|
|
Post by Scumhunter on Dec 9, 2019 18:48:27 GMT -5
Very off-topic but welcome back King of Clubs!
Also I explained elsewhere but after redoing the forum in a sense I unfortunately had to reformat some of your threads but ar least the cases are still there.
P.S. As far as Biden, he's always been gaff-prone and goofy and a lot of it is Biden being Biden. I think a lot can be explained that he no longer has the same energy because of the tragic loss of his oldest son.
|
|
|
|
Post by King Of Clubs on Dec 9, 2019 19:34:05 GMT -5
Hey that's no problem! And Yeah, that could be a part of it. But from what I can tell Biden has been the same his whole life. Go watch the video of him campaigning for Obama in 2008 where he hilariously calls him "Barack America". I honestly feel quite sorry for the guy.
|
|
|
|
Post by Scumhunter on Dec 9, 2019 20:09:27 GMT -5
Yeah but in my opinion that's part of his charm is his dumb messups, in like 2012 or something he told a guy in a wheelchair to stand up for a round of applause lol. But yeah no I see your point lol.
|
|
|
|
Post by 912thamwuser on Dec 10, 2019 0:11:36 GMT -5
When you say any of these candidates could "run up their margins in the south", what does that mean? What advantages could states like Mississippi or Alabama give Biden in the primaries?
|
|
|
|
Post by King Of Clubs on Dec 10, 2019 12:31:28 GMT -5
When you say any of these candidates could "run up their margins in the south", what does that mean? What advantages could states like Mississippi or Alabama give Biden in the primaries? Hillary Clinton won the primary in 2016 largely due to large margins in The South. The only Southern state she didn't win I believe was West Virginia. And she won some with over 70 percent of the vote. With Biden it could be the same situation. The South almost always goes for the "establishment" candidates in the Democratic primaries. Why exactly that is is up for debate, but that's what always seems to happen. I would guess it's because Democrats in The South are more religious and more moderate than elsewhere, but I could be missing something. |
|
|
|
Post by 912thamwuser on Dec 11, 2019 22:22:34 GMT -5
When you say any of these candidates could "run up their margins in the south", what does that mean? What advantages could states like Mississippi or Alabama give Biden in the primaries? Hillary Clinton won the primary in 2016 largely due to large margins in The South. The only Southern state she didn't win I believe was West Virginia. And she won some with over 70 percent of the vote. With Biden it could be the same situation. The South almost always goes for the "establishment" candidates in the Democratic primaries. Why exactly that is is up for debate, but that's what always seems to happen. I would guess it's because Democrats in The South are more religious and more moderate than elsewhere, but I could be missing something. What I heard was that a populist progressive polls better in West Virginia and the Rust Belt, and that they'd vote for a real populist over a pseudo-populist while also voting for a pseudo-populist over an establishment centrist. Perhaps there's a fundamental difference between the Deep South vs West Virginia and the Rust Belt that I'm not aware of. Can you think of one, perhaps? |
|
|
|
Post by King Of Clubs on Dec 15, 2019 22:34:28 GMT -5
Hillary Clinton won the primary in 2016 largely due to large margins in The South. The only Southern state she didn't win I believe was West Virginia. And she won some with over 70 percent of the vote. With Biden it could be the same situation. The South almost always goes for the "establishment" candidates in the Democratic primaries. Why exactly that is is up for debate, but that's what always seems to happen. I would guess it's because Democrats in The South are more religious and more moderate than elsewhere, but I could be missing something. What I heard was that a populist progressive polls better in West Virginia and the Rust Belt, and that they'd vote for a real populist over a pseudo-populist while also voting for a pseudo-populist over an establishment centrist. Perhaps there's a fundamental difference between the Deep South vs West Virginia and the Rust Belt that I'm not aware of. Can you think of one, perhaps? Yes, I can actually. Just simply the fact that the Rust Belt has always had a populist streak that The South doesn't. West Virginia along with Eastern Kentucky are outliers in The South that have a similar populist streak. And another thing is that most Democrats in most of The South (outside of those aforementioned areas) are non-white. Non-white Democrats tend to always favor the establishment candidates and don't have as much of a populist streak. You see this not only in The South but in almost all of the country. |
|
|
|
Post by Scumhunter on Dec 16, 2019 7:00:09 GMT -5
Take it for what it's worth- I've mentioned in the past I've honestly struggled with this question so this more a think an interesting topic for you guys to debate within politics rather than me sharing my opinion- but Boris Johnson and his conservative party just scored a huge victory in the UK election- trouncing Jeremy Corbyn and his Labour Party- thus indicating Brexit will likely indeed happen. Jeremy Corbyn was considered very far left- so some will say this is further proof Democrats need to run a more middle of the road candidate for the general election. Different countries obviously, but we have somewhat similar politics ans Trump was elected the same year the UK voted for Brexit. I'll provide a counterpoint in that Corbyn seemed not very well-liked to begin with while Bernie and Warren to an extent have a very approving fan-base. Additionally, I've seen Bernie Sanders give a populist appeal in the past. Regardless of your personal opinion on medicare for all, there are actually both democrat and Republican voters for it. Bernie Sanders did a town hall for Fox News, the only Democratic candidate with the guts to do that I think, and asked the crowd if any of them want Medicare for all. Surprisingly, he received a round of applause. (I also think this shows the difference between Hillary and Bernie. Hillary refused to campaign in Wisconsin, thinking she had it in the bag. Bernie is not afraid to go out there to even the Fox News crowd). Sorry I sort of rambled off-topic, but this could be the Labour Party having a leader too far-left or it could be simply running a bad candidate and figured I'd let everyone debate.  |
|
|
|
Post by 912thamwuser on Dec 16, 2019 18:53:23 GMT -5
Take it for what it's worth- I've mentioned in the past I've honestly struggled with this question so this more a think an interesting topic for you guys to debate within politics rather than me sharing my opinion- but Boris Johnson and his conservative party just scored a huge victory in the UK election- trouncing Jeremy Corbyn and his Labour Party- thus indicating Brexit will likely indeed happen. Jeremy Corbyn was considered very far left- so some will say this is further proof Democrats need to run a more middle of the road candidate for the general election. Different countries obviously, but we have somewhat similar politics ans Trump was elected the same year the UK voted for Brexit. I'll provide a counterpoint in that Corbyn seemed not very well-liked to begin with while Bernie and Warren to an extent have a very approving fan-base. Additionally, I've seen Bernie Sanders give a populist appeal in the past. Regardless of your personal opinion on medicare for all, there are actually both democrat and Republican voters for it. Bernie Sanders did a town hall for Fox News, the only Democratic candidate with the guts to do that I think, and asked the crowd if any of them want Medicare for all. Surprisingly, he received a round of applause. (I also think this shows the difference between Hillary and Bernie. Hillary refused to campaign in Wisconsin, thinking she had it in the bag. Bernie is not afraid to go out there to even the Fox News crowd). Sorry I sort of rambled off-topic, but this could be the Labour Party having a leader too far-left or it could be simply running a bad candidate and figured I'd let everyone debate. I don't remember hearing much about Corbyn's policy platform, but if it involved keeping the public commons in the public sector, I doubt they voted for Boris just to corporatize health care, for example. So I think it's more likely that Corbyn was almost as unlikable as Rodham. Plus, I can't think of a Blue Dog or other American Overton Window centrist who has the best odds of taking down Tronald Dump. I've already ruled out Biden because of Biden's creepy behavior with girls, racial gaffes, and for-profit corporate health care apologetics. So there has to be a better Blue Dog if indeed hard-leftism was to blame for Corbyn's loss. |
|
|
|
Post by Scumhunter on Dec 19, 2019 1:50:33 GMT -5
In shock none of you brought up Trump's impeachment yet considering the history of it lol- he now joins Andrew Johnson and Bill Clinton as the only Presidents to be impeached by the house.
The thing is- there unfortunately isn't enough votes to convict Trump in the Senate- it would be near impossible to get to 67 votes regardless of which party is in charge in today's divided politics as no party really ever has that big a majority- let alone a Republican Majority where Mitch McConnell aka "Moscow Mitch" will be running things and him and Lindsay Graham have already admitted they will not be fair and imprtial jurors. The only thing that could change is if we get video footage of Trump literally shooting people on 5th Avenue within the next few weeks- and even that's debatable.
However, I am glad that for once in his life, Trump was held accountable by some court or branch of government and he will be forever noted in history as an impeached President.
If you were to take politics out of the equation, and present this case to a jury without telling them what parties or who the key players were, the deliberation would turn into a conviction before lunch break.
Shame on all the Republicans in congress for choosing party over country and choosing to debase themselves and act like children. All they can do is complain about process since the facts are indisputable and they have nothing to defend Trump on.
I hope I'm proven wrong, but there are no more hero Republicans like the ones who stood up to Richard Nixon. There are hardly Republicans anymore at all in Congress. Democrats, a few Independents, a few Republicans, and the cult of Trump.
|
|
|
|
Post by тσρтєиhυитєя on Dec 19, 2019 9:27:53 GMT -5
In shock none of you brought up Trump's impeachment yet considering the history of it lol- he now joins Andrew Johnson and Bill Clinton as the only Presidents to be impeached by the house. The thing is- there unfortunately isn't enough votes to convict Trump in the Senate- it would be near impossible to get to 67 votes regardless of which party is in charge in today's divided politics as no party really ever has that big a majority- let alone a Republican Majority where Mitch McConnell aka "Moscow Mitch" will be running things and him and Lindsay Graham have already admitted they will not be fair and imprtial jurors. The only thing that could change is if we get video footage of Trump literally shooting people on 5th Avenue within the next few weeks- and even that's debatable. However, I am glad that for once in his life, Trump was held accountable by some court or branch of government and he will be forever noted in history as an impeached President. If you were to take politics out of the equation, and present this case to a jury without telling them what parties or who the key players were, the deliberation would turn into a conviction before lunch break. Shame on all the Republicans in congress for choosing party over country and choosing to debase themselves and act like children. All they can do is complain about process since the facts are indisputable and they have nothing to defend Trump on. I hope I'm proven wrong, but there are no more hero Republicans like the ones who stood up to Richard Nixon. There are hardly Republicans anymore at all in Congress. Democrats, a few Independents, a few Republicans, and the cult of Trump. Sorry I was out celebrating his impeachment last night lol, even with the obvious that he’ll be acquitted by the senate, I think this is what disgraced trump, and right on an election year too. Impeached right at the end of his first term. Anyone with any decency wouldn’t dare to vote for him in 2020 unless your a bigot or hope he’ll probably make a change if he gets a second term. |
|
|
|
Post by 912thamwuser on Dec 23, 2019 18:51:59 GMT -5
3 problems today:
*A headline, granted it's the mainstream media and they're more beholden to their advertisers than objectivity, reported that the Jong Un regime has threatened America with a "Christmas gift". Everything I've heard about the regime all year tells me they've made all the breakthroughs they need to instantaneously cremate Los Angeles, Portland, Seattle, and indeed Chicago, Miami, and NYC. I'll be extremely grateful if the world makes it through not only Christmas and New Decade's Day, but also each of the next few months, without a thermonuclear strike anywhere in the world.
*If what one of you said about the state-by-state voting dynamics is true, then all of Tronald Dump's opponents in the '020 election are stuck between a rock and a hard place. It requires opposite and mutually exclusive policy positions to win the southern states in a primary vs a general election in the Rust Belt. So there's no way Tronald's opponents in our 2-party system could win either way. In that case, if the Democrats lose the '020 election, I would have to rule out all possibility of a natural loss based on policy ideas and principles, and focus on our gnarled inter-state social, political, and emotional climate, paradigms, and trends as the first suspect. Quite frankly, I think it would be impossible to cure that problem.
It's been predicted that in the winter of '021 or '025, when 45 is either voted out of office or his second term expires, or some time in between if he was to declare himself president for life, or worse, his entire lineage as monarchs forever, it would create a Constitutional crisis because there simply aren't any safeguards and provisions in our Constitution nor our legislation to resolve it. Nobody has even the faintest idea how the tiniest element of it would play out. In other words, it's not just deeply shrouded in mystery, but shrouded in a deep cloud of mystery SQUARED! All that can be assured is a brand new experience for all of the human race. In fact, it's so deep in mystery, the precedents it'll set will change America, and indeed the outside world as it's subject to American policy, so radically, it'll smash the record as the biggest moment in American political science of all time, and indeed cut the A.D. timeline that's been running for 2 millennia and 2 decades short, ushering in a new timeline. We would have to retro-name the year '999, for one example, as "22 before the big Constitutional Crisis"!
Having said all that, it might be easy to think there's some remote explanation as to why the tide of American politics has turned this way, and whether there's anything the citizenry can do to save themselves, but there isn't. No 2 people have the same opinion why our political system and discourse is like this, no 2 people have the same idea how to regain control of our political system, and the explanation is so deep in mystery, I'd have a ***k*** "been there, done that" reaction if it all got traced back to a quantum-physical disruption! In fact, no common citizen should accept any blame for any of this because there was nothing we could do to prevent it, and we're dead out of solid leads on why it happened.
|
|
|
|
Post by Scumhunter on Dec 23, 2019 19:36:43 GMT -5
3 problems today: *A headline, granted it's the mainstream media and they're more beholden to their advertisers than objectivity, reported that the Jong Un regime has threatened America with a "Christmas gift". Everything I've heard about the regime all year tells me they've made all the breakthroughs they need to instantaneously cremate Los Angeles, Portland, Seattle, and indeed Chicago, Miami, and NYC. I'll be extremely grateful if the world makes it through not only Christmas and New Decade's Day, but also each of the next few months, without a thermonuclear strike anywhere in the world. *If what one of you said about the state-by-state voting dynamics is true, then all of Tronald Dump's opponents in the '020 election are stuck between a rock and a hard place. It requires opposite and mutually exclusive policy positions to win the southern states in a primary vs a general election in the Rust Belt. So there's no way Tronald's opponents in our 2-party system could win either way. In that case, if the Democrats lose the '020 election, I would have to rule out all possibility of a natural loss based on policy ideas and principles, and focus on our gnarled inter-state social, political, and emotional climate, paradigms, and trends as the first suspect. Quite frankly, I think it would be impossible to cure that problem. It's been predicted that in the winter of '021 or '025, when 45 is either voted out of office or his second term expires, or some time in between if he was to declare himself president for life, or worse, his entire lineage as monarchs forever, it would create a Constitutional crisis because there simply aren't any safeguards and provisions in our Constitution nor our legislation to resolve it. Nobody has even the faintest idea how the tiniest element of it would play out. In other words, it's not just deeply shrouded in mystery, but shrouded in a deep cloud of mystery SQUARED! All that can be assured is a brand new experience for all of the human race. In fact, it's so deep in mystery, the precedents it'll set will change America, and indeed the outside world as it's subject to American policy, so radically, it'll smash the record as the biggest moment in American political science of all time, and indeed cut the A.D. timeline that's been running for 2 millennia and 2 decades short, ushering in a new timeline. We would have to retro-name the year '999, for one example, as "22 before the big Constitutional Crisis"! Having said all that, it might be easy to think there's some remote explanation as to why the tide of American politics has turned this way, and whether there's anything the citizenry can do to save themselves, but there isn't. No 2 people have the same opinion why our political system and discourse is like this, no 2 people have the same idea how to regain control of our political system, and the explanation is so deep in mystery, I'd have a ***k*** "been there, done that" reaction if it all got traced back to a quantum-physical disruption! In fact, no common citizen should accept any blame for any of this because there was nothing we could do to prevent it, and we're dead out of solid leads on why it happened. Well, I was going to take a break from discussing politics for the holidays, but I want to quickly respond to you by saying I'm a big believer in not worrying about things until the time comes/only worry about something if it actually happens. North Korea hasn't nuked us yet, so I won't worry until that actually (and hopefully never) happens. I also don't think anyone is saying the Democrats are damned if they do/don't, but rather there is a fundamental dilemma over who the better candidate for a general election would be- someone more centrist even if they're the more "boring" candidate who can appeal to the average voter in both blue and red and swing states or someone more "inspirational" to get people to the polls in all the states regardless of how left or middle they are. That's not to say you don't have valid concerns, and doing nothing isn't the answer, but I still think having a positive attitude is a good start. Having a negative/defeatist attitude towards anything in life will almost inevitably lead to such results. My main concern is actually Trump loses the election but still refuses to leave office after claiming it's "rigged"- leading to a bunch of Supreme Court battles and sh**shows. And for now, I'll try to not post here until after the new year (although I can't promise that lol). |
|
|
|
Post by outlawtaco on Jan 3, 2020 1:16:49 GMT -5
Well mr 800 grand Julian Castro has dropped out
|
|
|
|
Post by outlawtaco on Jan 3, 2020 1:22:51 GMT -5
I realize I have been a bit vague on my positions I do support the GOP's but Trump has got to go he is way to aggressive for my taste but I do tend to lean more towards liberal and conservative on some aspects of political ideology
|
|
