it the first time, right down to women not having the right to vote or a slave being three-fifths of a person. We all gotta admire something.


BIGV - 2/8/2020 at 04:24 AM

quote:
quote:
quote:
Because the Forefathers had vision, the same vision that you claim to stand behind when exercising your thoughts on what denotes a valid impeachment. Oh, how that pendulum swings....



Except that isn't true.

Win these states...

California
Texas
Florida
New York
Illinois
Pennsylvania
Ohio
Georgia
Michigan
North Carolina
New Jersey

...and you win the Presidency. You don't have to get one vote in the other 39 states to win.


Please tell us all just how many of the above states were in existence when the constitution was written? The forefathers new exactly what they were doing.


Purposely and obtusely avoiding the point, as usual.

Although it is inspirational that you feel the forefathers nailed it the first time, right down to women not having the right to vote or a slave being three-fifths of a person. We all gotta admire something.


You did not answer the question


gotdrumz - 2/9/2020 at 01:28 PM

quote:
[

Although it is inspirational that you feel the forefathers nailed it the first time, right down to women not having the right to vote or a slave being three-fifths of a person. We all gotta admire something.


The fact they made the Constitution amenable pretty much nullifies your nitpicking. Do you know for a fact that all the forefathers felt that way about women and/or slaves? Nope They discussed compromised, and came to the best solution they could. Something the I'll in DC couldn't do today. Their cult following would never go for anything like that.


BIGV - 2/9/2020 at 02:15 PM

quote:
they are both talking about how the electoral college could either help or hurt Trump. care to follow-up with their point?


Does this argument pertain only to President Trump? Did not President Obama carry the electoral college?...How about Kennedy?....or Bill Clinton?

I repeat, the forefathers got this right. California emerged as one of the most populous states in the Union, some 73 years after the adoption of the Constitution, proving their insight into the possibility that heavily populated areas should not control what happens everywhere. Saying that smaller states do not count is the most asinine & ignorant thing anyone can write, I suggest you return to H.S. and take civics again.


BrerRabbit - 2/9/2020 at 05:07 PM

Trump win Electoral College = Electoral College good
Trump lose Electoral College = Electoral College bad


BrerRabbit - 2/9/2020 at 05:50 PM

quote:
I repeat


You certainly do.


Bhawk - 2/9/2020 at 06:48 PM

quote:
quote:
quote:
quote:
Because the Forefathers had vision, the same vision that you claim to stand behind when exercising your thoughts on what denotes a valid impeachment. Oh, how that pendulum swings....



Except that isn't true.

Win these states...

California
Texas
Florida
New York
Illinois
Pennsylvania
Ohio
Georgia
Michigan
North Carolina
New Jersey

...and you win the Presidency. You don't have to get one vote in the other 39 states to win.


Please tell us all just how many of the above states were in existence when the constitution was written? The forefathers new exactly what they were doing.


Purposely and obtusely avoiding the point, as usual.

Although it is inspirational that you feel the forefathers nailed it the first time, right down to women not having the right to vote or a slave being three-fifths of a person. We all gotta admire something.


You did not answer the question



Well, damn. I certainly can't not answer your question, that would be tragic.

The point I was making (and you consistently ignore every time I bring it up) is that, depending on how you view it, the Electoral College is actually already mostly a population contest. There's plenty of examples in electoral history where the smaller states didn't matter at all. Take a look at the 2012 map and tell me that Rural America voting for Romney ended up mattering.

I'm not for getting rid of the Electoral College system, so don't make that leap. Personally, the representation math in the Senate is far sillier to me.

As for the Forefather worship, it's equally as asinine to believe that they nailed it all the the first time when it's been changed 27 times since.


Bhawk - 2/9/2020 at 06:48 PM

quote:
quote:
Except that isn't true.

Win these states...

California
Texas
Florida
New York
Illinois
Pennsylvania
Ohio
Georgia
Michigan
North Carolina
New Jersey

...and you win the Presidency. You don't have to get one vote in the other 39 states to win.


First of all, Jerry, congratulations on yesterday!




Thank you!


BrerRabbit - 2/9/2020 at 09:55 PM

quote:
California emerged as one of the most populous states in the Union, some 73 years after the adoption of the Constitution,


California's population boom began around WW2 - in 1900 there were about 2 million people there. When it emerged as a state there weren't many people there, 49ers, settlers, lots of Chinese - maybe half million or so, a lot less if you subtract the Chinese, who weren't allowed citizenship until 1943.

[Edited on 2/9/2020 by BrerRabbit]


BIGV - 2/10/2020 at 07:32 PM

quote:
calm down.


Too funny


BIGV - 2/10/2020 at 07:34 PM

quote:
quote:
California emerged as one of the most populous states in the Union, some 73 years after the adoption of the Constitution,


California's population boom began around WW2 - in 1900 there were about 2 million people there. When it emerged as a state there weren't many people there, 49ers, settlers, lots of Chinese - maybe half million or so, a lot less if you subtract the Chinese, who weren't allowed citizenship until 1943.


Making my point that California was not a colony, has emerged as a population center and should not be the voice of people everywhere.


nebish - 2/11/2020 at 02:33 PM

New Hampshire tonight.

What might it mean if Biden finishes 4th again, or even 5th if Amy can beat him?


MartinD28 - 2/11/2020 at 04:37 PM

quote:
New Hampshire tonight.

What might it mean if Biden finishes 4th again, or even 5th if Amy can beat him?


My gut tells me Joe lives for Nevada, SC, and Super Tuesday. He should perform better then, however I think Mayor Pete is taking away from Joe's votes. Joe's trend has been down. I f Joe is not well up in the mix after those 3 voting days, then he is toast.

I don't think AK gains enough traction to be a real contender. In the end, if Joe is out of the mix, then it'll come down to Bernie, Mayor Pete, and Michael B. I think Bernie's message may be a big liability.

Time will tell.


BIGV - 2/12/2020 at 06:15 AM

Uh-Oh!....Looks like Bloomberg might be a racist Bigot

https://youtu.be/N91_1u36RJE


gotdrumz - 2/12/2020 at 03:07 PM

If somebody makes a derogatory statement about people of color online, does that make them an e-racist?


BIGV - 2/12/2020 at 03:43 PM

quote:
If somebody makes a derogatory statement about people of color online, does that make them an e-racist?


As long as it is the Left doing the accusing.


cyclone88 - 2/12/2020 at 04:04 PM

quote:
don't think AK gains enough traction to be a real contender. In the end, if Joe is out of the mix, then it'll come down to Bernie, Mayor Pete, and Michael B. I think Bernie's message may be a big liability.


Bernie has a #metoo problem along w/his other baggage.

I was interested in the mechanics of the impeachment because it is a rare occurrence on the American landscape. You indulged me. I have zero interest in elections - especially starting back 18 months ago. I'll not interrupt your discussion, but I do want to say the dems are missing the point.

You don't fight polarization w/more polarization. You draw a large enough group through every sector that sees that Trump is a dictator wannabe, disruptor, bot. You find someone richer, smarter, & tougher even if he's not perfect on every issue. Then EVERY single dem gets behind that guy (there's not going to be a woman prez next year). Everyone. All the old guys - Warren, Bernie, Biden - drop out & get behind Bloomberg as much as it might pain them to do so.

This isn't politics as usual. We're in a new galaxy. Trump isn't even going to debate the dem nominee. Why should he? He's in a position of strength & he knows it.

This is from the NYT & lays out a good strategy.
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/02/11/opinion/bloomberg-president-2020.html?ac tion=click&module=Well&pgtype=Homepage§ion=OpEd%20Columnists

Key points are:

We have to get this right. This is no ordinary time, no ordinary Republican Party, no ordinary incumbent, and it will require an extraordinary Democratic machine to triumph.

Because, without doubt, Russia and China also will be “voting” Trump 2020 — for three reasons: (1) Trump keeps America in turmoil and unable to focus on building the infrastructure we need to dominate the 21st century the way we did the 20th. (2) Both Beijing and Moscow know that Trump is so disliked by America’s key allies that he can never galvanize a global coalition against China or Russia. And (3) both Russia and China know that Trump is utterly transactional and will never challenge them on human rights abuses. Trump is their chump, and they will not let him go easily....

...There is one candidate on the Democratic side who has the resources to build a machine big enough to take on the Trump machine.

This candidate also has the toughness to take on Trump, because while Trump was pretending to be a C.E.O. on the show “The Apprentice,” this candidate was actually building one of the most admired global companies as a real C.E.O.

This candidate is not cuddly, he is not always politically correct and he will not always tell you what you want to hear — or try to outbid you on how many free services he’ll give away. He’s made mistakes, especially around stop-and-frisk policing in New York City, which disproportionately targeted black and brown men and for which he recently apologized.

His mistakes, though, have to be weighed against a record of courageously speaking out and devoting enormous personal resources to virtually every progressive cause — gun control, abortion rights, climate change, Planned Parenthood, education reform for predominantly minority schools, affordable housing, income inequality and tax reform. And he has vowed as president to focus on building black wealth, not just ending poverty.

And this candidate knows how to get stuff done — he can fight this fire at the scale of the fire. His team has for years used social networks to promote progressive issues to centrist and conservative audiences. He won’t cede the internet/Facebook/Twitter battlefield to Trump’s team, who are killers in that space.
And this candidate is now rising steadily in the polls. This candidate is Michael Bloomberg. This candidate has Trump very worried.



BrerRabbit - 2/12/2020 at 04:16 PM

@cyclone - Nice writeup thx for taking the time. Good points - a strong moderate could break up this unflushable turd stinkin up the White House.

Depressing that Bernie Sanders is back - he strikes me as a hack.


BIGV - 2/12/2020 at 04:18 PM

quote:
quote:
If somebody makes a derogatory statement about people of color


then the right will elevate them to the White House.


And look at the that!...Here comes a Democratic candidate making the exact same type of allusion...

But that's OK because the other Party has done it as well.

Holy sh*t.


BrerRabbit - 2/12/2020 at 04:26 PM

The noise around Bloomberg shows they may see him as a threat.


BIGV - 2/12/2020 at 04:30 PM

quote:
quote:
As long as it is the Left doing the accusing.


never a denial....so interesting.


I think this goes to the core of your issue here on this board. You've accused and You've inquired, you are curious as to why people do not respond to your questions and "inquisitions"... So, to not answer you is to deny or be evasive. That's quite a level of self importance you have placed on the worth of your own scrutiny. People have thoughts and opinions and it is their choice as when it is important enough to "defend" them. You can't handle that and that's OK. But I would add that even if most were to respond to your interests, your response would be one of disbelief that led to an attempt to prove the other "wrong". This has zero to do with dialogue and everything to do with why I could not care less what you think.


BIGV - 2/12/2020 at 04:32 PM

quote:
The noise around Bloomberg shows they may see him as a threat.



$$$$$$$ He is in the %1 the left seems to have so much disdain for.

Conundrum


BrerRabbit - 2/12/2020 at 04:39 PM

I don't know, but it looks like the Redhat hive is starting to defense swarm.


BIGV - 2/12/2020 at 04:41 PM

quote:
quote:
And look at the that!...Here comes a Democratic candidate making the exact same type of allusion...But that's OK


Is there new data to support this conclusion about Bloomberg’s numbers, or is this just emotion?



Numbers?....I'm referencing his comments about minorities and crime, thus the use of the word "Allusion"


BrerRabbit - 2/12/2020 at 04:49 PM

HAT ALERT HAT ALERT ALL REDHATS FLASH BLITZ SOCIAL MEDIA BLOOMBERG IS A RICH RACIST REPEAT RICH RACIST HAT ALERT HAT ALERT


Stephen - 2/12/2020 at 05:30 PM

quote:
quote:
New Hampshire tonight.

What might it mean if Biden finishes 4th again, or even 5th if Amy can beat him?


My gut tells me Joe lives for Nevada, SC, and Super Tuesday. He should perform better then, however I think Mayor Pete is taking away from Joe's votes. Joe's trend has been down. I f Joe is not well up in the mix after those 3 voting days, then he is toast.

I don't think AK gains enough traction to be a real contender. In the end, if Joe is out of the mix, then it'll come down to Bernie, Mayor Pete, and Michael B. I think Bernie's message may be a big liability.

Time will tell.



Bernie wins, Pete B 2nd, Amy K 3rd, Yang cashes out, guessing 2 of the 3 Mass. candidates, E. Warren & Deval Patrick, will soon follow (Bill Weld has money) - but the top 3 represent a real cross section, which is nice to see

The campaign trail to Milwaukee & the DNC is long - as you said, time will tell


nebish - 2/12/2020 at 05:39 PM

Bloomberg-Klobuchar 2020?


cyclone88 - 2/12/2020 at 05:56 PM

quote:
@cyclone - Nice writeup thx for taking the time. Good points - a strong moderate could break up this unflushable turd stinkin up the White House. Depressing that Bernie Sanders is back - he strikes me as a hack.


They're all hacks if they don't understand that the rules have changed. Trump was emboldened by the impeachment acquittal. He's abusing his powers again by intervening in Roger Stone's sentencing thru Barr & the dem response is "we'll have to have the IG have Barr explain his reasoning" as if Congressional oversight of Trump isn't DOA. I've no idea what it would take for dems & moderate GOPs to realize that politics as usual is OVER in the Trump era & new, aggressive tactics are required to oust him - even if it means very strange bedfellows.




cyclone88 - 2/12/2020 at 05:57 PM

quote:
Bloomberg-Klobuchar 2020?


Bloomberg-former GOP 2020.


BrerRabbit - 2/12/2020 at 06:06 PM

quote:
Bloomberg-Klobuchar 2020?


Solid ticket. I like it.

I hate to bring up the elephant in the room but has the US evolved to the point of electing a Jewish president? Every president has been Protestant except Kennedy, and look at how that worked out. Then Obama, sort of, but he was on the books as a Protestant.

It would be great to break the pattern, but this goes way deeper than electing a black person or a woman - the ultraright Christians and Nazis are gonna freak out if a Jew is president, just watch, it will be the Antichrist, that type of noise. This is a very primitive country.



[Edited on 2/12/2020 by BrerRabbit]


Jerry - 2/12/2020 at 07:19 PM

quote:
quote:
Bloomberg-Klobuchar 2020?


Solid ticket. I like it.

I hate to bring up the elephant in the room but has the US evolved to the point of electing a Jewish president? Every president has been Protestant except Kennedy, and look at how that worked out. Then Obama, sort of, but he was on the books as a Protestant.

It would be great to break the pattern, but this goes way deeper than electing a black person or a woman - the ultraright Christians and Nazis are gonna freak out if a Jew is president, just watch, it will be the Antichrist, that type of noise. This is a very primitive country.



[Edited on 2/12/2020 by BrerRabbit]


I just don't believe that Bloomberg will do as good as he thinks he will across the south or other rural dominant states.


BrerRabbit - 2/12/2020 at 07:36 PM

quote:
Did not President Obama carry the electoral college?


Yes. Obama won both electoral and popular vote in 2008 and 2012. So any argument over Electoral College need not include Obama.


Bhawk - 2/12/2020 at 11:22 PM

Bloomberg should buy all of Trump's debt and call it in, taking all of his holdings and hotels in the process.


nebish - 2/13/2020 at 12:29 AM

I'm seeing a new Bloomberg commercial with old Obama footage and quotes. That's going to make Biden mad, using Obama is his gig!

quote:



I just don't believe that Bloomberg will do as good as he thinks he will across the south or other rural dominant states.


Primary or general? In the primaries he should be able to do as well as any of the candidates left.


Bhawk - 2/13/2020 at 01:18 AM

quote:
So, to not answer you is to deny or be evasive. That's quite a level of self importance you have placed on the worth of your own scrutiny. People have thoughts and opinions and it is their choice as when it is important enough to "defend" them.


Dude. You literally chastised me for not answering your question to me in this thread.


Bhawk - 2/13/2020 at 01:19 AM

quote:
quote:
don't think AK gains enough traction to be a real contender. In the end, if Joe is out of the mix, then it'll come down to Bernie, Mayor Pete, and Michael B. I think Bernie's message may be a big liability.


Bernie has a #metoo problem along w/his other baggage.

I was interested in the mechanics of the impeachment because it is a rare occurrence on the American landscape. You indulged me. I have zero interest in elections - especially starting back 18 months ago. I'll not interrupt your discussion, but I do want to say the dems are missing the point.

You don't fight polarization w/more polarization. You draw a large enough group through every sector that sees that Trump is a dictator wannabe, disruptor, bot. You find someone richer, smarter, & tougher even if he's not perfect on every issue. Then EVERY single dem gets behind that guy (there's not going to be a woman prez next year). Everyone. All the old guys - Warren, Bernie, Biden - drop out & get behind Bloomberg as much as it might pain them to do so.

This isn't politics as usual. We're in a new galaxy. Trump isn't even going to debate the dem nominee. Why should he? He's in a position of strength & he knows it.

This is from the NYT & lays out a good strategy.
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/02/11/opinion/bloomberg-president-2020.html?ac tion=click&module=Well&pgtype=Homepage§ion=OpEd%20Columnists

Key points are:

We have to get this right. This is no ordinary time, no ordinary Republican Party, no ordinary incumbent, and it will require an extraordinary Democratic machine to triumph.

Because, without doubt, Russia and China also will be “voting” Trump 2020 — for three reasons: (1) Trump keeps America in turmoil and unable to focus on building the infrastructure we need to dominate the 21st century the way we did the 20th. (2) Both Beijing and Moscow know that Trump is so disliked by America’s key allies that he can never galvanize a global coalition against China or Russia. And (3) both Russia and China know that Trump is utterly transactional and will never challenge them on human rights abuses. Trump is their chump, and they will not let him go easily....

...There is one candidate on the Democratic side who has the resources to build a machine big enough to take on the Trump machine.

This candidate also has the toughness to take on Trump, because while Trump was pretending to be a C.E.O. on the show “The Apprentice,” this candidate was actually building one of the most admired global companies as a real C.E.O.

This candidate is not cuddly, he is not always politically correct and he will not always tell you what you want to hear — or try to outbid you on how many free services he’ll give away. He’s made mistakes, especially around stop-and-frisk policing in New York City, which disproportionately targeted black and brown men and for which he recently apologized.

His mistakes, though, have to be weighed against a record of courageously speaking out and devoting enormous personal resources to virtually every progressive cause — gun control, abortion rights, climate change, Planned Parenthood, education reform for predominantly minority schools, affordable housing, income inequality and tax reform. And he has vowed as president to focus on building black wealth, not just ending poverty.

And this candidate knows how to get stuff done — he can fight this fire at the scale of the fire. His team has for years used social networks to promote progressive issues to centrist and conservative audiences. He won’t cede the internet/Facebook/Twitter battlefield to Trump’s team, who are killers in that space.
And this candidate is now rising steadily in the polls. This candidate is Michael Bloomberg. This candidate has Trump very worried.





This post here is pretty much true.


Stephen - 2/13/2020 at 05:18 AM

quote:
quote:
quote:
Bloomberg-Klobuchar 2020?


Solid ticket. I like it.




I just don't believe that Bloomberg will do as good as he thinks he will across the south or other rural dominant states.


In that sense I think Bernie will find the same thing as in 2016 - once the trail winds thru the more urban areas, his popularity will level off
Someone his age doing what he’s doing deserves respect from all Americans


Jerry - 2/14/2020 at 02:35 AM

quote:
I'm seeing a new Bloomberg commercial with old Obama footage and quotes. That's going to make Biden mad, using Obama is his gig!

quote:



I just don't believe that Bloomberg will do as good as he thinks he will across the south or other rural dominant states.


Primary or general? In the primaries he should be able to do as well as any of the candidates left.


I don't think he'll get much in the primaries. If he doesn't do well in the Super Tuesday, he may just pull out.
Southern states are mainly rural and the phrase "god, guns, and country/family/gold (different regions)" is pretty much as well known as the Lords' prayer.
With Bloomberg constantly advertising his and Obamas' "gun safety laws", it's possible that a fair number of gun owning Democrats will not vote for him.


OriginalGoober - 2/14/2020 at 02:54 AM

This is why Lil' Mike is going to spend an awful lot of money and not gain traction outside the typical coastal elites:

'Great example for the rest of this country': Bloomberg sees California as model for U.S.

Press - Monday, January 6, 2020

LOS ANGELES — Mike Bloomberg’s plan for California - export it.

The Democratic presidential candidate and former New York City mayor likes a lot of
what he sees in the Golden State and thinks its efforts on climate change, gun
control and criminal justice reform sets a benchmark for other states to emulate.

“I think that California can serve as a great example for the rest of this country,”
Bloomberg told supporters at the opening of his Angeles headquarters.

Yes, there are problems, including homelessness, struggling public schools and
scarce, costly housing. But California “is something the rest of the country looks up
to,” Bloomberg said.
“California has been a leader in an awful lot of things.”

His comments marked a sharp departure from views of President Donald Trump,
whose administration has been in a long-running feud with the nation’s most
populous state over issues from environmental protection to homelessness. Trump
called California “a disgrace” last year shortly after its Democratic-controlled
Legislature passed a bill that would have required presidential candidates to release
their tax returns to get on the 2020 ballot, a proposal aimed squarely at the
president. It was later voided in court.


Bloomberg’s visit came as part of a swing through a state that he sees as central to
his hopes of winning the White House. After a late entry into the race, Bloomberg is
bypassing the first four primary and caucus states and is anchoring his strategy to
California and other Super Tuesday states on March 3.

His TV ads have been appearing routinely on television, attempting to connect with
voters who might know little or nothing about the billionaire businessman.
With more delegates than any other state, California “has a lot of power in the
nominating process,” Bloomberg noted.

His remarks veered from occasional jokes - he lamented that Los Angeles has two
strong basketball teams, the Lakers and the Clippers, while the hapless New York
Knicks have struggled for decades - to searing attacks on Trump’s leadership style
and decision-making.

Referring to the recent U.S. airstrike that killed top Iranian general Qassem
Soleimani, Bloomberg said, “This president has a habit of making decisions
impulsively … and recklessly, as we’ve seen time and time again.”

“During crises like this one, it is critically important to … deescalate tensions and not
escalate tensions, and to not speak irresponsibly and make incendiary and bellicose
threats that may provoke attacks and endanger our country,” he said.

The political moderate argued that Trump has divided Americans, while he can unite
them, and that as Washington languishes in gridlock, he has a record of
accomplishment as mayor.

Among the crowd was Los Angeles investor Mike Connolly, who said he feared the
Democratic Party was drifting too far to the political left and was drawn to
Bloomberg’s scally conservative, socially liberal blueprint. And, importantly, he
believes Bloomberg can defeat Trump.
“He’s got the right policies” for most Americans on critical issues like gun violence
and climate change, said Connolly, an independent who voted for Presidents Bill
Clinton and Barack Obama.
Bloomberg earlier joined Mayor Eric Garcetti, a Democrat who flirted with a
presidential run, for an early lunch at a downtown restaurant.


OriginalGoober - 2/14/2020 at 03:23 AM

quote:
quote:
Bloomberg-Klobuchar 2020?


Bloomberg-former GOP 2020.


Bloomberg-Liberman on rye


cyclone88 - 2/14/2020 at 03:57 AM

quote:
Bloomberg-Liberman on rye

You're not worth engaging, but try to spell the names correctly when you're trolling around spewing anti-semitic vitriol & insulting those of us who are jewish.


BrerRabbit - 2/14/2020 at 07:02 AM

Ugly.

They must have cranked the amps on the red hat transmissions to cause a hive defense swarm reflex against Bloomberg.


MartinD28 - 2/14/2020 at 12:47 PM

quote:
quote:
Ugly.

They must have cranked the amps on the red hat transmissions to cause a hive defense swarm reflex against Bloomberg.


we're moments away from hearing a bunch of fake reasons why Bloomberg may or may not be catastrophic for the U.S., shifting the blame to the Democrats for choosing such an unelectable candidate, thus forcing the right's hand to have no choice but to vote for Trump again to save America from the dangerous and irresponsible left, who foolishly chose Bloomberg, who would ruin America. they will take their own thoughts and image, and project it right onto their opponents. what happened to these people? i used to enjoy engaging in debate about George W. Bush with the right. now it's a bunch of cult-like anti-social rhetoric.


The Trump Cult now has a uniform. The first link below features our number 1 model, Never Trumper turned Lead Trump Sycophant, Lindsey Graham. The second link features Mark Meadows and of course Don Jr. Soon it will be required attire for GOP House & Senate.

https://www.cnn.com/videos/politics/2020/02/13/gop-graham-team-trump-gear-c uomo-lemon-handoff-sot-ctn-vpx.cnn

https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/482483-trump-jr-meadows-wear-matching -trump-jackets-on-fox-and-friends


Stephen - 2/14/2020 at 01:05 PM

quote:
quote:
Bloomberg-Liberman on rye


yesterday the N-word was used in a joke, and now this.




Where exactly was the N-word used in a joke? I didn’t see it

By way of hijacking W/out Hostility...
One of the better known sayings in the sport of auto racing is “Gentlemen, start your engines”
President Trump will be saying it at the Daytona 500

Will he/they receive condemnation for doing so -
After all, “he persecutes children, he has criminal intentions against the United States, what is the matter with you wanting Him to give the command that defines our sport when he’s only using it for political gain” etc -

It will cause protests at the venue, likely for some drivers to drop out in protest.... - also, ”how can fans enjoy themselves when they’re outnumbered by security personnel.....”

it’ll generally be divisive & stain a famous American sports event, again, some believing b/c of Trump, others, not so much him but the protests & heavy security compromising their enjoyment of the day as fans - I hope I’m wrong, but......
If he or a poster did use the N-word, good riddance to them
With malice/ill will toward none

[Edited on 2/14/2020 by Stephen]


Stephen - 2/14/2020 at 02:09 PM

next stop for Democratic POTUS candidates, Nevada Sunday, then the leap year primary in SC leading to March 3 & super Tuesday


gotdrumz - 2/14/2020 at 02:25 PM

quote:
[

yesterday the N-word was used in a joke, and now this.


.

If you are referring to me, NIGS is not "nigger". If that is what you think, you have a serious problem that meds or therapy can never help. Context of the topic and what I actually posted has/had nothing to do with referencing race. How much do those glasses that see what isn't there cost? Maybe Bernie will give you free pair of you break the pair you are wearing now.


nebish - 2/14/2020 at 02:26 PM

quote:
I don't think he'll get much in the primaries. If he doesn't do well in the Super Tuesday, he may just pull out.
Southern states are mainly rural and the phrase "god, guns, and country/family/gold (different regions)" is pretty much as well known as the Lords' prayer.
With Bloomberg constantly advertising his and Obamas' "gun safety laws", it's possible that a fair number of gun owning Democrats will not vote for him.


Could be. But the Democrats that are left probably all have similar positions on guns. Bloomberg does make it a top issue so it may turn some people off. I'm from a different part of the country but I didn't know many Democrats subscribed to a "God, guns and country" mantra...not that I'm saying those things can't be important to a Democrat, but I've always associated that as a Republican motto. So in terms of a Democrat primary I wouldn't have expected those feelings to play much of a role. I have no problem deferring to your point of view on the matter. The votes will show us what people think.


Stephen - 2/14/2020 at 02:54 PM

Looks like it’ll shake down to the four B’s, Bernie, Biden, Bloomberg, Buttigieg, as the DNC approaches


nebish - 2/16/2020 at 02:52 PM



quote:

Quinnipiac: Nearly Half of Biden’s African-American Supporters Have Abandoned Him
By John McCormack

February 10, 2020 2:57 PM


Quinnipiac’s results among African-American Democratic primary voters in late January:

Biden 52

Sanders 15

Bloomberg 8

Warren 7

Buttigieg 0

And now:

Biden 27

Bloomberg 22

Sanders 19

Warren 8

Buttigieg 4

https://www.nationalreview.com/corner/quinnipiac-nearly-half-of-bidens-afri can-american-supporters-have-abandoned-him/



2112 - 2/18/2020 at 01:17 AM

quote:
quote:
I don't think he'll get much in the primaries. If he doesn't do well in the Super Tuesday, he may just pull out.
Southern states are mainly rural and the phrase "god, guns, and country/family/gold (different regions)" is pretty much as well known as the Lords' prayer.
With Bloomberg constantly advertising his and Obamas' "gun safety laws", it's possible that a fair number of gun owning Democrats will not vote for him.


Could be. But the Democrats that are left probably all have similar positions on guns. Bloomberg does make it a top issue so it may turn some people off. I'm from a different part of the country but I didn't know many Democrats subscribed to a "God, guns and country" mantra...not that I'm saying those things can't be important to a Democrat, but I've always associated that as a Republican motto. So in terms of a Democrat primary I wouldn't have expected those feelings to play much of a role. I have no problem deferring to your point of view on the matter. The votes will show us what people think.


Guns are very important to many Democrat gun owners. However, most I think see the difference between enacting tougher background checks and assault type weapon bans and the knee jerk reaction the Republicans have that any restrictions on guns at all will mean the government is coming for their hunting rifle or hand gun.


MartinD28 - 2/18/2020 at 01:13 PM

quote:
quote:
quote:
I don't think he'll get much in the primaries. If he doesn't do well in the Super Tuesday, he may just pull out.
Southern states are mainly rural and the phrase "god, guns, and country/family/gold (different regions)" is pretty much as well known as the Lords' prayer.
With Bloomberg constantly advertising his and Obamas' "gun safety laws", it's possible that a fair number of gun owning Democrats will not vote for him.


Could be. But the Democrats that are left probably all have similar positions on guns. Bloomberg does make it a top issue so it may turn some people off. I'm from a different part of the country but I didn't know many Democrats subscribed to a "God, guns and country" mantra...not that I'm saying those things can't be important to a Democrat, but I've always associated that as a Republican motto. So in terms of a Democrat primary I wouldn't have expected those feelings to play much of a role. I have no problem deferring to your point of view on the matter. The votes will show us what people think.


Guns are very important to many Democrat gun owners. However, most I think see the difference between enacting tougher background checks and assault type weapon bans and the knee jerk reaction the Republicans have that any restrictions on guns at all will mean the government is coming for their hunting rifle or hand gun.


Didn't Obama take away all their ammunition?


nebish - 2/19/2020 at 07:00 PM

Many in the Republican establishment were scared of Trump too remember. Maybe Bernie resonates deeper with people than suspected? Bernie might be able to defend himself when given the chance.

quote:
“In many respects, we are a socialist society today,” Sanders responded, noting the tax breaks and subsidies Trump received from the government as a businessman.

“The difference between my socialism and Trump’s socialism is I believe the government should help working families, not billionaires,” he added.


nebish - 2/19/2020 at 08:24 PM

Although...with Bernie, with friends like these....they're pretty polarizing



nebish - 2/20/2020 at 04:04 AM

That was the best nonsporting event thing I've watched on network TV in a long time!

Almost seemed like there was some kind of backroom plan to take Amy out tonight between Mayor Pete and one of the moderators. She was attacked more than I expected.

Got to respect Bernie for his convictions, he is who he is. But the more things get brought up like eliminating natural gas extraction in 5 years and having employees own 20% of the companies they work for...that is going to be a tough pill to swallow.

Warren seemed to look pretty desperate to me tonight.

Biden was assertive and may've reestablished himself a little, like "hey man, I'm still here".

Mayor Pete, I don't know...didn't seem to fit the part.

That brings me to Bloomberg...man it was rough early on. Fortunately for Nevada voters, this debate won't matter. Clearly he was fresh meat entering the ring with polished prize fighters and talented up-and-comers and hew as wounded pretty good early. I did feel after about maybe 2/3 of the way in or a little over half he started to hold his own. I think Bloomberg will continue to do well in direct debates with Bernie as this process goes on.


nebish - 2/20/2020 at 04:23 AM

I've wanted this for a long time and it is very clear watching this debate it only gets clearer - these parties need split. You can have Democrats divided into the far-left Sanders, Warren, AOC, etc wing. Then you can have the moderate Biden, Klobuchar type wing. Even throw in the Steyer, Bloomberg wing - hey Democrats can be billionares too, in fact many are. They don't need to be demonized. And the same with the Republican party...you can have whatever the Trump wing of the party actually is and then you can have the 1970s, 80s, 90s type Republican party. 4 or more parties with seats in both houses of Congress all vying for the White House. This big tent party stuff is crazy, Mayor Pete had a good line tonight...how about actually nominating a Democrat for the Democrat nomination (rather than a socialist or a Republican/Democrat).


nebish - 2/20/2020 at 04:48 AM

Might've just heard the truest thing I've ever heard out of Lawrence O'Donnell...it's all fantasy world. They spend a half hour, or more, on healthcare plans that can not possibly pass the Senate as it currently is or as it potentially could be. Instead of focusing on things that the President directly has control over like foreign policy - which was nonexistent tonight. Bernie's plan and Pete's plan are equally unrealistic and Pete shouldn't pretend his is more realistic. Another good point, Mayor Pete once elected says he is going to go to Kentucky to convince Mitch McConnell's constituents to support his healthcare plan after Trump won Kentucky by 20 points - it's fantasy.


nebish - 2/20/2020 at 12:38 PM

quote:
quote:
Mayor Pete, I don't know...didn't seem to fit the part.


what in particular? i liked him. i never speculate on whether a policy would be effective or not, but he seems very intelligent, articulate, good character, positive role model. i thought he possessed similar traits to Obama.


The manner in which he attacked Klobuchar was a huge turnoff to me, both times he did it. And other than Bloomberg looking out of place, for the first time I saw the lifetime of experience on that stage preparing them for the highest job in the land, perhaps the world, and I listened to Pete and I just couldn't see it. Now I didn't see it with Obama early on either...and Pete is no Obama. I don't dispute his intelligence or anything else you see in him. For me, I think he falls short in the resume department compared to his peers. I hadn't thought that of him before but something about last night made me think that way.


Bhawk - 2/20/2020 at 01:07 PM

Political fans and junkies watch these debates, millions upon millions of other people don’t.

Just another blip. In the end, The Blue Team will vote Blue Candidate, The Red Team will vote Trump.


cyclone88 - 2/20/2020 at 01:24 PM

quote:
Might've just heard the truest thing I've ever heard out of Lawrence O'Donnell...it's all fantasy world. They spend a half hour, or more, on healthcare plans that can not possibly pass the Senate as it currently is or as it potentially could be. Instead of focusing on things that the President directly has control over like foreign policy - which was nonexistent tonight. Bernie's plan and Pete's plan are equally unrealistic and Pete shouldn't pretend his is more realistic. Another good point, Mayor Pete once elected says he is going to go to Kentucky to convince Mitch McConnell's constituents to support his healthcare plan after Trump won Kentucky by 20 points - it's fantasy.


Which is why I find the idea of primary debates ludicrous. It's almost like high school debate teams arguing theoretical scenarios as something to add to their college applications. I understand it is the way the DNC works to get to the convention, but in 2020, talking about issues is irrelevant when the key issue is electability. What would be more interesting/useful is ALL dem candidates making a 5 minute pitch as to why they believe they're electable & can beat Trump in the national election - more like a job interview as to why you're best suited for the job over the other interviewees. I see no benefit to the party as a whole to have their ultimate nominee & party standard bearer being repeatedly beaten up by a collection of fellow dems on national TV.

Trump has hinted several times since his impeachment acquittal that he won't debate the dem nominee. He's running on his record as a bureaucracy busting wild card "genius." In his mind, it's a waste of time to even pretend to have a serious debate on "issues."


nebish - 2/20/2020 at 01:26 PM

quote:
Political fans and junkies watch these debates, millions upon millions of other people don’t.

Just another blip. In the end, The Blue Team will vote Blue Candidate, The Red Team will vote Trump.



I wonder though, I can't say how many, but Bernie's base seems so unique - you think they show up for a nominee other than Bernie if the DNC super delegates take his nomination away? Or, if Bloomberg is the nominee (as strange as that sounds after a poor entrance last night), you think Bernie supporters will back him? Are Bernie supporters, some number of them at least, even on the blue team?


cyclone88 - 2/20/2020 at 02:01 PM

quote:
Political fans and junkies watch these debates, millions upon millions of other people don’t.

Just another blip. In the end, The Blue Team will vote Blue Candidate, The Red Team will vote Trump.



I have to agree. I'm one of those who doesn't watch. With the exception of one write-in vote, I've pulled the Blue Team Lever every time. That makes for a pretty sad success rate (McGovern, Mondale, Dukakis, Gore) but the Red Team wasn't offering anything in line w/my views. Those conclusions weren't based on run-up-to-the-election debates, but years of watching & following the candidates when they were governors & congressmen. For me, that provides a richer context for making a choice than who has been best groomed for a TV show.


BIGV - 2/20/2020 at 02:57 PM

quote:
I see no benefit to the party as a whole to have their ultimate nominee & party standard bearer being repeatedly beaten up by a collection of fellow dems on national TV.


"ultimate nominee & party standard bearer" Bloomberg?.....What does this guy stand for?...All we really know about him is that he is extremely wealthy and is willing to spend millions on TV ads. What substance has he shown?.... if it is Bloomberg, he was "Beaten up" solely because of the things that have exited his mouth. "Standard bearer"?...Was he not once a Republican?


nebish - 2/20/2020 at 03:33 PM



February 22nd - Nevada - 36 Delegates

February 29th - South Carolina 54 Delegates

March 2nd -
-Alabama 52 Delegates
-American Samoa 6 Delegates
-Arkansas 31 Delegates
-California 415 Delegates
-Colorado 67 Delegates
-Maine 24 Delegates
-Massachusetts 91 Delegates
-Minnesota 75 Delegates
-North Carolina 110 Delegates
-Oklahoma 37 Delegates
-Tennessee 64 Delegates
-Texas 228 Delegates
-Utah 29 Delegates
-Vermont 16 Delegates
-Virginia 99 Delegates

March 10th -
-Idaho 20 Delegates
-Mississippi 36 Delegates
-Missouri 68 Delegates
-North Dakota 14 Delegates
-Washington 89 Delegates

March 17th-
-Arizona 67 Delegates
-Florida 219 Delegates
-Illinois 155 Delegates
-Ohio 136 Delegates

March 24th - Georgia 105 Delegates

March 29th - Puerto Rico 51 Delegates

April 4th -
-Alaska 15 Delegates
-Hawaii 24 Delegates
-Louisiana 54 Delegates
-Wyoming 14 Delegates

April 7th - Wisconsin 84 Delegates

April 28th -
-Connecticut 60 Delegates
-Delaware 21 Delegates
-Maryland 96 Delegates
-New York 274 Delegates
-Pennsylvania 186 Delegates
-Rhode Island 26 Delegates

May 2nd -
-Guam 7 Delegates
-Kansas 39 Delegates

May 5th - Indiana 82 Delegates

May 12th -
-Nebraska 29 Delegates
-West Virginia 28 Delegates

May 19th-
-Kentucky 54 Delegates
-Oregon 61 Delegates

June 2nd-
-District of Columbia 20 Delegates
-Montana 19 Delegates
-New Jersey 126 Delegates
-New Mexico 34 Delegates
-South Dakota 16 Delegates

June 6th - Virgin Islands 7 Delegates


BrerRabbit - 2/20/2020 at 06:04 PM

quote:
Bloomberg?.....What does this guy stand for?


Google is your friend. Once I decided to bother to find out what Bloomberg stood for it took me about 30 seconds.

However, at this point I am just hoping to dethrone the Idiot King.


BIGV - 2/20/2020 at 09:57 PM

quote:
quote:
Bloomberg?.....What does this guy stand for?


Google is your friend. Once I decided to bother to find out what Bloomberg stood for it took me about 30 seconds.


Here's a great quote from Mr. Bloomberg (while on stage in Vegas) showing that the fallout of the Mortgage crisis and how it affected Tens of thousands of homeowners is beyond his understanding and how it related to the average Homeowner. He is after all a BILLIONAIRE which places him squarely in that 1% Category the left is supposed to despise.

Quote: “It came about because the people who took the mortgages, packaged them and others bought them. That’s where the disaster was.”

"That's where the disaster was"!

No, that was the cause, the disaster was all of the homes lost by hard working Americans.

Maybe if he is elected we can bring back "Stop and frisk" and make it a National program!

Quote: "..I think we disproportionately stop whites too much and minorities too little".....

Two real winners here from the former mayor!...Sounds kinda racist

Thanks!...Found these gems with a simple Google search!


BrerRabbit - 2/20/2020 at 10:28 PM

YAAAWWWWNNN. So Bloomberg is worth a chuckle - certainly not the incessant sidesplitting farce of a president you go to bat for every chance you get.


BIGV - 2/20/2020 at 10:32 PM

quote:
YAAAWWWWNNN. So Bloomberg is worth a chuckle - certainly not the incessant sidesplitting farce of a president you go to bat for every chance you get.


"Worth a chuckle" Just what the leadership of the Democratic Party is looking for.


BrerRabbit - 2/20/2020 at 10:42 PM

If you love Trump so much just tell us why - no need to beat around the bush tearing down the opposition. Goober and Fuji are the only Trump supporters here who ever openly support the president. I don't agree for the most part, but I respect their confidence.


BIGV - 2/20/2020 at 11:02 PM

quote:
If you love Trump so much just tell us why


Because he kept Hillary and Democratic "values" out of the White House


BrerRabbit - 2/20/2020 at 11:11 PM

Yeah we know, that is the tape loop you play every time you are asked to tell us what impresses you about Trump. That tells us zero about what you like about Trump, his policy, personality, endeavors.


BIGV - 2/20/2020 at 11:25 PM

quote:
Yeah we know, that is the tape loop you play every time you are asked to tell us what impresses you about Trump. That tells us zero about what you like about Trump, his policy, personality, endeavors.


Then for the umpteenth time, there is my answer, right there. I like not much about him other than the accomplishment of keeping the Democrats out of the White House.


BrerRabbit - 2/20/2020 at 11:49 PM

quote:
I like not much about him . . .


There. It is out. Feel better? Honesty is good medicine. You might not be so twisted up in knots if you were more direct with yourself and others.


BIGV - 2/20/2020 at 11:51 PM

quote:
quote:
I like not much about him . . .


Feel better?


I am having a wonderful day, thanks


BIGV - 2/21/2020 at 03:19 AM

quote:
quote:
Then for the umpteenth time, there is my answer, right there. I like not much about him other than the accomplishment of keeping the Democrats out of the White House.


it’s not that you want him, it’s that you need someone that you don’t like to save you from a perceived danger that won’t ever go away. What a position you put yourself in.


Suits me just fine


nebish - 2/21/2020 at 04:02 AM

Donald Trump is the POTUS, whether I vote for him or not, he is my, he is our president. Barack Obama was my President, our President. If Elizabeth Warren wins she will be my and our a President. People can look st it different ways, until Trump leaves office he is President of the United States and I am a citizen of the United States, he is our President.


BrerRabbit - 2/21/2020 at 04:02 AM

Suit yourself, speak for yourself. Not my president - he is an impostor. Just getting in on the ground floor of the right side of history, don't mind me. Worth having on record before the Redhat Coup kicks into execution mode after 2020. Like all those Germans who wished they had called out Hitler before it became the "in" thing to do after 1945.



[Edited on 2/21/2020 by BrerRabbit]


BrerRabbit - 2/21/2020 at 12:51 PM

quote:
Please tell me there’s a bigger endgame than that.


There is a bigger endgame than that. Read The Handmaid's Tale, that is exactly where they are going with all this. There is a method to the madness.


MartinD28 - 2/21/2020 at 01:10 PM

quote:
Suit yourself, speak for yourself. Not my president - he is an impostor. Just getting in on the ground floor of the right side of history, don't mind me. Worth having on record before the Redhat Coup kicks into execution mode after 2020. Like all those Germans who wished they had called out Hitler before it became the "in" thing to do after 1945.



[Edited on 2/21/2020 by BrerRabbit]


I agree, and I suspect so would Santayana.


BrerRabbit - 2/21/2020 at 01:53 PM

quote:
I agree, and I suspect so would Santayana.


Not familiar with Santayana. Sounds like I ought to be - will dig up some cliff notes.


BIGV - 2/21/2020 at 03:18 PM

quote:
They’ll even elect a scumbag tyrant to destroy America just to eventually call the left hypocrites.


"Destroying America"....Hilarious, how is America being destroyed?

quote:
you need someone that you don’t like to save you from a perceived danger that won’t ever go away. What a position you put yourself in.


And here you are preoccupied with a President who is destroying America!...Does this qualify as a "Perceived Danger"?


BIGV - 2/21/2020 at 03:24 PM

quote:
Like all those Germans who wished they had called out Hitler before it became the "in" thing to do after 1945.


Again with the Nazi references.....What's up with that? Seems to be a go-to for you.


BIGV - 2/21/2020 at 04:22 PM

quote:
quote:
And here you are preoccupied with a President who is destroying America!...Does this qualify as a "Perceived Danger"?


quote:
Because he kept Hillary and Democratic "values" out of the White House


i won’t be selling my soul to treason and sleaze to save me from American values that are different from my own. sounds like torture. troll away.


To question phrases like treason, sleaze and destroying America is trolling?


LOL...Have a wonderful day!


BrerRabbit - 2/22/2020 at 12:05 AM

quote:
Again with the Nazi references.....What's up with that? Seems to be a go-to for you.


If you can not see why, then you are a not see.

[Edited on 2/22/2020 by BrerRabbit]


BIGV - 2/22/2020 at 02:14 AM

quote:
quote:
Again with the Nazi references.....What's up with that? Seems to be a go-to for you.


If you can not see why, then you are a not see.


I can not see why, thus the question.


BrerRabbit - 2/22/2020 at 07:41 AM

i love this bar


lukester420 - 2/22/2020 at 01:40 PM

quote:
quote:
quote:
Again with the Nazi references.....What's up with that? Seems to be a go-to for you.


If you can not see why, then you are a not see.


I can not see why, thus the question.



Again... willfully ignorant. If you cannot see the obvious similarities in the anti immigrant rhetoric of the 2016 campaign and Nazi Germany then I give you this quote, “Those who do not learn history are doomed to repeat it”
Given your constant downplaying of the threat Neo Nazi scum being emboldened by tRump, I would only have to assume you want to repeat the ethnic cleansing.


lukester420 - 2/22/2020 at 01:57 PM

Republicans have to be loving these debates. Distracting the public from the stench of Trump pardoning schmucks like Blagojevich and Milken purging the “disloyal” members of his admin. as Impeachment payback.

Trump’s legacy- setting the precedent that white collar criminals are above the law and anyone who attempts to stand up for the American people and Democracy will be blackballed.


BIGV - 2/22/2020 at 02:10 PM

quote:
quote:
quote:
quote:
Again with the Nazi references.....What's up with that? Seems to be a go-to for you.


If you can not see why, then you are a not see.


I can not see why, thus the question.



Again... willfully ignorant. If you cannot see the obvious similarities in the anti immigrant rhetoric of the 2016 campaign and Nazi Germany then I give you this quote, “Those who do not learn history are doomed to repeat it”
Given your constant downplaying of the threat Neo Nazi scum being emboldened by tRump, I would only have to assume you want to repeat the ethnic cleansing.


This has to be one of the most ridiculous things ever written on this website. You really and truly believe this crap? Personally, I have way more concern over thoughts like yours than any "Fear" of 1% of the population who can't control their hate....


BIGV - 2/22/2020 at 02:14 PM

quote:
Republicans have to be loving these debates. Distracting the public from the stench of Trump pardoning schmucks like Blagojevich and Milken purging the “disloyal” members of his admin. as Impeachment payback.


If I am not mistaken, NO ONE is forcing the Democratic "leadership" to put this pathetic donkey show on prime-time television...

Too funny


lukester420 - 2/22/2020 at 03:52 PM

quote:
quote:
quote:
quote:
quote:
Again with the Nazi references.....What's up with that? Seems to be a go-to for you.


If you can not see why, then you are a not see.


I can not see why, thus the question.



Again... willfully ignorant. If you cannot see the obvious similarities in the anti immigrant rhetoric of the 2016 campaign and Nazi Germany then I give you this quote, “Those who do not learn history are doomed to repeat it”
Given your constant downplaying of the threat Neo Nazi scum being emboldened by tRump, I would only have to assume you want to repeat the ethnic cleansing.


This has to be one of the most ridiculous things ever written on this website. You really and truly believe this crap? Personally, I have way more concern over thoughts like yours than any "Fear" of 1% of the population who can't control their hate....


Funny, you never deny only deflect, and once again you write off the dangers of racism and a leader who condones it, Whatcha hiding?

I’m tired of this place and don’t know how to delete an account so feel free to snitch to mods, I lose nothing by losing my right to post here. Some of you guys are cool but BIGV you can eat **** you spineless pussy.

**** you, go shove a pistol barrel up your ass and keep fellating Moscow Mitch and Russian don you ignorant inbred sack of dog **** .


BIGV - 2/22/2020 at 04:03 PM

quote:
quote:
quote:
quote:
quote:
quote:
Again with the Nazi references.....What's up with that? Seems to be a go-to for you.


If you can not see why, then you are a not see.


I can not see why, thus the question.



Again... willfully ignorant. If you cannot see the obvious similarities in the anti immigrant rhetoric of the 2016 campaign and Nazi Germany then I give you this quote, “Those who do not learn history are doomed to repeat it”
Given your constant downplaying of the threat Neo Nazi scum being emboldened by tRump, I would only have to assume you want to repeat the ethnic cleansing.


This has to be one of the most ridiculous things ever written on this website. You really and truly believe this crap? Personally, I have way more concern over thoughts like yours than any "Fear" of 1% of the population who can't control their hate....


Funny, you never deny only deflect, and once again you write off the dangers of racism and a leader who condones it, Whatcha hiding?

I’m tired of this place and don’t know how to delete an account so feel free to snitch to mods, I lose nothing by losing my right to post here. Some of you guys are cool but BIGV you can eat **** you spineless pussy.

**** you, go shove a pistol barrel up your ass and keep fellating Moscow Mitch and Russian don you ignorant inbred sack of dog **** .


Intellect and the ability to communicate clearly and concisely such as this is truly a dying art form.

Worth saving.


lukester420 - 2/22/2020 at 04:07 PM

More commentary from the drunk old troll at the end of the bar banking on the hope that surely no one would hit an old man. Wipe Don’s cum off your lips before you address me dickweasel


cyclone88 - 2/22/2020 at 04:39 PM

quote:
If I am not mistaken, NO ONE is forcing the Democratic "leadership" to put this pathetic donkey show on prime-time television...

In an effort to acknowledge agreement when it exists on insult-laden threads, I will say that I agree w/that statement. I said something similar a few days ago. If the DNC wants to defeat Trump in November, it should re-think its process so as not to undermine the eventual nominee whoever that is. My exact words were:

"I see no benefit to the party as a whole to have their ultimate nominee & party standard bearer being repeatedly beaten up by a collection of fellow dems on national TV."

"I don't see the point of rivals bashing, zinging, & grilling each other on national TV 11 times to produce a "highlight reel" to be used against whoever becomes the candidate. In the Trumpian Era, all traditional roads to the nomination & election should've been re-evaluated."

The DNC has failed to alter its strategy despite the FACTS that 1) Trump is not a man who plays by the rules and 2) US intel has advised Congress (& Sanders) that Russia is interfering in the democratic party nomination process in its effort to achieve Trump's re-election. The DNC should be nimble enough to change course. They've had 3 years to come up w/a viable nominee & winning plan. What they're doing seems to me to be self-defeating.


BIGV - 2/22/2020 at 11:31 PM

quote:
Wipe Don’s cum off your lips before you address me dickweasel


Once again you surprise absolutely no one with your "skill" as an orator.


BIGV - 2/22/2020 at 11:46 PM

quote:
The DNC has failed to alter its strategy


Only a partial quote, I understand, but in essence this goes directly to the core of the issue at hand. It begs the question: "What is the strategy"? Surely the DNC does not wish for Bernie to be the Candidate; Bloomberg might still be able to better represent in upcoming "debates"....Now that impeachment has left egg on every visible part of their platform... What is the strategy?


cyclone88 - 2/23/2020 at 12:05 AM

quote:
What is the strategy?

Exactly my point. So far, it has been Eyes Wide Shut doing what worked in 1992, 1996, 2008, 2012.


lukester420 - 2/23/2020 at 12:27 AM

quote:
quote:
Wipe Don’s cum off your lips before you address me dickweasel


Once again you surprise absolutely no one with your "skill" as an orator.

You still got a little something in the corner of your mouth big boy.


BIGV - 2/23/2020 at 12:43 AM

quote:
quote:
quote:
Wipe Don’s cum off your lips before you address me dickweasel


Once again you surprise absolutely no one with your "skill" as an orator.

You still got a little something in the corner of your mouth big boy.



Mmmmm......Corner of my mouth? That makes zero sense, are not mouths round?....Corner of my jaw perhaps. My guess is you are referring to teeth (which most of us still possess) not sure I get what you are inferring here since I floss regularly.

Once again your capacity for communicating at an unprecedented plain is beyond words. How do you do it?


lukester420 - 2/23/2020 at 01:11 AM

quote:
quote:
quote:
quote:
Wipe Don’s cum off your lips before you address me dickweasel


Once again you surprise absolutely no one with your "skill" as an orator.

You still got a little something in the corner of your mouth big boy.



Mmmmm......Corner of my mouth? That makes zero sense, are not mouths round?....Corner of my jaw perhaps. My guess is you are referring to teeth (which most of us still possess) not sure I get what you are inferring here since I floss regularly.

Once again your capacity for communicating at an unprecedented plain is beyond words. How do you do it?


Where your upper lip and bottom lip meet at the sides of your mouth is widely known to many human beings as the corners of your mouth. Like
a true sloppy drunken old man you are unaware of the crust you have accumalated there, only in your case it isn't just spit, it's Donald's cum, since Melania won't blow him anymore he relies on his little subservient snowflakes to keep stroking his ego and open wide for the billionaire's trickle down plan.


BIGV - 2/23/2020 at 01:20 AM

quote:
only in your case it isn't just spit, it's Donald's cum


Another great quote worth saving. You my friend are a true gem!


nebish - 2/23/2020 at 02:04 AM

quote:
I’m tired of this place and don’t know how to delete an account so feel free to snitch to mods, I lose nothing by losing my right to post here.


Just don't delete the whole thread Rowland, if you have to delete anything just delete posts of certain user(s). Or just leave it, stuff gets buried in these threads that some people will never see anyway.

I have to ask lukester, if you are tired of this place...then why comeback to fight? Just don't come and stop thinking about certain people you don't like. That would seem the appropriate action rather than trying to get banned in a blaze of glory.



[Edited on 2/23/2020 by nebish]


lukester420 - 2/23/2020 at 02:46 AM

quote:
quote:
I’m tired of this place and don’t know how to delete an account so feel free to snitch to mods, I lose nothing by losing my right to post here.


Just don't delete the whole thread Rowland, if you have to delete anything just delete posts of certain user(s). Or just leave it, stuff gets buried in these threads that some people will never see anyway.

I have to ask lukester, if you are tired of this place...then why comeback to fight? Just don't come and stop thinking about certain people you don't like. That would seem the appropriate action rather than trying to get banned in a blaze of glory.



[Edited on 2/23/2020 by nebish]


Good idea. Out of respect for you and pretty much everyone other than two or thee jagoffs, i shall indeed piss off.
But here's one for the road for the BIIIG guy
Your constant deflections and ignorance to facts have provided an excellent example of a true chicken **** human being with some kind of inferiority complex that would baffle most shrinks. Have fun polishing your guns while your Pimps tRump, Vlad and Mitch keeps you in line you spineless peasant. I pity your meaningless, insignificant existence.


BIGV - 2/23/2020 at 02:58 AM

quote:
quote:
quote:
I’m tired of this place and don’t know how to delete an account so feel free to snitch to mods, I lose nothing by losing my right to post here.


Just don't delete the whole thread Rowland, if you have to delete anything just delete posts of certain user(s). Or just leave it, stuff gets buried in these threads that some people will never see anyway.

I have to ask lukester, if you are tired of this place...then why comeback to fight? Just don't come and stop thinking about certain people you don't like. That would seem the appropriate action rather than trying to get banned in a blaze of glory.



[Edited on 2/23/2020 by nebish]


Good idea. Out of respect for you and pretty much everyone other than two or thee jagoffs, i shall indeed piss off.
But here's one for the road for the BIIIG guy
Your constant deflections and ignorance to facts have provided an excellent example of a true chicken **** human being with some kind of inferiority complex that would baffle most shrinks. Have fun polishing your guns while your Pimps tRump, Vlad and Mitch keeps you in line you spineless peasant. I pity your meaningless, insignificant existence.


Read through this thread and tell us all just who has the "meaningless, insignificant existence."...

Your responses speak volumes and you could have walked away at any time.


BIGV - 2/24/2020 at 03:10 AM

quote:
quote:
What is the strategy?

Exactly my point. So far, it has been Eyes Wide Shut doing what worked in 1992, 1996, 2008, 2012.


As someone who could not be further from the mainstream Democratic party, I sincerely hope they stay on their present course of "What strategy"?...Keep up the in-fighting, keep chasing the hate of President Trump and please keep belittling each other at these dog and pony shows commonly referred to as "debates".

Amen


nebish - 2/26/2020 at 03:21 AM

This debate disappointed compared to last week's. I've watched a bunch of these and forgotten a ton, but I think this was the worst moderated and found it largely uninteresting...and I usually like these things.

Bloomberg was ineffective, he wasn't damaged like he was last week, but I actually thought he scored some points last week, this week I hardly knew he was there.

Mayor Pete came across as reasoned and thoughtful. Last week I was very turned off by his attacks towards Klobuchar. Other than trying to hit Bernie, he didn't go on the offensive much and I think that is a better look for him.

Warren will finish 4th again. She tried to tie herself more to Bernie tonight while still trying to say she is better than Bernie. I don't think that works in SC, Bernie is what he is and will probably do pretty well even if he doesn't win. I don't think Warren can try and be Bernie-lite in SC and show well. She might even finish 5th behind Steyer if that is possible.

Bernie took a lot of incoming however he is really great at these debates in defending himself and citing all the supporting data he believes reinforces his views. I don't recall anyone saying anything that really hurt him, a couple shots, but not meaningful ones.

I'm not sure I would say Biden was the winner, but I tend to think he was. Now, of all the candidates I think Joe is showing his age the most and in every event and debate I see his age and occasional speech issues come through. Aside from that, Joe was angry tonight. Joe meant business. He turned it up to 11. Everyone has said it for so long now, but I do think Biden will win South Carolina.

Amy didn't get much airtime early, but did get more than her share past halfway. I like Amy, she seems like the most reasonable one up there. Last week "they" were trying to take her knees out, tonight she didn't get touched and was able to get her points across.

Tom Steyer for the first time I thought had some impact. Hadn't seen him for a while, but I mean..he might get 5 or 6% of the vote. Not sure what his end game is, but he wasn't awful and he might be good enough to finish 4th in SC which for him is good I guess, but really means nothing.

So I was fairly disappointed in the debate. I like entertainment, but I like substance too and candidates taking others to task. It was a little lacking. Not great moderators and control of the debate didn't help.


Stephen - 2/26/2020 at 01:27 PM

I’d like to know what the candidates think of what happened in Nebraska, where gun-rights activists brought loaded semi automatic weapons into the state capitol to protest bills that would have imposed new restrictions on gun ownership

“Similar conflicts have occurred in state houses throughout the country. In Idaho, an 11 year old girl toted a loaded AR-15 assault weapon into a legislative hearing Monday with her grandfather to support a proposal that would allow visitors to Idaho who can legally possess firearms to carry a concealed handgun within city limits” (article)

Heckuva spine that grandfather has
How are politicians/lawmakers supposed to function with loaded weapons trained on them - is this what democracy & the American way are coming to?
Would like to hear what Trump/candidates/other politicians think of this

[Edited on 2/26/2020 by Stephen]


Stephen - 2/26/2020 at 03:16 PM

Little useful info from the debate, the last one mercifully is March 15 - Bernie still in front going into next week’s make or break (for some candidates) ‘super Tuesday’ -

maybe it’s prejudicial/politically IC or whatever, just am not comfortable with someone of his advanced age being president - he’s outta the gate strong, but over the long haul......
Bernie won Colorado Minnesota Oklahoma & Vermont in Super Tuesday 2016

[Edited on 2/26/2020 by Stephen]


nebish - 2/26/2020 at 03:39 PM

quote:
I’d like to know what the candidates think of what happened in Nebraska, where gun-rights activists brought loaded semi automatic weapons into the state capitol to protest bills that would have imposed new restrictions on gun ownership

“Similar conflicts have occurred in state houses throughout the country. In Idaho, an 11 year old girl toted a loaded AR-15 assault weapon into a legislative hearing Monday with her grandfather to support a proposal that would allow visitors to Idaho who can legally possess firearms to carry a concealed handgun within city limits” (article)

Heckuva spine that grandfather has
How are politicians/lawmakers supposed to function with loaded weapons trained on them - is this what democracy & the American way are coming to?
Would like to hear what Trump/candidates/other politicians think of this

[Edited on 2/26/2020 by Stephen]


There are some crazy people out there and if I were a member of those legislatures I would be uncomfortable. Gabby Giffords and Steve Scalise know too well what crazy people can do.

I am pretty pro-gun, not very pro-gun, but pretty pro-gun. I have concealed carry permit and generally think that lawful citizens should be able to own, carry, buy, sell and trade their firearms in private transactions without oversight of our government.

The problem is, what about the citizens who aren't lawful...or what can we do to try and get ahead of unlawful events to limit or stop potential shootings?

I think gun rights activists are wrong in fighting against any reform or restrictions to the status quo. That is just the thing isn't it, now matter what group it is, nobody ever wants to give an inch.

There are some problems with extreme risk protection orders...I guess I just figure, don't be a dick, don't be crazy, or give people reason to think you are crazy and what to cause harm to others. Just be a normal person and nobody is going to threaten your gun collection. Act a fool, and people are going to question you, look at you and perhaps file a red flag case against you.

Many states do not have waiting periods for long rifles like they do hand guns. I do not think it is extreme to have a short waiting period for a long rifle. The NRA strongly opposes such proposals.

Society has changed. Not everyone is a responsible gun owner and I think, unfortunately, those of us that are responsible gun owners have to bear more burden now because of a small number of others. If we have some more hurdles to jump through, I can handle that. Hurdles are one thing, bans are another. I would like to see more gun enthusiasts understand the purpose of one and I would like more anti-gun activists understand the foolishness in the other.

Finally, concealed or open carry firearms should probably not be permitted in capital buildings, I don't see any reason for it and I don't see why some people would be so against it that they would take to protest to preserve the right to take a gun into their state capital buildings.



cyclone88 - 2/26/2020 at 05:51 PM

quote:
maybe it’s prejudicial/politically IC or whatever, just am not comfortable with someone of his advanced age being president

I've been saying that about Sanders since 2016. I also consider his health in that he's had at least one heart attack on the campaign trail.

The problem is most of the other candidates aren't far behind him & would be the oldest president at inauguration (beating out Trump at 70 by almost a decade). At inauguration Sanders would be 79, but Bloomberg & Biden would be 78. Trump seems positively youthful in that he would be 74. Warren would be 71.

Prior to Trump, 69 yr old Reagan's age was an issue during his 1st campaign. We now know symptoms of Alzheimer's disease were present late in his second term & he survived an assassination attempt - that had nothing to do w/age - but there was a period of recovery during his presidency.

There's never been an octogenarian president even when LEAVING office. The "only as old as you feel/act" platitude is just that; we're as old as our bodies are.


MartinD28 - 2/26/2020 at 08:20 PM

quote:
Little useful info from the debate, the last one mercifully is March 15 - Bernie still in front going into next week’s make or break (for some candidates) ‘super Tuesday’ -

maybe it’s prejudicial/politically IC or whatever, just am not comfortable with someone of his advanced age being president - he’s outta the gate strong, but over the long haul......
Bernie won Colorado Minnesota Oklahoma & Vermont in Super Tuesday 2016

[Edited on 2/26/2020 by Stephen]


So where do you draw the line on age? What is the cutoff? Trump is pushing 74 so not too much younger than Bernie. Throw in Trump's "immaturity factor", and that really presents a problem for Trump - old in years but acts like a juvenile. That's a real dichotomy to reconcile for someone to vote for on top of the rest of his challenges as a decent human being.


BIGV - 2/26/2020 at 09:27 PM

quote:
Trump - old in years but acts like a juvenile.


Hey!, how is your life?..working?..gas is affordable?..groceries in the fridge? The economy is good, unemployment is at its lowest since 1968. Things are pretty good here in USA right now and what are the Democrats key talking points?

Socialized medicine
Global Warming
15$ an hr.
Impeach the President
Gun Control
Free College

Good Luck with that


2112 - 2/26/2020 at 11:05 PM

quote:
quote:
Trump - old in years but acts like a juvenile.


Hey!, how is your life?..working?..gas is affordable?..groceries in the fridge? The economy is good, unemployment is at its lowest since 1968. Things are pretty good here in USA right now and what are the Democrats key talking points?

Socialized medicine
Global Warming
15$ an hr.
Impeach the President
Gun Control
Free College

Good Luck with that


Hey, my life is great. It was under Obama as well. The nice thing about the Obama days was that we didn't have a national embarrassment representing us on the world stage, telling lies every single day, and doing everything in his power to divide this country.

I also realize that not everyone in this country is doing as well as I am. Some people can't afford food and rent. Some people don't have clean water to drink. Unlike some, I care about people who don't have it as good as me and my family. I also think that maybe some enhanced background checks before you can buy a firearm might keep my son from being gunned down in a mass school shooting. The current out of control deficit spending, even during what is considered to be good economic times, is scary. So, maybe you think America is great again, but I see it currently on the decline.


MartinD28 - 2/26/2020 at 11:30 PM

quote:
quote:
quote:
Trump - old in years but acts like a juvenile.


Hey!, how is your life?..working?..gas is affordable?..groceries in the fridge? The economy is good, unemployment is at its lowest since 1968. Things are pretty good here in USA right now and what are the Democrats key talking points?

Socialized medicine
Global Warming
15$ an hr.
Impeach the President
Gun Control
Free College

Good Luck with that


Hey, my life is great. It was under Obama as well. The nice thing about the Obama days was that we didn't have a national embarrassment representing us on the world stage, telling lies every single day, and doing everything in his power to divide this country.

I also realize that not everyone in this country is doing as well as I am. Some people can't afford food and rent. Some people don't have clean water to drink. Unlike some, I care about people who don't have it as good as me and my family. I also think that maybe some enhanced background checks before you can buy a firearm might keep my son from being gunned down in a mass school shooting. The current out of control deficit spending, even during what is considered to be good economic times, is scary. So, maybe you think America is great again, but I see it currently on the decline.


That was a wonderful response, 2112. It reflects much of my situation and beliefs.

The thing you stated about Trump being "a national embarrassment representing us on the world stage, telling lies every single day, and doing everything in his power to divide this country." - When is someone who supports Trump or hates democrats going to disagree with your point or defend Trump on that? Same goes for actions with Putin, KJU, foreign policy/ actions - Iran, North Korea, Syria. Why can't he be defended? Do they agree with his beliefs with these dictators and agree with his foreign policy?


BIGV - 2/26/2020 at 11:32 PM

quote:
The nice thing about the Obama days was that we didn't have a national embarrassment representing us on the world stage, telling lies every single day


Curious, this affects you in what way? Is your life any worse with your Congressman, State senator, Senator, Assemblyman, City Councilman and Mayor doing the exact same thing, the only real difference being some of these representatives are on the local level?

quote:
and doing everything in his power to divide this country


I would counter with the "divide" being nothing more than what each party values. Funny thing, both believe their views to be flawless.


BIGV - 2/26/2020 at 11:33 PM

quote:
quote:
quote:
quote:
Trump - old in years but acts like a juvenile.


Hey!, how is your life?..working?..gas is affordable?..groceries in the fridge? The economy is good, unemployment is at its lowest since 1968. Things are pretty good here in USA right now and what are the Democrats key talking points?

Socialized medicine
Global Warming
15$ an hr.
Impeach the President
Gun Control
Free College

Good Luck with that


Hey, my life is great. It was under Obama as well. The nice thing about the Obama days was that we didn't have a national embarrassment representing us on the world stage, telling lies every single day, and doing everything in his power to divide this country.

I also realize that not everyone in this country is doing as well as I am. Some people can't afford food and rent. Some people don't have clean water to drink. Unlike some, I care about people who don't have it as good as me and my family. I also think that maybe some enhanced background checks before you can buy a firearm might keep my son from being gunned down in a mass school shooting. The current out of control deficit spending, even during what is considered to be good economic times, is scary. So, maybe you think America is great again, but I see it currently on the decline.


That was a wonderful response, 2112. It reflects much of my situation and beliefs.

The thing you stated about Trump being "a national embarrassment representing us on the world stage, telling lies every single day, and doing everything in his power to divide this country." - When is someone who supports Trump or hates democrats going to disagree with your point or defend Trump on that? Same goes for actions with Putin, KJU, foreign policy/ actions - Iran, North Korea, Syria. Why can't he be defended? Do they agree with his beliefs with these dictators and agree with his foreign policy?


Once again, how does this affect you?


Bhawk - 2/26/2020 at 11:37 PM

quote:
quote:
Trump - old in years but acts like a juvenile.


Hey!, how is your life?..working?..gas is affordable?..groceries in the fridge? The economy is good, unemployment is at its lowest since 1968. Things are pretty good here in USA right now and what are the Democrats key talking points?

Socialized medicine
Global Warming
15$ an hr.
Impeach the President
Gun Control
Free College

Good Luck with that


None of my personal success has anything to do with who is President.

That said, he’s a horrific human being and a walking clown show. I pay my taxes and follow the rules and have every right to believe whatever I want.

You’ve got yours are you are doing well and you don’t care about anyone else. Yet another conservative. Some things never change.


MartinD28 - 2/26/2020 at 11:44 PM

quote:
quote:
quote:
Trump - old in years but acts like a juvenile.


Hey!, how is your life?..working?..gas is affordable?..groceries in the fridge? The economy is good, unemployment is at its lowest since 1968. Things are pretty good here in USA right now and what are the Democrats key talking points?

Socialized medicine
Global Warming
15$ an hr.
Impeach the President
Gun Control
Free College

Good Luck with that


None of my personal success has anything to do with who is President.

That said, he’s a horrific human being and a walking clown show. I pay my taxes and follow the rules and have every right to believe whatever I want.

You’ve got yours are you are doing well and you don’t care about anyone else. Yet another conservative. Some things never change.


X2

"None of my personal success has anything to do with who is President." Absolutely. I have made my success as an individual not because of nor in spite of government or who is president - be it a president who is a statesman and respected around the world or a president who is a national and global embarrassment.


BIGV - 2/26/2020 at 11:48 PM

quote:
You’ve got yours are you are doing well and you don’t care about anyone else. Yet another conservative. Some things never change.


Of course I care about others. When I have organizations that I feel worthy of my financial help, I donate. If my disbelief in social programs distributing $$ to those who will not work helps you categorize me, so be it.


BIGV - 2/26/2020 at 11:50 PM

quote:
"None of my personal success has anything to do with who is President." Absolutely. I have made my success as an individual not because of nor in spite of government or who is president - be it a president who is a statesman and respected around the world or a president who is a national and global embarrassment.


What does the President being a statesman or a "national and global embarrassment." have to do with your success or lack of it?


Bhawk - 2/27/2020 at 12:02 AM

quote:
quote:
"None of my personal success has anything to do with who is President." Absolutely. I have made my success as an individual not because of nor in spite of government or who is president - be it a president who is a statesman and respected around the world or a president who is a national and global embarrassment.


What does the President being a statesman or a "national and global embarrassment." have to do with your success or lack of it?


He’s a horrific human being and a walking clown show.

What you and others keep trying to say (without actually saying it, it’s so cowardly) is that you do not care what Trump says or does. None of that matters. Donald Trump could stab a baby on the podium and you wouldn’t care, because, hey, the economy is doing well.

The economy was doing well at the end of the previous Presidential term, but you sure as s—t weren’t going around here admonishing supporters of candidate Trump who were saying that the country was in a horrible state that needed to be made great again, now were you?

Every election cycle of our entire lives has contained candidates from both parties saying how bad things are and they can make it better. All the sudden you have a problem with it?

Just come out and say that there’s not one thing this guy could do that would bother you. Enough with the coy attempts at not coming out and just being honest. What’s the matter? You afraid to say you like the guy? You afraid to say how much you like how he insults people? You afraid to say you don’t care how much he lies?

What are you afraid of? Just say it.


BIGV - 2/27/2020 at 12:12 AM

quote:
He’s a horrific human being and a walking clown show.


This is what you believe and I respect that while disagreeing with you.

quote:
Just come out and say that there’s not one thing this guy could do that would bother you. Enough with the coy attempts at not coming out and just being honest. What’s the matter? You afraid to say you like the guy? You afraid to say how much you like how he insults people? You afraid to say you don’t care how much he lies?


I just do not care as much as you do. That last President that "Bothered me" was either of the two Bush's. War for no reason bothers me, a lot. We care about and are "Bothered by" different things, I like low gas prices, an economy that gives people the opportunity to work and neighbors who believe in community. It shouldn't be that complicated.


2112 - 2/27/2020 at 05:29 AM

quote:
quote:
"None of my personal success has anything to do with who is President." Absolutely. I have made my success as an individual not because of nor in spite of government or who is president - be it a president who is a statesman and respected around the world or a president who is a national and global embarrassment.


What does the President being a statesman or a "national and global embarrassment." have to do with your success or lack of it?


Why are you so focused on personal success? Life is more important than just my bank account. I care about this country. I care about how my country leads the free word. Seems like those on the right love to wave the flag, but that is where their patriotism stops. I guess I'm not that shallow. And yes, I travel a lot internationally (I've been to more countries already in 2020 than most American visit in a lifetime), and I see how Americans have been perceived around the world in the last 3 years differently than they used to be. Sometimes it's like they are walking on eggshells around Americans. Maybe you don't care, but I do...a lot.


2112 - 2/27/2020 at 05:33 AM

quote:
quote:
quote:
"None of my personal success has anything to do with who is President." Absolutely. I have made my success as an individual not because of nor in spite of government or who is president - be it a president who is a statesman and respected around the world or a president who is a national and global embarrassment.


What does the President being a statesman or a "national and global embarrassment." have to do with your success or lack of it?


Why are you so focused on personal success? Life is more important than just my bank account. I care about this country. I care about how my country leads the free word. Seems like those on the right love to wave the flag, but that is where their patriotism stops. I guess I'm not that shallow. And yes, I travel a lot internationally (I've been to more countries already in 2020 than most American visit in a lifetime), and I see how Americans have been perceived around the world in the last 3 years differently than they used to be. Sometimes it's like they are walking on eggshells around Americans. Maybe you don't care, but I do...a lot.


Do you have a drunk loudmouth uncle that always shows up uninvited at your backyard BBQs, and you feel obligated to apologize to all the other party guests because of his behavior? Well, that is what I feel like when I travel internationally now.


BIGV - 2/27/2020 at 11:33 AM

quote:
Do you have a drunk loudmouth uncle that always shows up uninvited at your backyard BBQs, and you feel obligated to apologize to all the other party guests because of his behavior?


Never did, no.

quote:
Well, that is what I feel like when I travel internationally now.


That is your cross to bear, not mine.


BIGV - 2/27/2020 at 12:07 PM

quote:
little useful info from the debate, the last one mercifully is March 15


Well, we did learn (according to Joe Biden) that 150 million people have died from gun violence in the U.S. "more than all the wars"....

OMG


nebish - 2/27/2020 at 12:49 PM

Re: cheap gas, oil is cheap. I think gas and diesel fuel prices are not cheap relative to oil for several years now. Different markets and state taxes impact this, but with oil hovering around $50 I feel gas should be 20% cheaper. Where I live when oil was $100 a barrel gas was $3. Our gas tax has gone up slightly, $.10, since then...our gas has been in the $2.30-2.39 range...with $50 oil that is not cheap.


BIGV - 2/27/2020 at 01:06 PM

quote:
My girlfriend commented last night that Biden looked like he "arose from his casket for this event"


If it's GOTTA be another old @$$ white man ... can it at least be Bernie?


Boy, Bernie is quite the supporter of this Country is he not?....Always finding benefits in how countries like Denmark and Sweden take care of their own and how regimes like China, Cuba and Nicaragua have done great things that need to be recognized.

Holy Cow are you kidding me?


nebish - 2/27/2020 at 01:21 PM

quote:
The current out of control deficit spending, even during what is considered to be good economic times, is scary.


It is a little scary when you think when the next recession comes the government will want to stimulate and thus further deficit spend. Tax receipts to the IRS have grown, but spending has grown more. When will debt and deficits matter, they always just kick the can - unless "deficits don't matter" (Cheney). I think to a point they matter less when interest rates are low as long as they can keep them there.

[Edited on 2/27/2020 by nebish]


cyclone88 - 2/27/2020 at 02:26 PM

quote:
I care about this country. I care about how my country leads the free word. Seems like those on the right love to wave the flag, but that is where their patriotism stops. I guess I'm not that shallow. And yes, I travel a lot internationally (I've been to more countries already in 2020 than most American visit in a lifetime), and I see how Americans have been perceived around the world in the last 3 years differently than they used to be. Sometimes it's like they are walking on eggshells around Americans.

I, too, travel a lot internationally & the global perception has deteriorated dramatically over the last 3 years. My firm & I are personally welcomed for our expertise, but the skepticism about the US's stability is growing. I used to be asked how on earth Trump became president (often by people who used to live in the US, specifically NYC who knew he was a bankrupt carny barker), then why he wasn't removed from office through impeachment when his actions were so obviously corrupt, and now, how is it possible that he's likely to win re-election.

There is a trickle-down of distrust of American anything because Trump is mercurial, disloyal to our allies, & a liar. How can anyone feel certainty when Trump tweets policy changes in the middle of the night over some perceived slight? He interferes in areas in which he knows absolutely nothing & that's scary.

Now, US health professionals are concerned that Americans themselves aren't going to get correct info about the pandemic COVID19 virus when it widens here. Trump, who used to be a notorious germaphobe who wouldn't even shake hands, is downplaying the danger. He contradicts the CDC, WHO, and health professionals & has trained his "base" not to trust media. The man has no respect for anyone who has expertise in anything & he just fires or undermines him - particularly in instances involving military or science. He doesn't inspire confidence that he can lead in a health crisis - so he's passed it off to the sphinx-like Pence. My trips to other continents have already been canceled.

I don't have answers for any of what's past. I don't have answers as to why the democrats are in such shock, disarray, or disbelief that they haven't spent the past 3 years planning surefire ways of unseating him w/a candidate who'll restore stability, repair relationships w/allies, and generally get the country operating w/3 branches of government rather than an unstoppable autocrat. I haven't heard love for ANY candidate - other countries aren't looking to a socialist or isolationist US. They want their old friend back.


adhill58 - 2/27/2020 at 02:40 PM

quote:
quote:
The nice thing about the Obama days was that we didn't have a national embarrassment representing us on the world stage, telling lies every single day


Curious, this affects you in what way? Is your life any worse with your Congressman, State senator, Senator, Assemblyman, City Councilman and Mayor doing the exact same thing, the only real difference being some of these representatives are on the local level?

--------------------------------------------------------------------------- --------------------------------------------------
The thing you stated about Trump being "a national embarrassment representing us on the world stage, telling lies every single day, and doing everything in his power to divide this country." - When is someone who supports Trump or hates democrats going to disagree with your point or defend Trump on that? Same goes for actions with Putin, KJU, foreign policy/ actions - Iran, North Korea, Syria. Why can't he be defended? Do they agree with his beliefs with these dictators and agree with his foreign policy?


Once again, how does this affect you?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------- -----------------------------------------------
quote:
"None of my personal success has anything to do with who is President." Absolutely. I have made my success as an individual not because of nor in spite of government or who is president - be it a president who is a statesman and respected around the world or a president who is a national and global embarrassment.


What does the President being a statesman or a "national and global embarrassment." have to do with your success or lack of it?



Boy, Bernie is quite the supporter of this Country is he not?....Always finding benefits in how countries like Denmark and Sweden take care of their own and how regimes like China, Cuba and Nicaragua have done great things that need to be recognized.

Holy Cow are you kidding me?


Funny how about ten posts ago, BIGV was indignantly asking people how Trump praising foreign dictators affects them personally, suggesting no one should care what leaders say if the gas stays cheap. But Sanders saying that literacy programs are good - no matter where they happen - causes him to feel the need to post his disbelief.




adhill58 - 2/27/2020 at 03:04 PM

quote:
quote:
Funny how about ten posts ago, BIGV was indignantly asking people how Trump praising foreign dictators affects them personally, suggesting no one should care what leaders say if the gas stays cheap. But Sanders saying that literacy programs are good - no matter where they happen - causes him to feel the need to post his disbelief.


When he agrees with a liberal, he gets agitated apparently. He’s just a troll who comes here to make every thread about himself with some type of confrontation. I have no idea why Rowland would tolerate this even for a minute on an Allman Brothers website.




I am not sure he needs to be given a timeout or anything, I just think he hurts his credibility to argue both sides of a topic within a dozen posts of each other.


BIGV - 2/27/2020 at 05:43 PM

quote:
I don't have answers as to why the democrats are in such shock, disarray, or disbelief that they haven't spent the past 3 years planning surefire ways of unseating him w/a candidate


I would think the biggest issue is a lack of leadership. For the last three years their emphasis has been on attempts to discredit the sitting President and not on solutions that the electorate can believe in and respond to on election day. Pete Buttigieg continues to be spot on with his depiction of what is going on with his party...The two choices seem to be an ancient, angry Socialist with a history of heart ailments and another old man who continues to open his mouth just to change feet. In this last debate, Joe Biden claimed that 150 million people have been killed by handguns in this country; the DNC just allows this mess to continue.

Hillary to the rescue.


BIGV - 2/27/2020 at 05:57 PM

quote:
But Sanders saying that literacy programs are good - no matter where they happen


But in Cuba's case, what else is being sacrificed? Yep, school is free, looks like a wonderful place to live and raise your kids.



Bhawk - 2/27/2020 at 06:06 PM

quote:
I would think the biggest issue is a lack of leadership. For the last three years their emphasis has been on attempts to discredit the sitting President and not on solutions that the electorate can believe in and respond to on election day.


Which of the nearly 300 bills passed by the House and sent to the Senate awaiting debate and vote in 2019 do you have an issue with?

EDIT: Correction. Nearly 400 bills.

[Edited on 2/27/2020 by Bhawk]


BIGV - 2/27/2020 at 06:10 PM

quote:
quote:
I would think the biggest issue is a lack of leadership. For the last three years their emphasis has been on attempts to discredit the sitting President and not on solutions that the electorate can believe in and respond to on election day.


Which of the nearly 300 bills passed by the House and sent to the Senate awaiting debate and vote in 2019 do you have an issue with?

EDIT: Correction. Nearly 400 bills.


I am only speaking to the title of this thread when it comes to leadership or lack thereof as it relates to the November Election. Do you feel these debates are helping the DNC?


Bhawk - 2/27/2020 at 06:21 PM

quote:
quote:
quote:
I would think the biggest issue is a lack of leadership. For the last three years their emphasis has been on attempts to discredit the sitting President and not on solutions that the electorate can believe in and respond to on election day.


Which of the nearly 300 bills passed by the House and sent to the Senate awaiting debate and vote in 2019 do you have an issue with?

EDIT: Correction. Nearly 400 bills.


I am only speaking to the title of this thread when it comes to leadership or lack thereof as it relates to the November Election. Do you feel these debates are helping the DNC?


Someday, you'll answer a question posed to you.

I'll answer yours, though.

I think these debates neither hurt nor help, because the vast majority of people that will vote in November don't pay any attention. This is February. Given America's microscopic attention span, there will be plenty more things that happen by this weekend that will push whatever happened in a debate to distant memory.

The last debate landed "huge" viewership of 15.3 million.

128.8 million people voted in the last election. 15.3 million is 11.8% of 128.8 million.

It's easy to think that the majority of the public is paying attention, but they aren't. Never really have.

Come November, The Red Team will vote Trump, The Blue Team will vote whoever the Democratic nominee is. The rest is just noise.


Stephen - 2/27/2020 at 06:37 PM

It’s getting into apples & oranges now tho
If the Democrats in 2019 sent nearly 400 bills to the Senate for advice/consent, that’s a good thing & shows good leadership -
off the campaign trail

On it, the leadership’s incessant hollow attempts at discrediting Trump is all but conceding they don’t have a good enough candidate of their own who can unseat him in Nov, & their rabid anyone-but-Trump approach has lost steam/credibility

The terrorist/totalitarian/tyrant tendencies of the president cited by some here on the boards - that he’s trying to make the US his own private Russia, he persecutes children etc etc - aren’t even worthy of comment

There’s a long way to go on the trail, & many bills to be enacted/tabled/sent to committee in the House/Senate chambers in Wash DC........best wishes

[Edited on 2/27/2020 by Stephen]


BIGV - 2/27/2020 at 06:53 PM

quote:
Which of the nearly 300 bills passed by the House and sent to the Senate awaiting debate and vote in 2019 do you have an issue with?


I've absolutely zero idea. I will admit that I do not pay much attention to that facet of either Congress or the Senate.

Which ones do you approve of?


BrerRabbit - 2/27/2020 at 07:35 PM

quote:
The terrorist/totalitarian/tyrant tendencies of the president cited by some here on the boards - that he’s trying to make the US his own private Russia, he persecutes children etc etc - aren’t even worthy of comment


Your comment is noted.


Bhawk - 2/27/2020 at 08:22 PM

quote:
On it, the leadership’s incessant hollow attempts at discrediting Trump is all but conceding they don’t have a good enough candidate of their own who can unseat him in Nov, & their rabid anyone-but-Trump approach has lost steam/credibility

The terrorist/totalitarian/tyrant tendencies of the president cited by some here on the boards - that he’s trying to make the US his own private Russia, he persecutes children etc etc - aren’t even worthy of comment



Translation: There is no legit criticism of Trump, he does nothing wrong. I will hold opposition candidates to an even higher standard.

Same ol conservative rap, just a new election year.


MartinD28 - 2/27/2020 at 08:23 PM

quote:
quote:
The terrorist/totalitarian/tyrant tendencies of the president cited by some here on the boards - that he’s trying to make the US his own private Russia, he persecutes children etc etc - aren’t even worthy of comment


Your comment is noted.



X2

To the original post quoted - Because in the language of Trump these are hoaxes and fake news?


adhill58 - 2/27/2020 at 09:20 PM

quote:
quote:
But Sanders saying that literacy programs are good - no matter where they happen


But in Cuba's case, what else is being sacrificed? Yep, school is free, looks like a wonderful place to live and raise your kids.





"Once again, how does this affect you?"

This is your response when someone complains about Trump talking up how strong and sexy Putin and Kim are.

Try some continuity.


Stephen - 2/27/2020 at 09:35 PM

quote:
quote:
quote:
The terrorist/totalitarian/tyrant tendencies of the president cited by some here on the boards - that he’s trying to make the US his own private Russia, he persecutes children etc etc - aren’t even worthy of comment


Your comment is noted.



X2

To the original post quoted - Because in the language of Trump these are hoaxes and fake news?


Not Trump’s language, but that of his enemies who go to irresponsible extremes to put him in a bad light - constructive criticism is one thing, undermining is another - it makes the nation as a whole look bad & gives rise to the embarrassment people feel to be Americans when they are traveling abroad, as was mentioned previously


BIGV - 2/27/2020 at 09:35 PM

quote:
quote:
quote:
But Sanders saying that literacy programs are good - no matter where they happen


But in Cuba's case, what else is being sacrificed? Yep, school is free, looks like a wonderful place to live and raise your kids.





"Once again, how does this affect you?"

This is your response when someone complains about Trump talking up how strong and sexy Putin and Kim are.

Try some continuity.


How does this affect me?...Because this is representative of the type of thing that Bernie is selling, I am not buying and have no desire to be saddled with the Tax burden any of his programs are sure to bring.

Free College & the cessation of student loan debt. Absolutely not.


Stephen - 2/27/2020 at 09:46 PM

quote:
quote:
On it, the leadership’s incessant hollow attempts at discrediting Trump is all but conceding they don’t have a good enough candidate of their own who can unseat him in Nov, & their rabid anyone-but-Trump approach has lost steam/credibility

The terrorist/totalitarian/tyrant tendencies of the president cited by some here on the boards - that he’s trying to make the US his own private Russia, he persecutes children etc etc - aren’t even worthy of comment



Translation: There is no legit criticism of Trump, he does nothing wrong. I will hold opposition candidates to an even higher standard.

Same ol conservative rap, just a new election year.


The translation is inaccurate, never said he does nothing wrong or that I hold others to a higher standard - am neither liberal or conservative, Repub or Dem, left or right - go by what my standard of common sense & fair play
You believe he’s a horrible person in a few posts - I don’t think he’s that bad - it’s a friendly disagreement


BrerRabbit - 2/27/2020 at 10:16 PM

quote:
. . .his enemies who go to irresponsible extremes to put him in a bad light . . .


Trouble is, all you have to do to put him in a bad light is point out stuff he does and says all the time. The only way to not put him in a bad light is to keep the lights off.


2112 - 2/27/2020 at 10:23 PM

quote:
quote:
But Sanders saying that literacy programs are good - no matter where they happen


But in Cuba's case, what else is being sacrificed? Yep, school is free, looks like a wonderful place to live and raise your kids.


Cuba's leaders crack down on the free press. They put emphasis on government leaders loyalty above all else, including competence. They are extremely corrupt and owe a lot to Putin.

Sound like the US is getting closer to the Cuba model of government all the time.


MartinD28 - 2/27/2020 at 10:25 PM

quote:
quote:
quote:
quote:
The terrorist/totalitarian/tyrant tendencies of the president cited by some here on the boards - that he’s trying to make the US his own private Russia, he persecutes children etc etc - aren’t even worthy of comment


Your comment is noted.



X2

To the original post quoted - Because in the language of Trump these are hoaxes and fake news?


Not Trump’s language, but that of his enemies who go to irresponsible extremes to put him in a bad light - constructive criticism is one thing, undermining is another - it makes the nation as a whole look bad & gives rise to the embarrassment people feel to be Americans when they are traveling abroad, as was mentioned previously


Not Trump language - that's laughable. That's practically his only language.

Come on now. Anybody with a set of ears hears Trump endlessly saying "hoax" and "fake news" any time his lies are exposed, and that's on a daily basis. Are you going to next come on here and say that Trump doesn't lie regularly and exponentially more than any other president that's been in office?


BrerRabbit - 2/27/2020 at 10:36 PM

There you go unfairly insulting the president again. Wait a sec, you were simply talking about what he actually is. Tell you what - just don't refer to the president at all, then you won't be insulting him.


BIGV - 2/27/2020 at 10:48 PM

quote:
You believe he’s a horrible person in a few posts - I don’t think he’s that bad - it’s a friendly disagreement


X2


BrerRabbit - 2/27/2020 at 11:29 PM

- 1


MartinD28 - 2/27/2020 at 11:35 PM

quote:
- 1


- 2


adhill58 - 2/28/2020 at 02:07 PM

quote:
quote:
quote:
quote:
But Sanders saying that literacy programs are good - no matter where they happen


But in Cuba's case, what else is being sacrificed? Yep, school is free, looks like a wonderful place to live and raise your kids.





"Once again, how does this affect you?"

This is your response when someone complains about Trump talking up how strong and sexy Putin and Kim are.

Try some continuity.


How does this affect me?...Because this is representative of the type of thing that Bernie is selling, I am not buying and have no desire to be saddled with the Tax burden any of his programs are sure to bring.

Free College & the cessation of student loan debt. Absolutely not.


Again, try some continuity. If your concern is Sanders' potential tax policy, then start with that.

Why are you griping that Sanders was praising other countries right after you were telling people that Trump praising foreign leaders was no reason to complain? The people complaining about Trump's love of dictators don't like that it is representative of a leader who believes he should be able to interfere in the judicial process, etc. It seems like you are so quick to jump to the next fight with your perceived enemies on the left that you forget when you were just arguing the opposite side of a situation.

It's like how you can moan about who a small percentage of your tax dollars might potentially help, but you have told me to ("love it or leave it") move to a Scandinavian country if I think their gun policies might be better than ours.


Stephen - 2/28/2020 at 02:40 PM




"Once again, how does this affect you?"


It's like how you can moan about who a small percentage of your tax dollars might potentially help, but you have told me to ("love it or leave it") move to a Scandinavian country if I think their gun policies might be better than ours.


Not to change the subject, but the most recent gun attack, in which 5 people were shot & killed at a Milwaukee brewery, shows the near impossibility of any laws anywhere, US, Scandinavia, Canada etc - being effective in deterring gun violence

Was good at his job - was a good neighbor - most said they didn’t see it coming - was starting to show signs of paranoia at work from an ongoing dispute w/another employee

Was a hobbyist who collected guns -
& out of the blue, snapped -
No laws or legislation can prepare or protect people in a circumstance like that


Stephen - 2/28/2020 at 03:07 PM

The POTUS candidates are stumping for votes going into Super Tuesday - the four B’s, Bernie, Biden, Bloomberg & Buttigieg, still look like they’re in front - who will garner the most delegates next week - Klobuchar, Steyer, Warren, Weld others are still in it - good people one & all,

& I feel the same way about the President too - I for one believe he’s not the monstrous maniacal criminal pushing the communist manifesto that some believe he is & is doing -
With malice toward none

[Edited on 2/28/2020 by Stephen]


Stephen - 2/28/2020 at 03:44 PM

That’s the problem tho - from reading the article, it Was out of the blue to those who knew him & were familiar w/the circumstances - he was liked by most of the employees, apparently
agree w/your point about the woulda coulda shoulda aspect of it

**Sure, if you were rude to my family if invited into my home I’d be disgusted & irate - just don’t see that behavior in Trump - direct, minces no words, no political manners etc, sure - but rude etc etc, no

**Later edit - my bad Skydog32103, I misread your post before, that’s why my reply made no sense - “see rewrite above “ -

[Edited on 2/28/2020 by Stephen]


cyclone88 - 2/28/2020 at 04:03 PM

quote:
quote:
An avid gun enthusiast who was showing signs of paranoia at work, are 2 glaring signs...far from out of the blue. Failure to recognize these red flags and threats are part of the problem.

Back to back adhill’s point, I think he’s just asking the other poster for an explanation on the double standard surrounding the Democratic policies being discussed. [Edited on 2/28/2020 by Skydog32103]

Yes, we're going a bit off-topic, but you make an excellent point that the shooter's mental instability (more than a year-long dispute w/another employee escalating into paranoia that led coworkers to joke about wearing tin foil hats, lawsuit v. company's health plan & chronic unrelieved pain) may not have been present at the time of gun purchase. What's more useful in such a situation is knowing the signs of a change in mental status & acting. 72-hour psych holds to evaluate if someone is a danger to himself of others often originate at the workplace even if the underlying problem developed elsewhere in the patient's life (i.e., physical illness). A gun enthusiast everyone KNEW was making bizarre accusations (coworkers breaking into his home, moving chairs around in his house) isn't "out-of-the-blue." He was a "when" it was going to happen.

Back on topic, "How does this affect you?" isn't a question that furthers useful conversation. Public policy from either party is just that - for the benefit of the public. Otherwise, there are 331mm answers to that question.


MartinD28 - 2/28/2020 at 05:39 PM

quote:
quote:
at the very least, he’s not the monstrous maniacal criminal pushing the communist manifesto that some believe he is & is doing


If I came into your home and treated your family the way Trump treats other people, you would be disgusted and irate.




Those children in cages surely don't think he's a monster. The people that were in his rallies where he amped up the crowd and offered to pay legal bills if they attack protesters surely don't think he has these tendencies. The gold star familes he attacks are pleased to accept his criticism. His support of Roy Moore makes him a kind and compassionate man in support of the misunderstood Moore. The Kurds (former allies) in Syria who were gunned down after his foreign policy blunders don't get to think anymore. A guy who calls women pigs and dogs...fill in the blanks. We can go on and on with his disgusting words and actions towards fellow humans, but he is a self absorbed maniac. Sad that too many brush his ways it aside.

Big question - would anyone want Trump around their wife, daughter, or girlfriend?


Stephen - 2/28/2020 at 06:35 PM

I don’t see evidence of facism or the Fatherland of Nazi Germany coming into our society - these to me mean gas chambers, branding people w/numbers on their bodies, the wholesale extermination of people in the name of creating One Genetically Superior race of man

If however we are lurching toward that, & many believe we are, then I would join the popular uprising for the removal right now of the president - but, w/disrespect to none, don’t think we are - don’t see Trump as a Hitler-disciple dictator -
Good weekend to all, be safe


BrerRabbit - 2/28/2020 at 08:31 PM

quote:
I don’t see evidence of facism or the Fatherland of Nazi Germany coming into our society


Funny, neither did the Germans.


adhill58 - 2/28/2020 at 09:20 PM

quote:
I don’t see evidence of facism or the Fatherland of Nazi Germany coming into our society - these to me mean gas chambers, branding people w/numbers on their bodies, the wholesale extermination of people in the name of creating One Genetically Superior race of man

If however we are lurching toward that, & many believe we are, then I would join the popular uprising for the removal right now of the president - but, w/disrespect to none, don’t think we are - don’t see Trump as a Hitler-disciple dictator -
Good weekend to all, be safe



Great argument:

"I can still find examples of how Hitler and the Nazis were worse than Trump and his followers are, so how is it fair to say Trump is not what we should want in a POTUS and/or anything but a perfect gentleman?"


adhill58 - 2/28/2020 at 09:28 PM

quote:
quote:
quote:
An avid gun enthusiast who was showing signs of paranoia at work, are 2 glaring signs...far from out of the blue. Failure to recognize these red flags and threats are part of the problem.

Back to back adhill’s point, I think he’s just asking the other poster for an explanation on the double standard surrounding the Democratic policies being discussed. [Edited on 2/28/2020 by Skydog32103]

Yes, we're going a bit off-topic, but you make an excellent point that the shooter's mental instability (more than a year-long dispute w/another employee escalating into paranoia that led coworkers to joke about wearing tin foil hats, lawsuit v. company's health plan & chronic unrelieved pain) may not have been present at the time of gun purchase. What's more useful in such a situation is knowing the signs of a change in mental status & acting. 72-hour psych holds to evaluate if someone is a danger to himself of others often originate at the workplace even if the underlying problem developed elsewhere in the patient's life (i.e., physical illness). A gun enthusiast everyone KNEW was making bizarre accusations (coworkers breaking into his home, moving chairs around in his house) isn't "out-of-the-blue." He was a "when" it was going to happen.

Back on topic, "How does this affect you?" isn't a question that furthers useful conversation. Public policy from either party is just that - for the benefit of the public. Otherwise, there are 331mm answers to that question.


I agree that "how does this affect you?" is a useless question. I was simply using V's own quote to remind him of how he was reacting to someone on the other side doing what he was currently doing. I do find this line of questioning funny coming from a right-winger when Fox News went crazy about how Obama was making us all look weak when he wore a khaki suit in a press breifing.


cyclone88 - 2/28/2020 at 11:22 PM

quote:
I agree that "how does this affect you?" is a useless question.

Adhill, I know you were making a point & that the question didn't originate w/you. Sorry, if you thought otherwise. The flip side - "Are you better off than you were 4 years ago?" often posed by media or candidates themselves is equally useless & conversation stopper.


BIGV - 2/29/2020 at 12:31 AM

quote:
I don’t see evidence of facism or the Fatherland of Nazi Germany coming into our society - these to me mean gas chambers, branding people w/numbers on their bodies, the wholesale extermination of people in the name of creating One Genetically Superior race of man


I do not either, the rebuttal being "Well, we don't mean like a Holocaust"......Then why attempt the association? In that this is what the majority is going to visualize when they hear this term...


BrerRabbit - 2/29/2020 at 02:11 AM

Most Germans and the world were unaware of the Holocaust until after the war.

I guess we will find out what is happening here after Europe liberates Dumbfuckistan.


BIGV - 2/29/2020 at 02:17 AM

quote:
Most Germans and the world were unaware of the Holocaust until after the war.


This is what most Germans "claimed".....The rest of the world?..sure.


BrerRabbit - 2/29/2020 at 03:56 AM

quote:
This is what most Germans "claimed".


They most likely thought it was fake news.


nebish - 2/29/2020 at 05:39 PM

quote:
quote:
I would think the biggest issue is a lack of leadership. For the last three years their emphasis has been on attempts to discredit the sitting President and not on solutions that the electorate can believe in and respond to on election day.


Which of the nearly 300 bills passed by the House and sent to the Senate awaiting debate and vote in 2019 do you have an issue with?

EDIT: Correction. Nearly 400 bills.

[Edited on 2/27/2020 by Bhawk]


This is normal now. Just as McConnell is doing now, Harry Reid did to the hundreds of Republican controlled House passed bills. Par for the course these days.


Bhawk - 2/29/2020 at 07:31 PM

quote:
quote:
quote:
I would think the biggest issue is a lack of leadership. For the last three years their emphasis has been on attempts to discredit the sitting President and not on solutions that the electorate can believe in and respond to on election day.


Which of the nearly 300 bills passed by the House and sent to the Senate awaiting debate and vote in 2019 do you have an issue with?

EDIT: Correction. Nearly 400 bills.

[Edited on 2/27/2020 by Bhawk]


This is normal now. Just as McConnell is doing now, Harry Reid did to the hundreds of Republican controlled House passed bills. Par for the course these days.


I forgot that even the notion of absolute equivalence excuses all behavior. My bad.


nebish - 2/29/2020 at 09:17 PM

quote:
quote:
quote:
quote:
I would think the biggest issue is a lack of leadership. For the last three years their emphasis has been on attempts to discredit the sitting President and not on solutions that the electorate can believe in and respond to on election day.


Which of the nearly 300 bills passed by the House and sent to the Senate awaiting debate and vote in 2019 do you have an issue with?

EDIT: Correction. Nearly 400 bills.

[Edited on 2/27/2020 by Bhawk]


This is normal now. Just as McConnell is doing now, Harry Reid did to the hundreds of Republican controlled House passed bills. Par for the course these days.


I forgot that even the notion of absolute equivalence excuses all behavior. My bad.


Just politics as usual in Washington. Politics at it's worst when they denied Merrick Garland a vote. Obstruct (or resist if that word is preferred) what the other party wants. I don't like it that way, but everyone can see it.


nebish - 2/29/2020 at 09:22 PM

quote:
quote:
Little useful info from the debate, the last one mercifully is March 15 - Bernie still in front going into next week’s make or break (for some candidates) ‘super Tuesday’ -

maybe it’s prejudicial/politically IC or whatever, just am not comfortable with someone of his advanced age being president - he’s outta the gate strong, but over the long haul......


quote:

I've been saying that about Sanders since 2016. I also consider his health in that he's had at least one heart attack on the campaign trail.

The problem is most of the other candidates aren't far behind him & would be the oldest president at inauguration (beating out Trump at 70 by almost a decade). At inauguration Sanders would be 79, but Bloomberg & Biden would be 78. Trump seems positively youthful in that he would be 74. Warren would be 71.

Prior to Trump, 69 yr old Reagan's age was an issue during his 1st campaign. We now know symptoms of Alzheimer's disease were present late in his second term & he survived an assassination attempt - that had nothing to do w/age - but there was a period of recovery during his presidency.

There's never been an octogenarian president even when LEAVING office. The "only as old as you feel/act" platitude is just that; we're as old as our bodies are.


quote:
So where do you draw the line on age? What is the cutoff? Trump is pushing 74 so not too much younger than Bernie. Throw in Trump's "immaturity factor", and that really presents a problem for Trump - old in years but acts like a juvenile. That's a real dichotomy to reconcile for someone to vote for on top of the rest of his challenges as a decent human being.



We don't know the inner or mental health of these people (although many think they know Trump's mental health)...the only candidate of advanced age I have some concern about is Biden just because I think the effects of his age is fairly visible in not only his appearance, but with his speech. Bernie and Bloomberg at 78 I have yet to see any issue with age effecting them. They both had heart attacks, although Bloomberg's was 20 years ago or something I think. Heart attacks occur in much younger people sometimes too.

So, I think a lot of people are pretty disappointed that we are down to a few old white guys.


MartinD28 - 3/1/2020 at 01:33 AM

quote:
quote:
quote:
quote:
quote:
I would think the biggest issue is a lack of leadership. For the last three years their emphasis has been on attempts to discredit the sitting President and not on solutions that the electorate can believe in and respond to on election day.


Which of the nearly 300 bills passed by the House and sent to the Senate awaiting debate and vote in 2019 do you have an issue with?

EDIT: Correction. Nearly 400 bills.

[Edited on 2/27/2020 by Bhawk]


This is normal now. Just as McConnell is doing now, Harry Reid did to the hundreds of Republican controlled House passed bills. Par for the course these days.


I forgot that even the notion of absolute equivalence excuses all behavior. My bad.


Just politics as usual in Washington. Politics at it's worst when they denied Merrick Garland a vote. Obstruct (or resist if that word is preferred) what the other party wants. I don't like it that way, but everyone can see it.


You can bet that if an opportunity presents itself this year, Mitch will do a 180 and have Trump gift another anti choice judge to SCOTUS. In essence, he'll go against his own reasoning last time out and leave it up to the next president as a vote of the people was his line re: MG. One day, the people of Kentucky will rid this country of Mitch.


nebish - 3/1/2020 at 04:13 AM

Andrew Yang:
“...Bernie represents anger and revolution, Bloomberg represents wealth and managerial competence, I feel like Biden is caring, empathy and patriotism”

Big win for Biden. Pretty good victory speech too - a message he can take and build on.

Tuesday will tell what kind of legs this might have. Critically important who gets 15% of the vote in California and what kind of lead Sanders takes away at the end of Super Tuesday states.

Steyer out. Good showing for him relatively speaking, but I think he spent something like 22mil just in SC. The only other candidate I believe who spent over 1mil was Bootedge-edge.


Bhawk - 3/1/2020 at 04:04 PM

quote:
quote:
quote:
quote:
quote:
I would think the biggest issue is a lack of leadership. For the last three years their emphasis has been on attempts to discredit the sitting President and not on solutions that the electorate can believe in and respond to on election day.


Which of the nearly 300 bills passed by the House and sent to the Senate awaiting debate and vote in 2019 do you have an issue with?

EDIT: Correction. Nearly 400 bills.

[Edited on 2/27/2020 by Bhawk]


This is normal now. Just as McConnell is doing now, Harry Reid did to the hundreds of Republican controlled House passed bills. Par for the course these days.


I forgot that even the notion of absolute equivalence excuses all behavior. My bad.


Just politics as usual in Washington. Politics at it's worst when they denied Merrick Garland a vote. Obstruct (or resist if that word is preferred) what the other party wants. I don't like it that way, but everyone can see it.


A 10 minute review of the Reid leadership vs the McConnell leadership, however, shows...

Eff it. Republican good, Democrat bad. Can’t fight it.


BrerRabbit - 3/1/2020 at 06:02 PM

quote:
Can’t fight it.


It can and will continue to be fought, but save your breath for the battle. Propaganda warfare is a demoralization psy-op. That is what is being conducted via the internet, cybersappers. Don't fall for it, we got this - they have made their fatal mistake already: They f*cked with America.


nebish - 3/1/2020 at 09:53 PM

quote:
A 10 minute review of the Reid leadership vs the McConnell leadership, however, shows...

Eff it. Republican good, Democrat bad. Can’t fight it.


I prefer Republican bad, Democrat bad. Perhaps you might prefer Democrat bad, Republican worse?


Bhawk - 3/2/2020 at 12:07 AM

quote:
quote:
A 10 minute review of the Reid leadership vs the McConnell leadership, however, shows...

Eff it. Republican good, Democrat bad. Can’t fight it.


I prefer Republican bad, Democrat bad. Perhaps you might prefer Democrat bad, Republican worse?


No. I simply believe that there are many situations where differences are clear, and “they all suck” isn’t deep enough. It just makes it easier to justify whatever happens no matter who does it.


BIGV - 3/2/2020 at 01:29 AM

quote:
Big win for Biden. Pretty good victory speech too -


Did Joe again the mention the 150 million Americans that have been killed by Handguns?


nebish - 3/2/2020 at 03:38 AM

quote:
quote:
Big win for Biden. Pretty good victory speech too -


Did Joe again the mention the 150 million Americans that have been killed by Handguns?


He did not.

Pete out.


Jerry - 3/2/2020 at 07:42 PM

quote:
quote:
was starting to show signs of paranoia at work from an ongoing dispute w/another employee

Was a hobbyist who collected guns -
& out of the blue, snapped -


An avid gun enthusiast who was showing signs of paranoia at work, are 2 glaring signs...far from out of the blue. Failure to recognize these red flags and threats are part of the problem. One shooting example has nothing to do with the ongoing gun debate. We could list dozens of examples of mass shootings that could’ve resulted in far fewer casualties, saving dozens of lives and families from tragedy, had we have common sense gun laws on the books. The desire to ignore this, while children and loved ones are being slaughtered in public, is reprehensible.

Back to back adhill’s point, I think he’s just asking the other poster for an explanation on the double standard surrounding the Democratic policies being discussed.


[Edited on 2/28/2020 by Skydog32103]


Why would being an avid gun enthusiast be a "glaring sign", and a "red flag"?


nebish - 3/3/2020 at 12:32 PM

Amy out.

Pete and Amy endorse Biden along with Beto (which wouldn't appear to mean much but he is popular in Texas).

How many early votes already cast for Buttigieg and Klobuchar?

Big day - Super Tuesday!


porkchopbob - 3/3/2020 at 07:22 PM

Be sure to follow FOX News' Brit Hume on more Sexy Vixen Vinyl---AHH! I mean, Presidential primary coverage.

https://www.huffpost.com/entry/fox-news-brit-hume-browser-tabs_n_5e5e462fc5 b63aaf8f5d29eb?ncid=APPLENEWS00001

quote:
Someone remind Fox News’ Brit Hume to close down the tabs on his internet browser the next time he decides to share a screenshot online.

On Tuesday morning, the conservative network’s senior political analyst posted a screen grab of primary election betting odds showing former Vice President Joe Biden as the Democratic 2020 front-runner, ahead of Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.).

Twitter users were more titillated, however, by an open browser tab reading “Sexy Vixen Vinyl.”



Hume tweeted the screenshot at 5:37 a.m. It’s unclear what the Sexy Vixen Vinyl browser tab may have featured.

The post, that remained online for almost three hours before being deleted, caught the attention of plenty of people on social media:




cyclone88 - 3/3/2020 at 07:56 PM

quote:
It's looking like Biden will take the ticket. Seems like Trump knew this months ago.

and thus, the motive for dirtying Biden up that led to impeachment.


nebish - 3/4/2020 at 04:19 AM

Big night for Biden!

Projected to win Massachusetts despite reportedly not spending any ad money there (according to msnbc).

Bloomberg is a dud. Reports he will drop out.


MartinD28 - 3/4/2020 at 12:54 PM

quote:
quote:
Bloomberg is a dud. Reports he will drop out.


thank God. might have been the worst campaign i've ever seen.


His primary goal was to oust the toxicity known as Trump. He said he'd spend big $$$$ to do this. Let him step up now, back Biden, and inject his millions into Uncle Joe's campaign.


cyclone88 - 3/4/2020 at 01:38 PM

quote:
His primary goal was to oust the toxicity known as Trump. He said he'd spend big $$$ to do this. Let him step up now, back Biden, and inject his millions into Uncle Joe's campaign.

The Biden & Bloomberg camps have presumably been in discussions mostly because big donors were holding back on Biden to see how Bloomberg fared. With Bloomberg out, Biden should get a fund-raising windfall. Bloomberg was willing to spend personal money to oust Trump. Don't know that he's going to inject much to support someone else or that his support/endorsement means much.

Wish Warren would drop out. Can't even win her state.

Does this mean the only debaters on 3/15 are Bernie & Joe if Bloomberg & Warren drop out?


Rusty - 3/4/2020 at 02:00 PM

Bloomberg shifting his finances over to Biden? And all this time I was worried that the election would go to the guy (or gal) with the most money! Bloomberg has demonstrated that he can produce dazzling television ads - even if he can't out-debate a third grader. Biden just ain't gettin' any younger or quicker. My prediction: look for a Biden/Warren ticket ... losing big time to his Orangeness in November. I'll stay home for that one.


nebish - 3/4/2020 at 03:16 PM

Biden/Warren is a good strategic ticket to try and retain the more liberal Bernie type supporters.

If what Andrew Yang says is true, some of his campaign staff is working for Bloomberg, Yang says the DNC election operation pales in comparison to what Bloomberg has assembled. Extensive analytics and technology. Does he keep that operation running for another candidate?

Policy aside, if Biden becomes President we will be fine in big picture. As I've alluded to, I am a little worried 2 years from now his mental fitness may not be up for it. But as I have mostly felt during these Trump years...the country and government is resilient enough to almost cruise on auotpilot most days (at least when the President isn't actively undermining it).


nebish - 3/4/2020 at 03:29 PM

I would prefer to see a Biden/Klobuchar ticket, I think they are more aligned ideology wise and should something happen to Joe I'd be more comfortable with Klobuchar vs Warren. Amy doesn't bring in new votes for Joe the way Warren could however. People who like Amy are voting Joe anyway. The fear is the liberal wing (mostly Bernie supporters) won't fall in line. So maybe they do something to try and appeal to them. If they need to. Trump is so unpopular as long as the nominee doesn't blow it they will be favored.


MartinD28 - 3/4/2020 at 03:36 PM

What Joe was able to achieve last night was pretty impressive. Think about this - his infrastructure pales in comparison to that of Bloomberg and Bernie, and Joe spent pennies compared to the other 2. He is riding a wave of momentum thanks much in part to James Clyburn of South Carolina and the 3 moderates who dropped out of the race after smelling reality.

I don't think this has been mentioned, but in some states the turnout was off the charts compared to 4 years ago, and that tells you that people are engaged and want Trump gone. This is an extension of the 2018 midterms where the HOR flipped, and I suspect it will be repeated later this year with flipping of the WH and ending a really bad dream of four years of a reality TV presidency and daily chaos that he generates.


cyclone88 - 3/4/2020 at 04:02 PM

quote:
Biden/Warren is a good strategic ticket to try and retain the more liberal Bernie type supporters.

If what Andrew Yang says is true, some of his campaign staff is working for Bloomberg, Yang says the DNC election operation pales in comparison to what Bloomberg has assembled. Extensive analytics and technology. Does he keep that operation running for another candidate?

Policy aside, if Biden becomes President we will be fine in big picture. As I've alluded to, I am a little worried 2 years from now his mental fitness may not be up for it. But as I have mostly felt during these Trump years...the country and government is resilient enough to almost cruise on auotpilot most days (at least when the President isn't actively undermining it).

Bloomberg has a personal grudge v. Trump & vice versa. He's unlikely to deny the party any analytics/technology - the foundation of his business - to the candidate to defeat Trump.

Biden's health - particularly unsubstantiated suggestions of dementia or stroke after effects - is a negative, but Reagan had Alzheimer's, Edith Wilson essentially was the de facto president after her husband's debilitating stroke, & Ford was suspected of having a stroke near the end of his term. All finished their terms. Only FDR died while in office leaving the VP to take over.

Warren is a disastrous VP choice. Bernie almost has a cult following whereas Warren has no following. Biden's rise suggests voters' wish to "return to normal" or at least civility as well as getting back on track w/allies, supporting our own military & intel agencies, restoring faith in the DOJ, & returning to science as the guide for environmental policies.

Defeating a president who undermines the government is the goal. The country can't run on autopilot for 4 more years because Trump simple can't control his impulses. 8 years of his tantrums & egomania would be hard to undo.


Stephen - 3/4/2020 at 04:06 PM

Bloomberg has also smelled reality & dropped out - his $$$$ still make him a factor in the campaign tho as far as how best to oust Trump
it’ll be up for grabs between old warhorses Joe & Bernie at the DNC

[Edited on 3/4/2020 by Stephen]


Rusty - 3/4/2020 at 04:10 PM

On the lighter side- if Biden wins, the GOP won't have to worry (too much ) about him being reelected. This, presuming he makes it through the inauguration speech! But Joe's smart! When he was 7 years old, he could name all 4 U.S. presidents!


Rusty - 3/4/2020 at 04:17 PM

quote:
Biden/Warren is a good strategic ticket to try and retain the more liberal Bernie type supporters. ...




How so? "Big Pharma Joe" is AGAINST legalization ... he is (like Bloomberg) essentially a Republican trying to pass himself off as a Democrat - cashing in on the "anybody but Trump" movement.


BIGV - 3/4/2020 at 04:35 PM

quote:
cashing in on the "anybody but Trump" movement.


Exactly and in reality makes Democrats no better than the President they despise.

Biden does not even know where he is half the time and the other 50% of the the time has no clue as to what he's just said.

Somebody here tell us what this gentleman stands for.


2112 - 3/4/2020 at 05:19 PM

quote:
quote:
cashing in on the "anybody but Trump" movement.


Exactly and in reality makes Democrats no better than the President they despise.


How so?


BIGV - 3/4/2020 at 05:26 PM

quote:
quote:
quote:
cashing in on the "anybody but Trump" movement.


Exactly and in reality makes Democrats no better than the President they despise.


How so?


I stated above that I believe if you're going to support Candidate A, only because you despise the President and believe he is your best chance to put a Democrat in the WH, then have the courage to tell me why. What does Biden espouse that you believe in? If you can not, or will not, then, in my opinion you are no better that the people with which you so vehemently disagree. Either you (not personally) are a hypocrite or you truly believe Biden will make a wonderful leader. If that's the case...

...Why will Joe Biden make a good President?


lukester420 - 3/4/2020 at 05:42 PM

Eat **** big puss. You still have no reasoning other than 'hilary bad trump good immigrants scary'
So once again you have proven yourself to be the biggest hypocrite here. How's Putin's dick taste?


BIGV - 3/4/2020 at 05:49 PM

quote:
Eat **** big puss. You still have no reasoning other than 'hilary bad trump good immigrants scary'
So once again you have proven yourself to be the biggest hypocrite here. How's Putin's dick taste?


Do you have any other "skills" other than the "ability" to not control your emotions?

Pathetic


Brendan - 3/4/2020 at 06:21 PM

quote:
Why will Joe Biden make a good President?


Here's a good start Vince.

quote:
Biden's rise suggests voters' wish to "return to normal" or at least civility as well as getting back on track w/allies, supporting our own military & intel agencies, restoring faith in the DOJ, & returning to science as the guide for environmental policies.



These are important to a lot of people and Biden checks a lot of those boxes.


Rusty - 3/4/2020 at 06:59 PM

quote:
quote:
Why will Joe Biden make a good President?


Here's a good start Vince.

quote:
Biden's rise suggests voters' wish to "return to normal" or at least civility as well as getting back on track w/allies, supporting our own military & intel agencies, restoring faith in the DOJ, & returning to science as the guide for environmental policies.



These are important to a lot of people and Biden checks a lot of those boxes.


For just about every president to date, that's a pretty standard list of stuff. None of that ever seemed to be at question before the current administration.

I'm certainly no Trump fan. "Anything but Trump" ... I get that - but I'd like to be a little more specific.


BIGV - 3/4/2020 at 06:59 PM

quote:
quote:
Why will Joe Biden make a good President?


Here's a good start Vince.

quote:
Biden's rise suggests voters' wish to "return to normal" or at least civility as well as getting back on track w/allies, supporting our own military & intel agencies, restoring faith in the DOJ, & returning to science as the guide for environmental policies.



These are important to a lot of people and Biden checks a lot of those boxes.


Fair enough and thanks for the response. I do realize that you don't speak for all Democrats or voters in general and certainly understand how people can feel as though the president is "not their cup of tea"...

Me?.. I see JB as yet another old politician who feels this job is something he has earned and is less about an "improvement" in whatever may ail this country.

Thanks though Brendan.


2112 - 3/4/2020 at 09:05 PM

quote:
quote:
quote:
quote:
cashing in on the "anybody but Trump" movement.


Exactly and in reality makes Democrats no better than the President they despise.


How so?


I stated above that I believe if you're going to support Candidate A, only because you despise the President and believe he is your best chance to put a Democrat in the WH, then have the courage to tell me why. What does Biden espouse that you believe in? If you can not, or will not, then, in my opinion you are no better that the people with which you so vehemently disagree. Either you (not personally) are a hypocrite or you truly believe Biden will make a wonderful leader. If that's the case...

...Why will Joe Biden make a good President?


The irony of this is hilarious, considering you have stated over and over that the best thing about Trump in the White House is that it means Hillary isn't in the White House.

But I'll play. Yes, I think Biden will make a good president. He is a moderate like myself, and is the best available choice. Certainly not a perfect choice, as few ever are, but he has experience and will bring sanity back to the executive branch.


gotdrumz - 3/4/2020 at 09:05 PM

quote:
Eat **** big puss. You still have no reasoning other than 'hilary bad trump good immigrants scary'
So once again you have proven yourself to be the biggest hypocrite here. How's Putin's dick taste?


Tell us how you really feel

If we were playing charades, my guess would be you were acting like Trump.


nebish - 3/4/2020 at 11:01 PM

I personally do not care about marijuana legalization and did not know or care Biden's opinion on it. The people who do care about that will have to decide how important that is for them. I can say one thing for sure, Joe Biden is not a Republican. He can be labeled an establishment corporate Democrat, of which there are many, but a Republican he is not.

As for the question would Joe Biden make a good President?

I personally feel he will hold the office well and has a lifetime of qualifications and knowledge. It's fine if one doesn't value the kind of experience and knowledge and are looking for something else in their candidate; if that is the case, then I doubt somebody of that view is going to see him as a good President. Biden knows Washington, he knows the world and how it works. I had more hesitation and questions about Obama than I will for Biden. Some fear this country, and to an extent the world, could run off the rails at any moment with Trump as President. That fear is lifted if somebody like Joe Biden takes over. So for those people, bringing stability and normalcy to the office and US policy again will go towards answering the good President question.

It's a little bit of an exaggeration on Biden's confusion, but there is certainly some truth in that and I don't know how to completely assess how or if that is going to be an issue. People will have to weigh the potential risk of that with the potential risk(s) of Trump.

If you look at some of the exit polls for last night's primaries you saw that health care, climate change and racial equality were 3 reoccurring themes. These are not priorities for me, but I can appreciate other people's concerns even if I do not share them. Republicans have offered little to nothing there, so for those voters the choice is clear and what happens on those issues will go towards answering the good President question.

Everyone looks at things in a range from very different to slightly different, sometimes with overlap and sometimes without.

Just as you, BigV, I believe looks at the answer on the question on if a President is good or not with things like cheap energy and enforcement of immigration law...there are others who value action on climate change in lieu of cheap energy and de-emphasizing enforcement on immigration law to one of more inclusiveness and forgiveness. So with such differing opinions, some people just will never agree if a President is good or not based on how they address those two issues among many many others.

It is always going to be impossible for all of us to ever think a President was good or will be good, because all of us want different things or want to see certain things addressed more or less than others and we are going to value the work and actions of a President differently.

I've gotten to the point of believing that what I want, some 50-50 mix of both sides, is gone and would rather not vote for any major party candidate for President. I voted for Trump because I hoped he wasn't a major party candidate and hoped he would act that way. Instead we got the most partisan and divisive President ever. So I won't be supporting Trump this year. And I won't be voting for Biden or Bernie either this year. I will vote, but I've abandoned being forced to choose what the Republicans and Democrats offer up. If we get Trump for 4 more years, I will be ok with some things and not ok with others. If we get Biden, I will be ok with some things and not ok with others. Some people will think the 45th President was good, some will think the 46th President was good. I'll just think that is an impossible question to answer.


cyclone88 - 3/5/2020 at 12:50 AM

quote:
I can say one thing for sure, Joe Biden is not a Republican. He can be labeled an establishment corporate Democrat, of which there are many, but a Republican he is not.


Absolutely. He is not someone who has switched parties depending upon what is most advantageous at the time as candidates from both parties, including POTUS, have done. He's never been an Independent looking for a vacancy in the GOP or dem slate.

He is a solid conservative dem who has international & national experience - 8 years as VP; Chair, Senate Foreign Relations; & Chair, Senate Judiciary. To those looking for someone to undo damage Trump has done & restore faith in US institutions, Biden is well qualified.


OriginalGoober - 3/5/2020 at 01:26 AM


Joe Biden is a great guy. He is old, forgetfull, and not ready to be president, but he's not Trump, so many will overlook all of this. Joe BIdens VP pick of Crooked Hillary (you heard it hear first) will try to reach back for the democratic moderates. Picking Hillary is brilliant, because it will signal a willingness to return to the Obama years. Joe will retire for health reasons soon after his innauguration. The rest they say, is history.


BrerRabbit - 3/5/2020 at 04:51 AM

quote:
Joe BIdens VP pick of Crooked Hillary (you heard it hear first)


We did not here it hear first, that rumor has been going for a while.


Stephen - 3/5/2020 at 05:25 AM

Any number of configurations for the ticket among the current/former candidates is possible, including Joe/Bernie itself (or vice versa) - hadn’t heard the rumor of Biden/Hillary - will be fun to see how it all shakes down/plays out on the campaign trail/at DNC

[Edited on 3/5/2020 by Stephen]


cyclone88 - 3/5/2020 at 12:16 PM

quote:
Any number of configurations for the ticket among the current/former candidates is possible, including Joe/Bernie itself (or vice versa) - hadn’t heard the rumor of Biden/Hillary

Speculation re the VP nominee is just that - speculation - usually confined to candidates who dropped out of the race who are never chosen. Most nominees for both parties are usually governors or former governors often picked from obscurity.

The troll obsession w/HRC who has zero interest in the race & has said she doesn't plan to endorse anyone is just stale & unimaginative pathology.


MartinD28 - 3/5/2020 at 12:31 PM

quote:
quote:
Joe BIdens VP pick of Crooked Hillary (you heard it hear first)


We did not here it hear first, that rumor has been going for a while.



And the delusion of that rumor continues. When the 2020 election is determined w/out her being a prez of VP candidate, will the soothsayers begin to predict Hillary in 2024? The love for her continues from Moscow to this forum. She is done, finished, toast.


cyclone88 - 3/5/2020 at 12:47 PM

quote:
And the delusion of that rumor continues. When the 2020 election is determined w/out her being a prez of VP candidate, will the soothsayers begin to predict Hillary in 2024?

Interesting that the terms "delusion" & "pathology" were used in 2 posts. When has an obsession w/a candidate continued throughout the term of the elected president into his bid for a 2nd term? She's really got a hold on some.


adhill58 - 3/5/2020 at 02:19 PM

quote:

Joe Biden is a great guy. He is old, forgetfull, and not ready to be president, but he's not Trump, so many will overlook all of this. Joe BIdens VP pick of Crooked Hillary (you heard it hear first) will try to reach back for the democratic moderates. Picking Hillary is brilliant, because it will signal a willingness to return to the Obama years. Joe will retire for health reasons soon after his innauguration. The rest they say, is history.


The imagination of Hillary Clinton as an all-powerful behind-the-scenes puppet master who has literally thousands of Democratic officials doing her secret bidding, with no regard for their own ambitions and careers, to stealthily get her installed as POTUS through ever more creative schemes seems like a bizarre fetish to publicly confess to having. Sadly, like most fetishes, the fantasy has to keep getting weirder for it to remain as stimulating.

Goober's post may be a cry for help...


MartinD28 - 3/5/2020 at 02:31 PM

quote:
quote:

Joe Biden is a great guy. He is old, forgetfull, and not ready to be president, but he's not Trump, so many will overlook all of this. Joe BIdens VP pick of Crooked Hillary (you heard it hear first) will try to reach back for the democratic moderates. Picking Hillary is brilliant, because it will signal a willingness to return to the Obama years. Joe will retire for health reasons soon after his innauguration. The rest they say, is history.


The imagination of Hillary Clinton as an all-powerful behind-the-scenes puppet master who has literally thousands of Democratic officials doing her secret bidding, with no regard for their own ambitions and careers, to stealthily get her installed as POTUS through ever more creative schemes seems like a bizarre fetish to publicly confess to having. Sadly, like most fetishes, the fantasy has to keep getting weirder for it to remain as stimulating.

Goober's post may be a cry for help...

After reading through goob's obsession with HC for the last several years, it makes me think of the Tina Turner song, "What's Love Got To do With It". Love does crazy things to the mind. There are lessons in life that sometimes end in disppointment. I'm afraid goob will be crushed when the reality sinks in that HC's political career and ambitions have ridden off into the sunset.


Rusty - 3/5/2020 at 02:50 PM

quote:
I personally do not care about marijuana legalization and did not know or care Biden's opinion on it. The people who do care about that will have to decide how important that is for them. I can say one thing for sure, Joe Biden is not a Republican. He can be labeled an establishment corporate Democrat, of which there are many, but a Republican he is not. ....




As far as your not, "personally caring" about cannabis legalization: Either you already live in one of the states that have legalized or you choose not to partake. The latter is certainly your own prerogative. But there is more to this issue than a couple of stoners whining about legal weed.

A guy named Blake can walk into a dispensary in one of 11 states and purchase his desires with no fear of molestation by the law. Tax revenues from Blake's purchase will be used for anything from repairs to infrastructure to health care and to finance education. Meanwhile, a guy name Maurice can get pulled over by the cops in places like Brunswick, GA and hauled off to jail - while his car gets impounded and his boss decides to fire him for his arrest. These are NOT far-flung circumstances. I changed the name and location on "Maurice", but that scenario actually played out with a former employee at a former job I had. Bottom line- some Americans have more rights than others. That simply should not be allowed to be!

In addition to the allocation of taxes from Blake's purchase - farmers in his state now have a draught resistant cash crop to benefit from.

Now "Old-Big Pharma Owned Joe" (as well as others like Pete Buttigieg, Mike Bloomberg and others) offer the "let states decide" card. This is nothing more than fence-sitting! I've pointed out often that it took Federal intervention to get basic civil rights in the south. For any presidential candidate to "leave it up to the states" - literally translates to, "that $hit ain't ever gonna happen!".

So, No! Don't be looking for "Bernie's "liberal supporters" to readily and immediately jump into bed with Joe Biden!

Lastly, I don't know what the exact difference between a Republican and "an establishment corporate Democrat" is, but it seems negligible.

You want Biden? Fine! You already know the baggage that comes with him (plagiarist, supporter of Bloomberg- stop and frisk, etc). And I do not mean to sound morbid or pessimistic, but you'll be lucky to get an entire first term out of him.


cyclone88 - 3/5/2020 at 02:59 PM

quote:

makes me think of the Tina Turner song, "What's Love Got To do With It".


Reminds me of the 1966 Napoleon XIV song "They're Coming to Take Me Away, HaHa" that shows up on youtube a lot.


nebish - 3/5/2020 at 03:20 PM

quote:
You want Biden? Fine! You already know the baggage that comes with him (plagiarist, supporter of Bloomberg- stop and frisk, etc). And I do not mean to sound morbid or pessimistic, but you'll be lucky to get an entire first term out of him.


It's not that I "want" Biden...honestly I don't think I want any of them.

In all likelihood one of the following three people will be the next POTUS:

Trump - we know what we'll get

Bernie - nobody knows what we'll get

Biden - a return to recent Democratic leadership normalcy

And then it will come down to Trump vs Bernie or Biden. People are going to have to choose where they align. I can find things I like and don't like about all those choices, none moves me enough to support or block any of them.


Stephen - 3/5/2020 at 03:37 PM

I think we can safely say she won’t be in the running for VP - she hasn’t ofFIcially said so but ....

It sounds ludicrous I know, but still
Why Not Nancy?
Americans saw her tear up her copy of Trump’s speech following his SOTUnion address, later calling it “a manifesto of mistruths” - she’s been at the political forefront of the efforts to oust/unseat/impeach him

If the focus is solely to “Dump That Chump Trump!” instead of trying to sell the ticket in a constructive informational way, she might be just the ticket for VP

Realize she’s currently SOTHouse.....still seems sorta surprising her name hasn’t been mentioned

They could clamor for a Biden<>Sanders ticket at the convention, it’s all speculation/conjecture right now

[Edited on 3/5/2020 by Stephen]


cyclone88 - 3/5/2020 at 03:43 PM

quote:
Trump knew that a large population of Americans were incredibly fearful of the Obama administration. There were the hard-working class folks who felt like they had no choice but to defend themselves from a level playing field for all Americans. Without any type of advantage, they and their children's futures were doomed. Then there were the priviledged upper class folks who wanted to revert back to the 50s. And there are the conservatives who always vote Republican. Each of these 3 groups knows it is wrong to elect a character like Trump to be President of the United States, and none of those groups would have voted for him without an alibi or some type of justification for why it would be ok to do it. Trump knew these groups would need an alibi, so he created the Obama and Hillary demon - his 2 opponents. Those groups didn't care what the alibi was - as soon as it was offered, they were going to take it, no matter what it was. Trump first chose it to be Obama, and then turned it into Hillary, and it worked like a charm. The people constantly bashing and fearing Hillary are actually just shouting their alibi from a rooftop for anyone to hear, just like anyone else feeling guilty. [Edited on 3/5/2020 by Skydog32103]

Skydog, that is a lovely fairytale, but my version is there are people who just have a visceral hatred/fear/revulsion when it comes to HRC. Your explanation would have more credence if the anti-HRC didn't date back at least to her days as 1st Lady of AR when the explanation was she DIDN'T TAKE HER HUSBAND'S LAST NAME when they married so she must be a Yankee, a feminist, and/or godless. The newspaper attacks were relentless. Prior to that, her marriage to Bill in 1975 was head-shaking to some for a smart woman to marry such a cad. At this point, it just seems nonsensical for anyone - media included - to tie her to any political activity post-2016. She rode off into the sunset. Fade to black.


IF - 3/5/2020 at 05:25 PM

Joe Biden was not my first choice for president but now he is my choice. I believe if Elizabeth Warren were to put her support behind Joe Biden then the democrats have a candidate that can go on and beat Trump in the general election.


BrerRabbit - 3/5/2020 at 05:34 PM

quote:
. . .there are people who just have a visceral hatred/fear/revulsion when it comes to HRC


Mommy issues


BIGV - 3/5/2020 at 05:38 PM

quote:
. . .there are people who just have a visceral hatred/fear/revulsion when it comes to HRC



Similar to the Trumparona virus that has afflicted so many here?


BrerRabbit - 3/5/2020 at 05:42 PM

The antipathy towards the Idiot Emperor is based on his behavior. The obsession with HRC goes way deeper than that and has little or nothing to do with her.

[Edited on 3/5/2020 by BrerRabbit]


BIGV - 3/5/2020 at 05:51 PM

quote:
The antipathy towards the Idiot Emperor is based on his behavior. The obsession with HRC goes way deeper than that and has little or nothing to do with her.


Excellent rationale!...When if fact it boils down to one thing, the left can not fathom the thought that one can despise Hillary as much as they hate President Trump. When the left's "curiosity" gets the best of them and they ask why, there is no explanation that will appease them.

This is a fact.


cyclone88 - 3/5/2020 at 06:16 PM

quote:
I have no doubt that what you’re saying is true, but what percentage of the US population was even aware of those things from the 70s in AR? An overwhelming majority of the United States never even knew about her until the 90s when Bill became president. After that, we only heard about her on a widespread national level when Trump began attacking her after Benghazi, when he knew that she would be running in 2016.

The point is some have a visceral negative reaction to HRC no matter where she is or when. She was despised as the FL of AR (Bill's was gov while running for prez in 1992), Bill's Presidential campaign (remember the "I'm not Tammy Wynette standing by her man" 60 minutes interview?), FLOTUS when she was tasked w/healthcare reform & excoriated for its failure) senator, challenger to Obama's run for POTUS (she's causing party disunity!), and Secretary of State. She's been hated by some for 25 years on the national level between 1992 -2016. She's 72, been out of the picture for 4 years, & made it clear she's not interested in the 2020 campaign in ANY capacity so time to let go.


BIGV - 3/5/2020 at 06:19 PM

quote:
The point is some have a visceral negative reaction to HRC no matter where she is or when.


Kind of like the reaction at the mere mentioning of the President's name?


BrerRabbit - 3/5/2020 at 06:53 PM

quote:
. . .so time to let go.


The Hillary stuff was an understandable threat response at first, but is clearly a disorder by now.

Without professional help and group support it is impossible to undo a pathological kink. These folks will be bashing Hillary to their dying day.

If people are still freaking out over Trump in 2028 we will have to take a look at that in its own time. For now, it appears to be a reaction to a present reality, based on a tangible cause, and that it will simply be good riddance to bad rubbish in 2024 (hopefully 2020 but unlikely), and we will move on.


cyclone88 - 3/5/2020 at 06:56 PM

quote:
quote:
The antipathy towards the Idiot Emperor is based on his behavior. The obsession with HRC goes way deeper than that and has little or nothing to do with her.

When if fact it boils down to one thing, the left can not fathom the thought that one can despise Hillary as much as they hate President Trump.

Without all the generalities, Trump has been despised w/sound financial & civic reasons or dismissed as a fraud & buffoon by NYers since he launched himself in the 1980s. That's 8mm people. He was equally despised & shunned in Palm Beach when he purchased the sacred Marjorie Merriweather Post house Mar-a-Lago & proposed a real estate development but settled for turning it into A CLUB.

He didn't have a national presence until the TV show The Apprentice in 2004 when he 1st obtained a Q rating - a score for name recognition. The average viewership was about 7mm over 10 years. Safe to assume, there were some who viscerally disliked or loved him like any other TV personality - Roseanne, Rosie O'Donnell, Simon Cowell, the Hiltons, the Kardashians, any late night host, etc. - since they don't actually know them.

It wasn't until his presidential run & his first term that provided behavior & actions on which to base an opinion.






BIGV - 3/5/2020 at 06:59 PM

quote:
These folks will be bashing Hillary to their dying day.


As will a good percentage of the left leaning contributors on this message board.


BrerRabbit - 3/5/2020 at 07:09 PM

quote:
It wasn't until his presidential run & his first term that provided behavior & actions on which to base an opinion.


I am proof of this, as my admitted antipathy developed as the White House collapsed, not before. I certainly enjoyed a good laugh at the cultish fawning, but at first I was intrigued and entertained by this maverick rogue. I even applauded some of his points, every last one forgotten after the campaign. Forgotten, as he will be no later than November 7, 2024, thanks to term limits.


cyclone88 - 3/5/2020 at 07:12 PM

quote:
quote:
. . .so time to let go.


clearly a disorder by now.


called paranoia - an irrational fear that HRC will somehow interject herself into national politics.

Trump is actually in office & running so we are at least dealing in reality.




BrerRabbit - 3/5/2020 at 07:52 PM

quote:
called paranoia - an irrational fear that HRC will somehow interject herself into national politics.


I don't like having to agree with a term as strong as 'paranoia' and the serious mental illness it implies but gotta say it sure looks that way.


BrerRabbit - 3/5/2020 at 08:23 PM

quote:
. . .the left can not fathom the thought that one can despise Hillary as much as they hate President Trump. When the left's "curiosity" gets the best of them and they ask why, there is no explanation that will appease them.


Hello? 'Why Do You Dislike Hillary Clinton' has been a perennial question on this board. I genuinely wanted to hear why, and started a thread for Hillary haters to air their specific grievances. Page after page of innuendo and "Crooked Hillary" parrot sqwawks but NOT ONE ACTUAL COMPLAINT. Not one! (Well there was one, and I thought it was pretty good - alloak compared her to Big Nurse Ratchitt, which I had to agree with.)

You yourself are the loudest of the lot asserting that it is your right to despise her and it is nobody's business why. Which is fine of course, but disqualifies you from bellyaching that "The Left" doesn't want to hear you.

"The Left" is all ears, the floor is yours, tell us one reason you despise her so personally, so much more than other politicians with the same views.

"The Left" awaits your reply.


BrerRabbit - 3/5/2020 at 09:48 PM

quote:
. . . there is no explanation that will appease them.


So what. There is no explanation, period.

Who cares? I don't get all indignant that "The Right" doesn't want to hear my explanation! "The Right" can kiss my @ss! "The Left" too! And all you brainwashed propaganda spewing sockpuppets with the internet and cable tv arm up your rears who just love to call entire populations "The Right" or "The Left". Damn, that is some old noise by now.



[Edited on 3/5/2020 by BrerRabbit]


BIGV - 3/6/2020 at 12:27 AM

quote:
quote:
. . . there is no explanation that will appease them.


So what. There is no explanation, period.

Who cares? I don't get all indignant that "The Right" doesn't want to hear my explanation! "The Right" can kiss my @ss! "The Left" too! And all you brainwashed propaganda spewing sockpuppets with the internet and cable tv arm up your rears who just love to call entire populations "The Right" or "The Left". Damn, that is some old noise by now.


It's not about your explanation. The left can't seem to accept ANY thoughts someone who dislikes HC offers up. Like you, I don't care in the least what you all think. And yes, most of you here are leftists.


BrerRabbit - 3/6/2020 at 12:43 AM

quote:
. . . a good percentage of the left leaning contributors on this message board.


Whoa WE ARE THE LEFT. All five or six of us, the heathen hordes. A good percentage is what 40-60% so say TWO to FOUR WHOLE LEFTISTS OBSESSING ABOUT TRUMP PAST HIS EXPIRATION DATE.

WE ARE THE FACELESS LOCKSTEP MASSES. WE ARE THE LEFT.


BrerRabbit - 3/6/2020 at 01:14 AM

quote:
And yes, most of you here are leftists.


And you would rather hang out with us because we are cooler, funnier, more artistic, fun to yell at each other, with way better taste in music, and way better musicians than the boneheads of Dumfukistan who can't even type a sentence let alone dream one up.

If you think all us masses of evil leftists here are so terrible go hang out with your wonderful Redhat friends on some site and have a good time talking about how great the wall is and how fair and decent the conc... er, border detention facilities are, and how bad social security is, and various ways of mounting a flag in your pickup bed, and how funny Sis looks ductaped to that chair in the basement since we aint a-gonna allow her to abort Uncle Jebz .baby. What are you trying to oonvince us for? Are you a masochist? Most of us here left and right and whatever are comfortable in our views, you are the only one always with the "the Left never listens and doesn't allow me to say stuff" SO TF WHAT MAN????? It is really aggravating!
The Right doesn't listen either, you don't see the liberals getting all uptight about it.





BIGV - 3/6/2020 at 01:27 AM

quote:
What are you trying to convince us for?


I am not trying to convince anyone of anything, just speaking my mind.


BrerRabbit - 3/6/2020 at 02:02 AM

That's cool. I tell you what, sure there are more libs here than cons - such a small group what is it something like three or four cons and six , seven libs tops. Now, I bet a lib minority on a con dominated board would get a whole lot more sh!t than the cons get here - and they absolutely would not get to fling ANY lib sh!t at all, where here the cons can say pretty much whatever they please.

I am saying you got it completely backwards and liberals are more tolerant of opposing views than conservatives are. Sure the conservatives get some heat but there is more fraternity and respect all round.


BIGV - 3/6/2020 at 04:25 AM

quote:
I am saying you got it completely backwards and liberals are more tolerant of opposing views than conservatives are.


I could not disagree more.


BIGV - 3/6/2020 at 05:23 AM

quote:
Now, I bet a lib minority on a con dominated board would get a whole lot more sh!t than the cons get here - and they absolutely would not get to fling ANY lib sh!t at all, where here the cons can say pretty much whatever they please.


Then again, I believe it is the left that preaches tolerance.


BrerRabbit - 3/6/2020 at 06:01 AM

There you go with the hypocricy angle again . Liberals can be intolerant bsstards like anyone else, they are human. But it takes a Liberal to admit that. Conservatives are always Johnny On the Spot with how not racist and sexist they are. Old Muleklan here was a regular frekin Ghandi way he told it.

Tell you what, I will go find a conservative music site like Charlie Daniels, Kid Rock, or Ted Nugent, hang around and be the Lone Liberal Hero same as the role you play here - and come back here and let you know if I was accepted as you are here.

Was thinking on this though, there are a more equal balance of conservatives and liberals here than might seem - and we get along a lot better than the open hatred and disrespect Ive seen out there in comments, reddit, wherever. Whipping Post is remarkable in that respect.


KCJimmy - 3/6/2020 at 04:58 PM

quote:
you don't see the liberals getting all uptight about it.

quote:
...you got it completely backwards and liberals are more tolerant of opposing views than conservatives are.

LMAO! You are a riot! These are funnier than your assid story. You are being sarcastic right? Hard to tell sometimes but there is no other explanation here.


BrerRabbit - 3/6/2020 at 05:02 PM

Not sarcastic at all KC
- you never had the wonderful experience of being terrorized by rednecks so you just don't know.

Me I have had a shotgun jammed right in my back for being a hippy in the wrong part of Tennessee.

Which for a raggedy longhair in 1975 was most of Tennessee.



[Edited on 3/6/2020 by BrerRabbit]


BrerRabbit - 3/6/2020 at 05:04 PM

quote:
quote:
am saying you got it completely backwards and liberals are more tolerant of opposing views than conservatives are.

quote:
I could not disagree more.



You are blinded by your persecution complex.

It is a lot easier to be a Rhode Island Redneck than it is to be Mississippi Hippie.

You can quote me on that.

Or closer to home, who do you think would be more welcomed and feel safer, a staunch white conservative from deep behind the Orange Curtain in true blue liberal Sedona, the Blue Oasis of Arizona, as blue as Boulder and Santa Fe, or a degreed, professional, and progressive liberal black lesbian from Oakland in firetruck red Kingman AZ?


BrerRabbit - 3/6/2020 at 05:13 PM

nope, dead serious man

This pretty much says all that needs to be said about conservatives:



[Edited on 3/6/2020 by BrerRabbit]


KCJimmy - 3/6/2020 at 05:14 PM

quote:
Not sarcastic at all KC
- you never had the wonderful experience of being terrorized by rednecks so you just don't know.

Me I have had a shotgun jammed right in my back for being a hippy in the wrong part of Tennessee.

Which for a raggedy longhair in 1975 was most of Tennessee.

You don't know WHAT I have experienced. I am a long haired white hippy with an African American daughter living in rural Alabama. We have rednecks, racisits, redneck-racists and FATHER RAPERs. Forgive me please, it looked A LOT like sarcasm.


BrerRabbit - 3/6/2020 at 05:19 PM

Then don't pretend you don't know what I am talking about! And gotta say I am proud of you for what you do where you are. That is great. I love you man! No sarcasm


KCJimmy - 3/6/2020 at 05:24 PM

10-4 Buddy. I knew you were serious but I couldn't resist. You are my friend even if you vote funny.

[Edited on 3/6/2020 by KCJimmy]


BrerRabbit - 3/6/2020 at 05:39 PM

Seriously KC what you just described, where you live and your situation, how you are, that is true revolution, good medicine for a sick country - doing more for tolerance and justice than ten thousand self satisfied liberals cozy in Bluetown USA could ever do.

You are walking the walk. So very cool, thx for the perspective, that Easy Rider, Kent State stuff brings back bad memories gets myself down.


nebish - 3/18/2020 at 03:08 PM

Sounds like the official end for Bernie might be near:

quote:
No sugarcoating it, last night did not go the way we wanted.

And while our campaign has won the battle of ideas, we are losing the battle over electability to Joe Biden.

So we wanted to give you an update on what is next for Bernie and for our campaign:

First, Bernie will likely have a vote on the coronavirus in the Senate today. He’ll take that vote, and you can expect him to continue his fight to ensure we are protecting working people, low-income people, and the most vulnerable communities, not just giant corporations and Wall Street in any response to the virus.

Then after this vote today, Bernie and Jane are going to get on a plane back to Vermont. Once there, they’ll begin holding conversations with supporters to get input and assess the path forward for our campaign. We will keep you updated as those conversations progress.

In the meantime, please continue to stay safe, and thank you for everything you’ve done so far. It means the world to Bernie and Jane.

In solidarity,

Faiz Shakir
Campaign Manager


MartinD28 - 3/18/2020 at 04:51 PM

quote:
Sounds like the official end for Bernie might be near:

quote:
No sugarcoating it, last night did not go the way we wanted.

And while our campaign has won the battle of ideas, we are losing the battle over electability to Joe Biden.

So we wanted to give you an update on what is next for Bernie and for our campaign:

First, Bernie will likely have a vote on the coronavirus in the Senate today. He’ll take that vote, and you can expect him to continue his fight to ensure we are protecting working people, low-income people, and the most vulnerable communities, not just giant corporations and Wall Street in any response to the virus.

Then after this vote today, Bernie and Jane are going to get on a plane back to Vermont. Once there, they’ll begin holding conversations with supporters to get input and assess the path forward for our campaign. We will keep you updated as those conversations progress.

In the meantime, please continue to stay safe, and thank you for everything you’ve done so far. It means the world to Bernie and Jane.

In solidarity,

Faiz Shakir
Campaign Manager




"And while our campaign has won the battle of ideas, we are losing the battle over electability to Joe Biden."

I like Bernie, and he has a following / movement, but please tell me how he quantifies that he won the battle of ideas. It sounds good, but it really means little. If it was accurate, it would translate to the measure that matters - votes. And last night nor the last few weeks don't show that he won the battle of ideas. What it does do is provide some level of bargaining with Biden. Let's just hope that Bernie & his followers get on board to throw Trump overboard.


cyclone88 - 3/18/2020 at 05:28 PM

quote:
Sounds like the official end for Bernie might be near:
quote:
And while our campaign has won the battle of ideas, we are losing the battle over electability to Joe Biden.

What ideas? His ideology obviously didn't resonate w/enough voters to even get them out to vote much less win primaries. It's statistically impossible for him to win the nomination. He's kidding himself & his supporters if he thinks it was the electability factor. That is so 3 months ago.

Bernie was a good candidate in 2016. He's been nothing but a spoiler in 2020. He doesn't even recognize that "issues" aren't on the radar for many voters w/COVID19 ravaging their livelihoods.

Be a good senator and otherwise, stay out of the way.


Stephen - 3/18/2020 at 05:32 PM

Yep it looks like Biden - thought Bernie would make more of a showing - Bernie will throw his whole support behind the Democratic effort


BIGV - 3/18/2020 at 05:36 PM

quote:
thought Bernie would make more of a showing


So did he.

quote:
Bernie will throw his whole support behind the Democratic effort


But will his supporters follow his lead?


Stephen - 3/18/2020 at 05:43 PM

Would guess so - if it increases chances of defeating Trump, his supporters would be all in


MartinD28 - 3/18/2020 at 06:47 PM

quote:
Would guess so - if it increases chances of defeating Trump, his supporters would be all in


Right now Trump's record and performance may be enough to do him in w/out all of Bernie's supporters jumping in.

Which of the below do we think are most impressive of Trump's performance in the the last 3 plus years:

Having Mexcio pay for the wall that he promised?

His denials and lack of leadership on Coranavirus after "the Trump administration’s decision in 2018 to dismantle a National Security Council directorate at the White House charged with preparing for when, not if, another pandemic would hit the nation."

The stock market numbers that he lives for daily and brags about. Compare the numbers when he took office to today's numbers. This alone may cause him to gorge on Mig Macs - his favorite food.


Stephen - 3/18/2020 at 06:56 PM

With all those factors the election should be Biden’s to lose imo - depending on how he does until convention time, who he picks for VP etc
If coronavirus is still with us I don’t see how the political parties could have their conventions

[Edited on 3/18/2020 by Stephen]


cyclone88 - 3/18/2020 at 07:00 PM

quote:
Would guess so - if it increases chances of defeating Trump, his supporters would be all in

Wasn't there a discussion the other day that analysis shows that Bernie supporters are most definitely NOT all in? They're committed to the man not the party & are likely to not vote at all rather than vote for someone other than Bernie. It's the reason Bernie can't negotiate w/Biden re the platform. If Bernie can't deliver his voters, he's got nothing to bargain with. Warren didn't have that problem - her supporters seem more attached to her ideas than herself - yet hasn't endorsed either candidate.


MartinD28 - 3/18/2020 at 07:25 PM

quote:
quote:
Would guess so - if it increases chances of defeating Trump, his supporters would be all in

Wasn't there a discussion the other day that analysis shows that Bernie supporters are most definitely NOT all in? They're committed to the man not the party & are likely to not vote at all rather than vote for someone other than Bernie. It's the reason Bernie can't negotiate w/Biden re the platform. If Bernie can't deliver his voters, he's got nothing to bargain with. Warren didn't have that problem - her supporters seem more attached to her ideas than herself - yet hasn't endorsed either candidate.


True. At this point though Warren really has only one person to endorse. It's no longer a race, and Bernie and his wife know this. They are figuring out his next move. Will he go all in on the party he caucuses with, or will he remain the leader of his cause? What matters more?

The thing is - at this point he probably needs to handoff the "cause" thing to someone younger, and I hope it's not AOC.

The country needs a return to some semblance of normalcy, and political revolutions and failed experiments like Trump are not what's needed now. Change is good, but in my mind change works best and is most practical as it evolves and is not rampant or radical.


[Edited on 3/18/2020 by MartinD28]


cyclone88 - 3/18/2020 at 09:51 PM

quote:
The thing is - at this point he probably needs to handoff the "cause" thing to someone younger, and I hope it's not AOC.

The country needs a return to some semblance of normalcy, and political revolutions and failed experiments like Trump are not what's needed now. Change is good, but in my mind change works best and is most practical as it evolves and is not rampant or radical.[Edited on 3/18/2020 by MartinD28]


Way back when candidates announced, I scoffed that no one over 70 should be running (ha!) and that Bernie should sit back & be an elder statesman. The problem is he's not a statesman. Never has been. He's an activist. Frankly, I think his key issues - healthcare & higher education - are being addressed NOW in a national emergency. I don't think we're likely to return to where we were before. Healthcare will have new delivery systems (not tents in parking lots but better triage, clinical staff schedules, medication availability, telemedicine, etc.) & financing (no copay for x, y, z). Colleges, too, will get the message that some classes CAN be taught online no matter how prestigious the university & they'll get a taste of how much no playoffs in sports affects alumni donations. Either way, Bernie isn't the guy that's going to be involved.


nebish - 3/20/2020 at 03:27 AM

quote:
quote:
Sounds like the official end for Bernie might be near:

quote:
No sugarcoating it, last night did not go the way we wanted.

And while our campaign has won the battle of ideas, we are losing the battle over electability to Joe Biden.

So we wanted to give you an update on what is next for Bernie and for our campaign:

First, Bernie will likely have a vote on the coronavirus in the Senate today. He’ll take that vote, and you can expect him to continue his fight to ensure we are protecting working people, low-income people, and the most vulnerable communities, not just giant corporations and Wall Street in any response to the virus.

Then after this vote today, Bernie and Jane are going to get on a plane back to Vermont. Once there, they’ll begin holding conversations with supporters to get input and assess the path forward for our campaign. We will keep you updated as those conversations progress.

In the meantime, please continue to stay safe, and thank you for everything you’ve done so far. It means the world to Bernie and Jane.

In solidarity,

Faiz Shakir
Campaign Manager




"And while our campaign has won the battle of ideas, we are losing the battle over electability to Joe Biden."

I like Bernie, and he has a following / movement, but please tell me how he quantifies that he won the battle of ideas. It sounds good, but it really means little. If it was accurate, it would translate to the measure that matters - votes. And last night nor the last few weeks don't show that he won the battle of ideas. What it does do is provide some level of bargaining with Biden. Let's just hope that Bernie & his followers get on board to throw Trump overboard.


I don't know exactly how his campaign would answer this, but I think they would say that other candidates have adopted his ideas. What he was saying in 2016 in large part became the party norm in 2019/20. And look at Biden picking up some Bernie-esque policy positions. Sure Joe says he has always been there on free college, whatever, Bernie made him go there and Joe is pandering for votes at worst and maybe he actually always wanted it at best. Bernie will take credit for pushing the conversations further left to his position, that is the win I think they are talking about.


Rusty - 3/23/2020 at 03:29 PM

Well, thanks in no small part to the Coronavirus/Covid 19 outbreak, it looks like the entire nation and world are about to be in need of wide-spread assistance. Perhaps 4 years of unbridled socialism is gonna be what it takes to get our country back to its knees. Maybe it's time to reconsider Mr. Socialism, himself! Let's tax some legal weed and distribute those tax revenues as needed! Yeah, you know who I'm talkin' 'bout!


This thread come from : Hittin' The Web with the Allman Brothers Band
http://allmanbrothersband.com/

Url of this website:
http://allmanbrothersband.com//modules.php?op=modload&name=XForum&file=viewthread&fid=127&tid=147636