2020 Presidential Election -- Biden v Trump: Sleepy Joe vs Dopey Don [Results begin on page 409]

[Hugo Stiglitz 23356]

1 minute ago, Sawbonz said:

You're not optimistic about anything. You take the absolutely most pessimistic stance on every available topic. And you will continue to do so even after Biden wins and Trump goes away just like every previous president has done after losing or being termed. You are already adjusting your narrative in anticipation of that inevitability. 

 

What about you Mr. Sawbonz? What is your outlook for the future of America?  Maybe I’m just too jaded and defeated to see the light. 

[Sawbonz 27375]

7 minutes ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

What about you Mr. Sawbonz? What is your outlook for the future of America?  Maybe I’m just too jaded and defeated to see the light. 

I don’t think you are jaded or defeated. I think you are very purposeful and disciplined in how and what you post. As far as my outlook for the future of America I think we will pull through this, starting with Biden winning in November. It’s still not too late for you to accept my bet btw

[Hugo Stiglitz 23356]

2 minutes ago, Sawbonz said:

I don’t think you are jaded or defeated. I think you are very purposeful and disciplined in how and what you post. As far as my outlook for the future of America I think we will pull through this, starting with Biden winning in November. It’s still not too late for you to accept my bet btw

Your bet is silly because I have no desire to see you stop posting. There’s nothing in it for me, it’s a one sided bet. Plus, it is possible Biden wins and we get four more years of Trump, that’s how it’d go down.  Nothing has stopped this monster and counting on our democratic institutions to get the job done seems like wishful thinking. People should prepare to start protesting the day after the election now and voters should not tolerate Trump trying to litigate the election in the courts if it doesn’t go his way.  We’re going to need a massive sustained protest to get this fucker out I’m afraid but I’ll be there. 

[G650 13990]

10 hours ago, Buck Strickland said:

Maybe if you only know how to do lot and block title surveys.

 

Thank you for the education of what a surveyor is and good luck hiring one worth a shit at that beat down rate.

 

Agree to disagree

 

 

 

 

 

¯\_(ツ)_/¯

 

I'm a site contractor and land developer, but what do I know

[Fudge Nuggets 19118]

11 hours ago, Orale said:

11 hours ago, Grade of D as in David said:

If Trump loses he will scream rigged election and refuse to concede. If he doesn't step down and have pence pardon him, he tries to make a deal to drop his challenge if he gets to skate on all charges.

Whether or not he concedes is irrelevant. There isn't some provision in the constitution that relies on a losing candidate to concede for the winning candidate to take over. I don't understand why people keep raising that as if it has some relevance.

Exactly. I doubt he concedes but I'm pretty sure he'll drag his fat ass out of the White House in shame under the cover of darkness.

[Bateshorn 9882]

1 hour ago, Fudge Nuggets said:

Exactly. I doubt he concedes but I'm pretty sure he'll drag his fat ass out of the White House in shame under the cover of darkness.

The chances that the Biden’s arrive in the White House to find it partially stripped of China, silver, furniture, and paintings is over 50%.

[Mrs Whiggins 13049]

At least they won't waste spend time looking for binders full of useful information. That got thrown out four years ago.

[Sawbonz 27375]

6 hours ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

Your bet is silly because I have no desire to see you stop posting. There’s nothing in it for me, it’s a one sided bet. Plus, it is possible Biden wins and we get four more years of Trump, that’s how it’d go down.  Nothing has stopped this monster and counting on our democratic institutions to get the job done seems like wishful thinking. People should prepare to start protesting the day after the election now and voters should not tolerate Trump trying to litigate the election in the courts if it doesn’t go his way.  We’re going to need a massive sustained protest to get this fucker out I’m afraid but I’ll be there. 

If you really believed this ridiculous shit you would take the bet. But you don’t. You are a shit stirrer and a cancer on this site

[Mrs Whiggins 13049]

WHAT. A. JERK.

Probably a lot of other descriptors for this man...snake, for instance.

[Anastasis 23375]

A lot of the war mongering neocons finding a home under the big tent.  Surprise Bolton not one of them.

Atlantic article on Joe's foreign policy.  Not sure what Bolton doesn't like here. Seems pliable.  

https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2020/06/bidens-chance-disavow-his-bad-foreign-policy-ideas/612787/

Edited August 19, 2020 by Anastasis

[Sawbonz 27375]

20 minutes ago, Bateshorn said:

The chances that the Biden’s arrive in the White House to find it partially stripped of China, silver, furniture, and paintings is over 50%.

Chance of pee stains on mattresses 100%

[Hugo Stiglitz 23356]

14 minutes ago, Sawbonz said:

If you really believed this ridiculous shit you would take the bet. But you don’t. You are a shit stirrer and a cancer on this site

You just don’t like what I have to say and you’re trying to bully me into a stupid bet that serves no one but yourself.  Me going away isn’t going to improve the discourse on this site either.  

[Huckleberry 32685]

17 minutes ago, Anastasis said:

A lot of the war mongering neocons finding a home under the big tent.  Surprise Bolton not one of them.

Atlantic article on Joe's foreign policy.  Not sure what Bolton doesn't like here. Seems pliable.  

https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2020/06/bidens-chance-disavow-his-bad-foreign-policy-ideas/612787/

Well I know I'm shocked that Anastasis responded to a shithead like John Bolton by pointing out problems with the Democrats. 

[Sawbonz 27375]

5 minutes ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

You just don’t like what I have to say and you’re trying to bully me into a stupid bet that serves no one but yourself.  Me going away isn’t going to improve the discourse on this site either.  

What you said in that last post is either delusional or calculated to instill fear in many of the posters here who are understandably very vulnerable given the truly awful actions of this president. Posting that garbage and then accusing me of bullying you for calling you out on it is absurd. I’m not even touching that last comment. 

[Anastasis 23375]

3 minutes ago, Huckleberry said:

Well I know I'm shocked that Anastasis responded to a shithead like John Bolton by pointing out problems with the Democrats. 

I guess I should have thrown out my standard "fuck John Bolton" and left it at that.

Enjoy the Atlantic article I shared.  

[gmr548 16463]

You take the absolutely most pessimistic stance on every available topic.
 

Defending Hugo is not what I expected to do during the breakfast surly scroll, but I mean, have you looked around at the country lately?

Also, surveyor salary talk not going away.

[Biff Tannen 45477]

13 hours ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

The phrase “impeached President Trump” isn’t getting enough play. 

Most people have forgotten this occurred.

[Sawbonz 27375]

5 minutes ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

You just don’t like what I have to say and you’re trying to bully me into a stupid bet that serves no one but yourself.  Me going away isn’t going to improve the discourse on this site either.  

What you said in that last post is either delusional or calculated to instill fear in many of the posters here who are understandably very vulnerable given the truly awful actions of this president. Posting that garbage and then accusing me of bullying you for calling you out on it is absurd. I’m not even touching that last comment. 

[Brisketexan 104465]

1 hour ago, Bateshorn said:

The chances that the Biden’s arrive in the White House to find it partially stripped of China, silver, furniture, and paintings is over 50%.

.....and the Trumpkins would cheer it and defend it, saying that he earned it because of all of his sacrifice to be THE GREATEST PRESIDENT EVER, but the American people are too stupid to realize it, so he should absolutely take everything he can.

Oh, and Sawbonz.....what's crushing is that you know Hugo is right.  We have two huge problems in this country.  Trump.....and the 40-50% of Americans who support him, who love a person and a president like Trump.

Trump is the part of the tumor bulging out, oozing pus.  It's easy and obvious to conclude that we should cut off that oozing lump.  Hey, it will be nice -- no more pus, and our shirts will fit again!

That does nothing about the remaining 90% of that tumor, which has tendrils that have slithered into half of our vital organs.  You can cut off the oozing lump all day long, but the rest of that cancer is what's gonna kill us.  Unless and until we figure out how to cure that, we're a dead man walking.

[Anastasis 23375]

18 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

You can cut off the oozing lump all day long, but the rest of that cancer is what's gonna kill us.  Unless and until we figure out how to cure that, we're a dead man walking.

Looks like an Atlantic citing kind of morning.  One perspective on the root of the problem and the potential solution, transition to a multiparty democracy. 

https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2020/01/two-party-system-broke-constitution/604213/

America Is Now the Divided Republic the Framers Feared

John Adams worried that “a division of the republic into two great parties … is to be dreaded as the great political evil.” And that’s exactly what has come to pass.

...

But that was before American politics became fully nationalized, a phenomenon that happened over several decades, powered in large part by a slow-moving post-civil-rights realignment of the two parties. National politics transformed from a compromise-oriented squabble over government spending into a zero-sum moral conflict over national culture and identity. As the conflict sharpened, the parties changed what they stood for. And as the parties changed, the conflict sharpened further. Liberal Republicans and conservative Democrats went extinct. The four-party system collapsed into just two parties.

The Democrats, the party of diversity and cosmopolitan values, came to dominate in cities but disappeared from the exurbs. And the Republicans, the party of traditional values and white, Christian identity, fled the cities and flourished in the exurbs. Partisan social bubbles began to grow, and congressional districts became more distinctly one party or the other. As a result, primaries, not general elections, determine the victor in many districts.

Over the past three decades, both parties have had roughly equal electoral strength nationally, making control of Washington constantly up for grabs. Since 1992, the country has cycled through two swings of the pendulum, from united Democratic government to divided government to united Republican government and back again, with both sides seeking that elusive permanent majority, and attempting to sharpen the distinctions between the parties in order to win it. This also intensified partisanship.

These triple developments—the nationalization of politics, the geographical-cultural partisan split, and consistently close elections—have reinforced one another, pushing both parties into top-down leadership, enforcing party discipline, and destroying cross-partisan deal making. Voters now vote the party, not the candidate. Candidates depend on the party brand. Everything is team loyalty. The stakes are too high for it to be otherwise.

The consequence is that today, America has a genuine two-party system with no overlap, the development the Framers feared most. And it shows no signs of resolving. The two parties are fully sorted by geography and cultural values, and absent a major realignment, neither side has a chance of becoming the dominant party in the near future. But the elusive permanent majority promises so much power, neither side is willing to give up on it.

Read: How American politics went insane

This fundamentally breaks the system of separation of powers and checks and balances that the Framers created. Under unified government, congressional co-partisans have no incentive to check the president; their electoral success is tied to his success and popularity. Under divided government, congressional opposition partisans have no incentive to work with the president; their electoral success is tied to his failure and unpopularity. This is not a system of bargaining and compromise, but one of capitulation and stonewalling.

Congressional stonewalling, in turn, leads presidents to do more by executive authority, further strengthening the power of the presidency. A stronger presidency creates higher-stakes presidential elections, which exacerbates hyper-partisanship, which drives even more gridlock.

Meanwhile, as hyper-partisanship has intensified legislative gridlock, more and more important decisions are left to the judiciary to resolve. This makes the stakes of Supreme Court appointments even higher (especially with lifetime tenure), leading to nastier confirmation battles, and thus higher-stakes elections.

See how this all reinforces itself? That’s what makes it so tricky to resolve, at least in a two-party system with winner-take-all elections.

 

Political science has come a long way since 1787. Had the Framers been able to draw on the accumulated wisdom of today, they would have accepted that it is impossible to have a modern mass democracy without political parties, much as they might have wanted it. Parties make democracy work by structuring politics, limiting policy and voting choices to a manageable number. They represent and engage diffuse citizens, bringing them together for a common purpose. Without political parties, politics turns chaotic and despotic.

The Founders also would have known that plurality elections (whoever gets the most votes wins) tend to generate just two parties, while proportional elections (vote shares in multi-winner districts translate into seat shares) tend to generate multiple parties, with the district size and threshold percentages shaping the number.

But at the time, the Framers believed they could have a democracy without parties, and the only electoral system in operation was the 1430 innovation of plurality voting, which they imported from Britain without debate. It wouldn’t be until the 19th century that reformers came up with new voting rules, and until the 20th century that most advanced democracies moved to proportional representation, supporting multiparty democracies.

Had the Framers accepted the inevitability of political parties, and understood the relationship between electoral rules and the number of parties, I believe they would have attempted to institutionalize multiparty democracy. Certainly, Madison would have. “Federalist No. 10,” with its praise of fluid and flexible coalitions, is a vision of multiparty democracy.

Read: America is not a democracy

The good news is that nothing in the Constitution requires a two-party system, and nothing requires the country to hold simple plurality elections. The elections clause of the Constitution leaves states to decide their own rules, and reserves to Congress the power to intervene, a power that Congress has used over the years to enforce the very plurality-winner single-member districts that keep the two-party system in place and ensure that most elections are uncompetitive.

If the country wanted to, it could move to a system of proportional representation for the very next congressional election. All it would take is an act of Congress. States could also act on their own.

Multiparty democracy is not perfect. But it is far superior in supporting the diversity, bargaining, and compromise that the Framers, and especially Madison, designed America’s institutions around, and which they saw as essential to the fragile experiment of self-government.

Edited August 19, 2020 by Anastasis
adding quote tags to shorten up.

[Sawbonz 27375]

6 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

.....and the Trumpkins would cheer it and defend it, saying that he earned it because of all of his sacrifice to be THE GREATEST PRESIDENT EVER, but the American people are too stupid to realize it, so he should absolutely take everything he can.

Oh, and Sawbonz.....what's crushing is that you know Hugo is right.  We have two huge problems in this country.  Trump.....and the 40-50% of Americans who support him, who love a person and a president like Trump.

Trump is the part of the tumor bulging out, oozing pus.  It's easy and obvious to conclude that we should cut off that oozing lump.  Hey, it will be nice -- no more pus, and our shirts will fit again!

That does nothing about the remaining 90% of that tumor, which has tendrils that have slithered into half of our vital organs.  You can cut off the oozing lump all day long, but the rest of that cancer is what's gonna kill us.  Unless and until we figure out how to cure that, we're a dead man walking.

Hugo is not right. He is sowing discord. He wants a bloody conflict and sadly your posts have evolved to the point where you seem like you do as well. Now it’s 40-50% of the country “loves” trump?  You are doing your best to build up and demonize an “other” that you would have no compunction committing violence against. My previous comparison of you with Robespierre is looking more and more accurate. Hugo wants fanatics and fanatics of any stripe are very very bad. If you honestly think it is likely that Biden wins and Trump doesn’t leave, any further dialogue on the subject is fruitless. If you want to say the chance is greater than zero I’ll give you that, but it isn’t likely enough for the bandwidth Hugo wastes promoting it. 
 

Trump will be gone in January. Hugo knows this and is already changing his narrative to continue to instill fear and discord. Buy into it if you wish

[smuggs 9340]

17 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

We have two huge problems in this country.  Trump.....and the 40-50% of Americans who support him, who love a person and a president like Trump.

You forgot to mention all of these shithead surveyors flaunting their wealth all over town.

[Brisketexan 104465]

5 minutes ago, Sawbonz said:

Hugo is not right. He is sowing discord. He wants a bloody conflict and sadly your posts have evolved to the point where you seem like you do as well. Now it’s 40-50% of the country “loves” trump?  You are doing your best to build up and demonize an “other” that you would have no compunction committing violence against. My previous comparison of you with Robespierre is looking more and more accurate. Hugo wants fanatics and fanatics of any stripe are very very bad. If you honestly think it is likely that Biden wins and Trump doesn’t leave, any further dialogue on the subject is fruitless. If you want to say the chance is greater than zero I’ll give you that, but it isn’t likely enough for the bandwidth Hugo wastes promoting it. 
 

Trump will be gone in January. Hugo knows this and is already changing his narrative to continue to instill fear and discord. Buy into it if you wish

I want nothing of the sort.  I have stated every warning I could, in every venue -- here, family, professionally, personally, and more -- for years, about what I see coming.  I want the exact OPPOSITE of what is happening, and what will continue to happen.

The fact that the chance is greater than zero that Biden wins but Trump doesn't leave willingly/without fomenting a violent resistance to same is the failure point.  After every election, someone always comments about "how America has seen another peaceful transfer of power."  And the point is not that it happened, but that we are so stable and strong that it's a foregone conclusion. 

It is no longer a foregone conclusion.

For fuck's sake, we have half of this country motivated by the suffering of others -- sweet lib tears, need to hurt the right people, cage little brown kids to show the browns who's boss, etc. ad infinitum. Lies are truth, science is garbage, we desperately look to an autocrat who we question less than we'd question God himself.  I don't have to "demonize" shit -- I just need to quote them.  That's fucking psychopathic.  It's a fatal illness, and it's (mostly) internal (I say "mostly" because our enemies are exuberant at how easy it is to get us to feed our own cancer -- it's as if we had been diagnosed with stage IV lung cancer, but they can easily slip us pack after pack of unfiltered Camels that we smoke up voraciously every single day).

3 minutes ago, smuggs said:

You forgot to mention all of these shithead surveyors flaunting their wealth all over town.

Seeing a shithead get out of an air-conditioned white truck with his perfect little orange vest on....makes me ragey just thinking about it.  Fucking surveyors, man.

[Biff Tannen 45477]

20 minutes ago, smuggs said:

You forgot to mention all of these shithead surveyors flaunting their wealth all over town.

and then THEY go and THEY pee on YOUR fucking rug!  am I wrong?

Edited August 19, 2020 by Biff Tannen

[MC Fresh Breath 4074]

8 hours ago, Sawbonz said:

You're not optimistic about anything. You take the absolutely most pessimistic stance on every available topic. 

 

 

He's not alone.  

Quote

 

And yet, in the middle of this five-alarm garbage fire, we’re asked to white-knuckle it and feign excitement for an opposition party machine run by insiders, lobbyists and careerists who keep letting us know that they think campaign promises are distinct from policy. In so many ways, they keep telling us over and again that the most we can hope for is, in the words of the nominee himself, that “nothing would fundamentally change.” 

There has certainly been a lot of inspiring talk about the health care emergency and the climate crisis and oligarchy, but the party platform says it all.

During a recession that has resulted in millions losing health insurance, Medicare for All is nowhere to be found in the platform. During climate-intensified wildfires, inland hurricanes and — yes, really — fire tornados, the platform’s section on ending fossil fuel subsidies was removed. The lobbyists who run the DNC also killed an initiative to reduce the influence of corporate money on the party. Meanwhile, Joe Biden himself rolled out a whole package of legislative promises, and then told his Wall Street donors that, in fact, changing corporate behavior is “not going to require legislation” and he won’t be proposing any. Please clap.

The worst part is that dispassionately recounting any of these facts obviously proves you love Trump and Putin — at least that’s what you’ll be told if you dare even whisper this. In our tribalized politics, war is peace, freedom is slavery and dissent is disloyalty. Failure to match the rah-rah spirit of the Blue Team, refusal to get psyched for the charade, asking questions about inconvenient facts — it all means you must be on the Red Team and are being paid in rubles, comrade.

As an electoral strategy, this kind of vote shaming and dissent suppression doesn’t have a winning track record. It is both immoral and bad politics. There must be a better strategy — and for the love of god, with polls now tightening, the world needs the Democrats to find one fast, because another Trump term is unthinkable.

 

Whole op-ed worth a read, imo

https://sirota.substack.com/p/you-dont-have-to-be-excited

[Sawbonz 27375]

7 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

The fact that the chance is greater than zero that Biden wins but Trump doesn't leave willingly/without fomenting a violent resistance to same is the failure point

This is absolutely not true. The failure point  is if it happens. And the likelihood while not zero is tiny. Hugo knows it won’t happen.  You know it won’t. You are descending into fanaticism and Hugo’s posting while not the genesis certainly hastens your descent. 

 

[tantric superman 4667]

You guys need to suck it up, think about the Serenity Prayer or whatever that thing is to say that you can only control what you can, and you might be fucked, and try to help down ballot candidates win seats at the state legislature and US Congress.  The President stuff will take care of itself if you do.

The pandemic has people out in the neighborhoods walking around outside.  Weather is going to get nicer in the next 60 days. 

Go convince someone to vote.

And go whine on the recruiting or football board.

[BehoId, The Underminer! 11667]

15 minutes ago, MC Fresh Breath said:

As an electoral strategy, this kind of vote shaming and dissent suppression doesn’t have a winning track record. It is both immoral

yes

16 minutes ago, MC Fresh Breath said:

and bad politics.

no

you win the contest that is in front of you right now. long term strategy has no place in our current crisis if it detracts one tenth of one percent from the chances of our immediate win.

[SydneyCarton 47809]

7 minutes ago, tantric superman said:

You guys need to suck it up, think about the Serenity Prayer or whatever that thing is to say that you can only control what you can, and you might be fucked, and try to help down ballot candidates win seats at the state legislature and US Congress.  The President stuff will take care of itself if you do.

The pandemic has people out in the neighborhoods walking around outside.  Weather is going to get nicer in the next 60 days. 

Go convince someone to vote.

And go whine on the recruiting or football board.

Go fuck yourself. I'd have gone with a "dont you put that evil on me" gif, but you know what, telling you to go fuck yourself seemed more fitting. 

[Sawbonz 27375]

18 minutes ago, MC Fresh Breath said:

 

He's not alone.  

Whole op-ed worth a read, imo

https://sirota.substack.com/p/you-dont-have-to-be-excited

What newspaper was this op ed published in?

[tantric superman 4667]

8 minutes ago, SydneyCarton said:

Go fuck yourself. I'd have gone with a "dont you put that evil on me" gif, but you know what, telling you to go fuck yourself seemed more fitting. 

Seems like a reasonable response.

[Hugo Stiglitz 23356]

46 minutes ago, Sawbonz said:

This is absolutely not true. The failure point  is if it happens. And the likelihood while not zero is tiny. Hugo knows it won’t happen.  You know it won’t. You are descending into fanaticism and Hugo’s posting while not the genesis certainly hastens your descent. 

I’ve have been correctly criticized for putting too much faith in our democratic institutions to save us.  I have been a consistent cheerleader for solutions that have proved to be failures. I applauded people like Jeff Flake for publicly rebuking Trump, nothing good came of it. I prayed Republicans would come to their senses and reject the direction they’re taking the country, those prayers never answered.  I pulled for Mueller to get the job done, he didn’t. I pulled for Nancy Pelosi to successfully hold Trump accountable, she didn’t.  Trump and the GOP have managed to avoid accountability for their crimes against democracy every step of the way.   Nothing leads me to believe they’re going to get their comeuppance. 

I would love to believe as you do. I would love to see everything work itself out but the evidence is overwhelming that were not getting anywhere good without a dramatic intervention. I hope Biden wins in overwhelming fashion but even if he does, the problems that allowed Trump to happen are not going away.  In many ways, the harder fight to come is after the election because if we don’t get our society functioning together, we’re headed for worse than Trump down the road.  I’m not trying to sow division here, I’m trying to tell the truth as I know it. 

Edited August 19, 2020 by Hugo Stiglitz

[gmr548 16463]

And go whine on the recruiting or football board.

No matter how bad you think the CR is, doesn't hold a candle to the football board.

[Sawbonz 27375]

13 minutes ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

I’ve have been correctly criticized for putting too much faith in our democratic institutions to save us.  

So you’re too optimistic? 
 

Edit—the rest of your post is typical Hugo bullshit. Just what “dramatic intervention “ do you have in mind?  
 

You started on shaggy bevo as a LSU shitposter who almost got crowdsourced and then posted a bunch of pics in nsaa to get your rep up then disappeared for years before returning in 2016 as by far the most prolific CR poster. That has continued here. You really want us to believe you are just a concerned citizen?

Edited August 19, 2020 by Sawbonz

[Degenerate Gardner 4081]

1 hour ago, Sawbonz said:

Hugo is not right. He is sowing discord. He wants a bloody conflict and sadly your posts have evolved to the point where you seem like you do as well. Now it’s 40-50% of the country “loves” trump?  You are doing your best to build up and demonize an “other” that you would have no compunction committing violence against. My previous comparison of you with Robespierre is looking more and more accurate. Hugo wants fanatics and fanatics of any stripe are very very bad. If you honestly think it is likely that Biden wins and Trump doesn’t leave, any further dialogue on the subject is fruitless. If you want to say the chance is greater than zero I’ll give you that, but it isn’t likely enough for the bandwidth Hugo wastes promoting it. 
 

Trump will be gone in January. Hugo knows this and is already changing his narrative to continue to instill fear and discord. Buy into it if you wish

I enjoy your posts, but you have a persistent hard-on for Hugo. It's a bit fantastic too that you can so clearly discern his intent to foment bloody revolution while others can't. The line between vigilance and paranoia can be fuzzy, just ask Hugo.

[LurkingHorn 1044]

9 minutes ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

I’ve have been correctly criticized for putting too much faith in our democratic institutions to save us.  I have been a consistent cheerleader for solutions that have proved to be failures. I applauded people like Jeff Flake for publicly rebuking Trump, nothing good came of it. I prayed Republicans would come to their senses and reject the direction they’re taking the country, those prayers never answered.  I pulled for Mueller to get the job done, he didn’t. I pulled for Nancy Pelosi to successfully hold Trump accountable, she didn’t.  Trump and the GOP have managed to avoid accountability for their crimes against democracy every step of the way.   Nothing leads me to believe they’re  going to get their comeuppance. 

I would love to believe as you do. I would love to see everything work itself out but the evidence is overwhelming that were not getting anywhere good without a dramatic intervention. I hope Biden wins in overwhelming fashion but even if he does, the problems that allowed Trump to happen are not going away.  In many ways, the harder fight to come is after the election because if we don’t get our society functioning together, we’re headed for worse than Trump down the road.  I’m not trying to sow division here, I’m trying to tell the truth as I know it. 

This is simply not true. Trump won because of old, white men and that base is about to start going away in a hurry. The GOP is going to have to pivot really hard to avoid losing an entire generation of voters. I think that is likely to happen which will be a good thing. Yes, the fact that our republic elected Trump says a lot about us, but it will also be a sign of the strength of our system when his fat ass is ousted after only 1 term. 

[Sawbonz 27375]

9 minutes ago, Degenerate Gardner said:

I enjoy your posts, but you have a persistent hard-on for Hugo. It's a bit fantastic too that you can so clearly discern his intent to foment bloody revolution while others can't. The line between vigilance and paranoia can be fuzzy, just ask Hugo.

I’m pretty sure I’m not the only one who thinks Hugo has ill intentions. And at this point where is there to go except towards bloodshed? Read his last couple of posts. Protests the day after the election (even if Biden wins)? What “Dramatic intervention” do you think he is talking about following a landslide Biden victory and inauguration?  

Edited August 19, 2020 by Sawbonz

[StassneyHorn 6534]

Take the meathead “fuck yous” to the football/recruiting board.

[tantric superman 4667]

(Oh shit, sorry SC.  I get your response now. ..)

 

 

[Dbeasy 14953]

Hugo is not right. He is sowing discord. He wants a bloody conflict and sadly your posts have evolved to the point where you seem like you do as well. Now it’s 40-50% of the country “loves” trump?  You are doing your best to build up and demonize an “other” that you would have no compunction committing violence against. My previous comparison of you with Robespierre is looking more and more accurate. Hugo wants fanatics and fanatics of any stripe are very very bad. If you honestly think it is likely that Biden wins and Trump doesn’t leave, any further dialogue on the subject is fruitless. If you want to say the chance is greater than zero I’ll give you that, but it isn’t likely enough for the bandwidth Hugo wastes promoting it. 
 
Trump will be gone in January. Hugo knows this and is already changing his narrative to continue to instill fear and discord. Buy into it if you wish

Dude it absolutely is not a foregone conclusion that trump is gone in January. And the facts show that 40% of this country either supports him or passively tolerates him and doesn’t seem to either care or know how bad he is for this country. It’s terrible.

[Hugo Stiglitz 23356]

5 minutes ago, Sawbonz said:

I’m pretty sure I’m not the only one who thinks Hugo has ill intentions. And at this point where is there to go except towards bloodshed? Read his last couple of posts. Protests the day after the election (even if Biden wins)? What “Dramatic intervention” do you think he is talking about following a landslide Biden victory and inauguration?  

You seem more concerned about me, random message board poster Hugo Stiglitz, possibly fomenting violence to preserve democracy than Trump overtly calling for violence to destroy it.  Curious! 

[SydneyCarton 47809]

8 minutes ago, StassneyHorn said:

Take the meathead “fuck yous” to the football/recruiting board.

Yes, I'm clearly the definition of a fucking meathead. Are you one of those posters than doesn't look at handles or avatars? You know, the dozen or so times we've interacted on the various local politics and voting threads positively?

4 minutes ago, tantric superman said:

(Oh shit, sorry SC.  I get your response now. ..)

 

 

Do you want to enlighten our friend Stassney then, please, and let him in on my brash attempt towards humor?

[jimmyjazz 45513]

1 hour ago, Brisketexan said:

shithead get out of an air-conditioned white truck with his perfect little orange vest on....makes me ragey just thinking about it.  Fucking surveyors, man.

Why couldn't I have said "draftsmen and HR ladies"???  #genderroles

[SydneyCarton 47809]

2 minutes ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

You seem more concerned about me, random message board poster Hugo Stiglitz, possibly fomenting violence to preserve democracy than Trump overtly calling for violence to destroy it.  Curious! 

I don't have the tired animosity towards you as many others, but for starters, this is a non answer and a distraction. He's never said or indicated in any way he's not concerned about Trump calling for violence and destroying democracy. In fact, his activity on this thread indicates quite the opposite. But you just threw that out there as a shit, cheap misdirection. That isn't helping your perception here. It's very Trump like, honestly. Why don't you take to twitter and talk about how you're going to reduce prescription prices next? That weak ass effort from you can get fucked. 

[Sawbonz 27375]

2 minutes ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

You seem more concerned about me, random message board poster Hugo Stiglitz, possibly fomenting violence to preserve democracy than Trump overtly calling for violence to destroy it.  Curious! 

Nice one Hugo! Random message board poster who is also the most prolific poster on this board. And because I am concerned about you it means I don’t care about the threats to our country Trump and his supporters present!! You are good Hugo. 

[Sawbonz 27375]

1 minute ago, SydneyCarton said:

I don't have the tired animosity towards you as many others, but for starters, this is a non answer and a distraction. He's never said or indicated in any way he's not concerned about Trump calling for violence and destroying democracy. In fact, his activity on this thread indicates quite the opposite. But you just threw that out there as a shit, cheap misdirection. That isn't helping your perception here. It's very Trump like, honestly. Why don't you take to twitter and talk about how you're going to reduce prescription prices next? That weak ass effort from you can get fucked. 

Thank you my for posting this. I think I will take degenerate Gardner’s advice and bow out on this topic

[Biff Tannen 45477]

34 minutes ago, Sawbonz said:

then posted a bunch of pics in nsaa to get your rep up

Whoa now, say what?

[MonkeyDoughnut 10134]

27 minutes ago, LurkingHorn said:

This is simply not true. Trump won because of old, white men and that base is about to start going away in a hurry. The GOP is going to have to pivot really hard to avoid losing an entire generation of voters. I think that is likely to happen which will be a good thing. Yes, the fact that our republic elected Trump says a lot about us, but it will also be a sign of the strength of our system when his fat ass is ousted after only 1 term. 

Trump was elected because an entire class of people were angry. Many didn't and many still  don't like Trump, they just feel like he listens to them and cares about them. When the Democrats courted the silicon tech "visionaries" and celebrity left then turned their backs on all the blue-collar workers who were suffering and are now being told they have to "adapt" in the new times.  They voted for Obama because he also talked the talk and listened.  They turned back when he didn't walk that talk and felt Hillary didn't know they existed (other than being deplorable).  Where I will agree is that base is going away... blue collar is dying and we're worse off as a country for it.

[StassneyHorn 6534]

17 minutes ago, SydneyCarton said:

Yes, I'm clearly the definition of a fucking meathead. Are you one of those posters than doesn't look at handles or avatars? You know, the dozen or so times we've interacted on the various local politics and voting threads positively?

Do you want to enlighten our friend Stassney then, please, and let him in on my brash attempt towards humor?

I’m aware of the interactions. Asking for a clean discussion and avoiding tit for tat micro aggressions is all my statement means. Directed at sawbonz more than you, and he just posted he would cool down.

[Hugo Stiglitz 23356]

5 minutes ago, Sawbonz said:

The most prolific poster on this board

If there was ever a time to be the most vocal about politics, it’s during the Donald Trump presidency.  However, I completely understand the scrutiny towards me as a poster. My posting volume isn’t exactly healthy. There’s nothing I can do to satisfy the critics. Shit happens, we move on.