• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Cont: The Trump Presidency: Part 19

Status
Not open for further replies.
Upchurch said:
Well, he's not going to be able to apply his racist or misogynistic tactics. Not directly, anyway.
Click to expand...

Oh, he can against (((Bernie))) or (((Bloomberg))). Just has to be a bit more subtle about it. Oh wait, I just suggested Trump could be subtle. Forget that.

The religious far right isn't going to vote for a Jew, but they're a lost cause anyhow.

Assuming the Dem candidate is a white male, I'd be astounded if the Veep nominee isn't a female or person of color or both.
 
Trebuchet said:
Oh, he can against (((Bernie))) or (((Bloomberg))). Just has to be a bit more subtle about it. Oh wait, I just suggested Trump could be subtle. Forget that.

The religious far right isn't going to vote for a Jew, but they're a lost cause anyhow.

Assuming the Dem candidate is a white male, I'd be astounded if the Veep nominee isn't a female or person of color or both.
Click to expand...

Stacey Abrams.
 
Captain_Swoop said:
Trump Tweets



As usual, Jay Powell and the Federal Reserve are slow to act. Germany and others are pumping money into their economies. Other Central Banks are much more aggressive. The U.S. should have, for all of the right reasons, the lowest Rate. We don’t, putting us at a.....



....competitive disadvantage. We should be leading, not following!
Click to expand...
If Obama had said this he would have been crucified.
 
thaiboxerken said:
He probably has someone informing him on this one. Moderates are dropping off to consolidate against Bernie and could very well win. He can then claim the system was rigged against Bernie. Ignorant people would believe him, including uninformed Bernie bros.

I support Bernie over Biden, as an FYI.
Click to expand...
I also prefer Bernie, and I think that whatever happens will be easily spun either way. On the one hand it's easy to see a conspiracy, where at a certain point a bunch of moderates throw in the towel and switch to Biden, sandbagging Bernie. And indeed that might be what they're doing. On the other hand, it's clear that they're not going to get nominated, and that it's prudent to quit, so it's also prudent to throw in the towel, and they can be expected to throw their support toward the person they prefer. That might well be all they are doing. Or a little of both. The same action can easily be done for different reasons.

Or one can hope (not likely) that Biden doesn't get the gold, but Bernie and Warren keep an edge together, and at the last minute Bernie tosses his support to Warren (she's younger and healthier). Fat chance, but my favorite in all this has always been Warren, so might as well throw it at the wall and see if it sticks.
 
Stacyhs said:
I have always thought that fear is the basis of conservatism: fear of change (traditionalists), fear of 'different' (homophobia, bigotry, racism), fear of the unknown (again traditionalist/maintain the status quo). <Snip>
Click to expand...

Yes- and that's why they're so good at campaigning but crappy at governing. Fear is a powerful motivator to get people to vote but one cannot run a government on that basis.

Take a look at this cartoon:



This has to rank in the top 1% of GOP projecting their own tactics onto the Dems.
 
Minoosh said:
In the abstract, no, but after 9/11 the situation wasn't abstract. In that one instance I was fine with regime change, even knowing innocent people would die.
Click to expand...

But Shrub and the neocons were quite explicit that we were not there to effectuate "regime change" but rather to whack the bad guys. But it soon evolved to what they insisted it was not.

I was against the invasion. The Afghans had ground Russia into mincemeat and they were right next door. We were bound to face a similar fate being 8,000 miles further away.

Here's a few questions that could occupy the rest of your life: What would Gore have done in the same circumstances? Would the Republicans been 100% behind him? What would the world look like now?
 
bruto said:
I also prefer Bernie, and I think that whatever happens will be easily spun either way. On the one hand it's easy to see a conspiracy, where at a certain point a bunch of moderates throw in the towel and switch to Biden, sandbagging Bernie. And indeed that might be what they're doing. On the other hand, it's clear that they're not going to get nominated, and that it's prudent to quit, so it's also prudent to throw in the towel, and they can be expected to throw their support toward the person they prefer. That might well be all they are doing. Or a little of both. The same action can easily be done for different reasons.

Or one can hope (not likely) that Biden doesn't get the gold, but Bernie and Warren keep an edge together, and at the last minute Bernie tosses his support to Warren (she's younger and healthier). Fat chance, but my favorite in all this has always been Warren, so might as well throw it at the wall and see if it sticks.
Click to expand...


The fact that both Klobuchar and Buttigieg both dropped out today, just one day before Super Tuesday, convinces me that their intention is to spoil Sanders' chance. I mean, why the hell wouldn't they just coast through tomorrow, at least, before announcing. I can't think of a single reason why, other than being a spoiler for Bernie. I'm still seeing advertisements for both of them, so it's not like they pulled their advertising and got their money for it back; they didn't. So, unless they had ulterior motives (like playing spoiler) I can't think of one reason to not wait and at least see Super Tuesday's results before dropping out. Makes no sense--except for playing spoiler.
 
SezMe said:
But Shrub and the neocons were quite explicit that we were not there to effectuate "regime change" but rather to whack the bad guys. But it soon evolved to what they insisted it was not.

I was against the invasion. The Afghans had ground Russia into mincemeat and they were right next door. We were bound to face a similar fate being 8,000 miles further away.

Here's a few questions that could occupy the rest of your life: What would Gore have done in the same circumstances? Would the Republicans been 100% behind him? What would the world look like now?
Click to expand...


I have doubts 9/11 would have happened under a Gore presidency. It's always been said that the Bush team dismissed the Clinton's team's warnings of bin Laden being determined to strike. I don't think that dismissal would have happened with Gore; I'll admit I don't know if that would have been sufficient to stop 9/11, however.
 
slyjoe said:
Captain_Swoop said:
Trump Tweets

The food is GREAT at Sammy’s Mexican Grill in Phoenix, Arizona. Congratulations to Betty & Jorge Rivas on doing such a wonderful job. I will try hard to stop by the next time I am in Phoenix. Support Sammy’s!
Click to expand...

Sammy's is in Tucson. They are getting backlash from supporting Trump. And Trump saying they are in Phoenix won't help their business.
Click to expand...


It's in Catalina, a bit north of Tucson, beautiful view of the Santa Catalina mountains. We're living just south of there at the moment.

But Sammy's is quite ordinary food. In Catalina, go here...

https://itsgreektomecatalina.com/
 
Cabbage said:
The fact that both Klobuchar and Buttigieg both dropped out today, just one day before Super Tuesday, convinces me that their intention is to spoil Sanders' chance. I mean, why the hell wouldn't they just coast through tomorrow, at least, before announcing. I can't think of a single reason why
Click to expand...

I can! They are indeed conspiring...but not for politics. They're in love! It's a secret, forbidden romance. Him, the hitherto Official First Gay Candidate, it would devastate the public to learn he fell for a woman. Her, the Abusive Boss, it would shock the people to learn she possesses the tender emotions. It was unexpected but so profound, the way their eyes locked across the debating arena, his dollar-sign-shaped pro-capitalist pupils and her basilisk unjust-prosecution glare, and just like that in an instant it was True Love! They agreed to throw away their candidacies because neither could bear the thought of defeating the other, of perhaps winning office and being thus forever set out of reach of the beloved...they've snuck away in secret to indulge in the carnal, bestial lusts in a seedy motel room, their forms locked together in unthinkable passion!

Either that, or Bloomberg just bought them off.
 
SezMe said:
But Shrub and the neocons were quite explicit that we were not there to effectuate "regime change" but rather to whack the bad guys. But it soon evolved to what they insisted it was not.

I was against the invasion. The Afghans had ground Russia into mincemeat and they were right next door. We were bound to face a similar fate being 8,000 miles further away.

Here's a few questions that could occupy the rest of your life: What would Gore have done in the same circumstances? Would the Republicans been 100% behind him? What would the world look like now?
Click to expand...

They call it the graveyard of empires for a reason.

Once again they wave goodbye with a cheery "and stay the **** out!"
 
Damn it, this is the wrong thread. I moved my reply to the primary thread. Cabbage.
 
Last edited:
Taking a slight detour from Trump ******* up the country over coronavirus, here's Trump injecting propaganda into climate science:

NY Times: A Trump Insider Embeds Climate Denial in Scientific Research
An official at the Interior Department embarked on a campaign that has inserted misleading language about climate change — including debunked claims that increased carbon dioxide in the atmosphere is beneficial — into the agency’s scientific reports, according to documents reviewed by The New York Times.

The misleading language appears in at least nine reports, including environmental studies and impact statements on major watersheds in the American West that could be used to justify allocating increasingly scarce water to farmers at the expense of wildlife conservation and fisheries.
Click to expand...
 
Cabbage said:
The fact that both Klobuchar and Buttigieg both dropped out today, just one day before Super Tuesday, convinces me that their intention is to spoil Sanders' chance. I mean, why the hell wouldn't they just coast through tomorrow, at least, before announcing. I can't think of a single reason why, other than being a spoiler for Bernie. I'm still seeing advertisements for both of them, so it's not like they pulled their advertising and got their money for it back; they didn't. So, unless they had ulterior motives (like playing spoiler) I can't think of one reason to not wait and at least see Super Tuesday's results before dropping out. Makes no sense--except for playing spoiler.
Click to expand...
It's nasty, but not necessarily a conspiracy if you go on the assumption that they really prefer Biden to Bernie. It's of course quite possible that they're engaging in nefarious strategy to undercut Bernie, and that's likely to be the effect, but if they actually want Biden to be nominated you can hardly expect them to play along as if they didn't.

I like Bernie, and I think he'd make a pretty good president, but he is running for a party nomination in a party that he hasn't actually joined. While I'd like to see the organization take him in and treat him better, I can't entirely fault them for being biased toward those who have belonged to it, and served it, for a long time.

With that said, I think the idea of "electability" is a poor one. It's anybody's guess, and it's often guessed wrong, and the people whose supposedly electable candidate loses the nomination tend to flounce. The party should nominate whoever best represents the party and its members, and then make them as electable as possible by doing the work.
 
Cabbage said:
The fact that both Klobuchar and Buttigieg both dropped out today, just one day before Super Tuesday, convinces me that their intention is to spoil Sanders' chance. I mean, why the hell wouldn't they just coast through tomorrow, at least, before announcing. I can't think of a single reason why, other than being a spoiler for Bernie.
Click to expand...

One reason is to avoid the humiliation of coming in fourth, fifth or sixth and and having to acknowledge "I guess nobody loves me." It's also possible that they sincerely believe it will be easier for Trump to beat Sanders than Biden, and wanted to help Biden -- which is not the same as sabotaging Sanders.
 
Cabbage said:
I have doubts 9/11 would have happened under a Gore presidency. It's always been said that the Bush team dismissed the Clinton's team's warnings of bin Laden being determined to strike. I don't think that dismissal would have happened with Gore; I'll admit I don't know if that would have been sufficient to stop 9/11, however.
Click to expand...

Gore was a "good government" technocrat. I think it's likely that he would have had the intelligence and law enforcement agences talking to each other earlier and more effectively.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom