Jump to content
Required Reading for any Longhorn ×

2020 Democratic Nominee

used2b

By used2b
in Cloak Room

 Share

Recommended Posts

Aqua Buddha

Aqua Buddha 14625

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, FondrenRoad said:

The future of housing for America is Japan and Europe. You could go move into an empty house in the middle of nowhere practically for free, but housing prices in core cities will continue to rise even as the population grays or shrinks. Tokyo's core is still growing and increasing in cost even as Japan is shrinking. 

Personally, I'd buy one of those $1 homes in Sicily way before I bought one in small town America.  Building towns for the car makes for ugly towns. 

You need to invest in mass transit, though.  By that, I mean multi channel network.  Buses, trains, bikes, etc.  Japan and Europe have that and we don't.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Replies 23.3k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • bad_teammate

    3638

  • Hugo Stiglitz

    2212

  • Hank Kingsley

    1252

  • Js1

    1230

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Popular Posts

Huckleberry
Huckleberry

No it doesn't, this is absurd selfishness on a grand scale. Nobody is getting punished. My wife and I paid off our student loans, and you know what I think about younger people or even those in our ge

henrygandorf
henrygandorf

i’ve really enjoyed the 900 posts from bt explaining how bernie people aren’t aggressive, obsessive, and very-online.  truly a learning experience. 

Bill Clinton
Bill Clinton

3rd or 4th thread but whos counting.  Name recognition and ability to collect money is most important to the Democratic Party. They aren't trying to win 2020, they are trying to rebuild and colle

Posted Images

F250

F250 28829

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, ndawg said:

I can imagine Bernie haters reading it and thinking, "finally, some legit dirt on the guy." But I can't imagine anyone reading it and deciding, "wow, I actually feel differently about Bernie Sanders now."

Yeah, anyone trying to make hay out of that essay is really reaching. Beto's short story was weirder and even that was unworthy of a discussion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Aqua Buddha

Aqua Buddha 14625

Posted
Posted (edited)
27 minutes ago, washparkhorn said:

Wait - better than 2016 is bad now?

 

Well, if voter turnout in NV in 2020 is lower than 2008 despite NV have more people now that it did then, yes that's bad.

There was no sign of a Sanders voter surge in New Hampshire either, nor on Saturday in Nevada, where the nearly final results indicated that turnout would finish above 2016 but well short of 2008 levels, despite a decade of population growth and a new early voting option that attracted some 75,000 voters. The low numbers are all the more striking given the huge turnout in the 2018 midterm elections, which was the highest in a century.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/elections-2020/bernie-sanders-says-hell-attract-a-wave-of-new-voters-it-hasnt-happened/ar-BB10lewF?li=BBnb7Kz&ocid=mailsignout

Edited by Aqua Buddha
Link to comment
Share on other sites
F250

F250 28829

Posted
Posted
10 minutes ago, burntorangebongos said:

This dude keeps shooting himself in the dick. It's too bad he has the money to keep smoothing shit over.

 

The difference between Trump and Bloomberg is how they would celebrate The Purge.

 

The Trump Family

spacer.png

Bloomberg

spacer.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites
gmr548

gmr548 16617

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, washparkhorn said:

Wait - better than 2016 is bad now?

 

 

38 minutes ago, Aqua Buddha said:

Well, if voter turnout in NV in 2020 is lower than 2008 despite NV have more people now that it did then, yes that's bad.

There was no sign of a Sanders voter surge in New Hampshire either, nor on Saturday in Nevada, where the nearly final results indicated that turnout would finish above 2016 but well short of 2008 levels, despite a decade of population growth and a new early voting option that attracted some 75,000 voters. The low numbers are all the more striking given the huge turnout in the 2018 midterm elections, which was the highest in a century.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/elections-2020/bernie-sanders-says-hell-attract-a-wave-of-new-voters-it-hasnt-happened/ar-BB10lewF?li=BBnb7Kz&ocid=mailsignout

Primary turnout is not correlated with general election turnout nor is it predictive of GE results. That's well established.

Primaries involve the always-engaged core supporters of a party and turnout is generally correlated with how competitive a race is. We're not going to get any proof of Sanders's ability to turn out new voters until the general, but pointing to primary numbers as proof that he won't is simply bad analysis. For better or worse, that theory is ultimately going to be tested in November. What data points do exist say we should see a turnout bump from 2016, though the extent of which is unclear. Most people aren't posting in the CR in February. Most people don't pay attention until somewhere between the conventions and Labor Day.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
JimmyJames

JimmyJames 12271

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, washparkhorn said:

Agree. The "sexual revolution" of the late 60's and early 70's gave the country a whole lot of cringe (and too much . . . hair). If you had a boomer parent, they had the Joy of Sex - a book that gave children nightmares of giant bushes.  

spacer.png

It is a wonder any GenXer ever had sex.

Porn was a lot harder to come by back then. So no choice.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
FondrenRoad

FondrenRoad 4378

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, gmr548 said:

 

Primary turnout is not correlated with general election turnout nor is it predictive of GE results. That's well established.

Primaries involve the always-engaged core supporters of a party and turnout is generally correlated with how competitive a race is. We're not going to get any proof of Sanders's ability to turn out new voters until the general, but pointing to primary numbers as proof that he won't is simply bad analysis. For better or worse, that theory is ultimately going to be tested in November. What data points do exist say we should see a turnout bump from 2016, though the extent of which is unclear. Most people aren't posting in the CR in February. Most people don't pay attention until somewhere between the conventions and Labor Day.

Also it's a caucus. That means it's only extra hardcore supporters.  I don't know whether 2008 really had a higher turnout than 2020, but the Culinary Workers Union endorsement of Obama could have easily made that happen. They didn't endorse anyone in 2016 or 2020.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites
GSU&UT

GSU&UT 1798

Posted
Posted
19 minutes ago, FondrenRoad said:

Also it's a caucus. That means it's only extra hardcore supporters.  I don't know whether 2008 really had a higher turnout than 2020, but the Culinary Workers Union endorsement of Obama could have easily made that happen. They didn't endorse anyone in 2016 or 2020.  

2008 was the first time Nevada moved to a caucus format after running regular primaries before.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Zonahorn

Zonahorn 8079

Posted
Posted
10 hours ago, Aqua Buddha said:

Well, if voter turnout in NV in 2020 is lower than 2008 despite NV have more people now that it did then, yes that's bad.

There was no sign of a Sanders voter surge in New Hampshire either, nor on Saturday in Nevada, where the nearly final results indicated that turnout would finish above 2016 but well short of 2008 levels, despite a decade of population growth and a new early voting option that attracted some 75,000 voters. The low numbers are all the more striking given the huge turnout in the 2018 midterm elections, which was the highest in a century.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/elections-2020/bernie-sanders-says-hell-attract-a-wave-of-new-voters-it-hasnt-happened/ar-BB10lewF?li=BBnb7Kz&ocid=mailsignout

Has that stopped him from winning, and will it stop him from winning an insurmountable delegate lead?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Aqua Buddha

Aqua Buddha 14625

Posted
Posted
Just now, Calihorn said:

Since when has primary turnout correlated to GE turnout? I'll hang up and listen.

Hillary 2016.  Weak turnout in the primaries and in the general.

The turnout issue is specific to Bern because that's the underpinning of his electoral strategy.  He's running a campaign unlike any other recent winning campaigns.  He's specifically mentioned his ability to turn out new voters and that's not the case.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites
gmr548

gmr548 16617

Posted
Posted
No but it makes it highly unlikely he'd beat Trump in the general is further proof that his campaign model and strategy are flawed.

No it doesn't. If you're basing your argument on primary turnout, he's very likely to beat Trump because GOP primary turnout is way down. Of course, that's fucking stupid and isn't meaningful at all.

Do you also believe preseason football predicts regular season performance?
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Zonahorn

Zonahorn 8079

Posted
Posted
Just now, Aqua Buddha said:

Hillary 2016.  Weak turnout in the primaries and in the general.

The turnout issue is specific to Bern because that's the underpinning of his electoral strategy.  He's running a campaign unlike any other recent winning campaigns.  He's specifically mentioned his ability to turn out new voters and that's not the case.  

That's the wrong answer, the correct answer is literally never. Remember when republicans thought Beto wouldn't even come close after the primary turnout? 

Also, for the love of god, shut the fuck up about this point.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Zonahorn

Zonahorn 8079

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, gmr548 said:


No it doesn't. If you're basing your argument on primary turnout, he's very likely to beat Trump because GOP primary turnout is way down. Of course, that's fucking stupid and isn't meaningful at all.

Do you also believe preseason football predicts regular season performance?

Its pretty obvious he has an agenda

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Nice Guy Eddie

Nice Guy Eddie 13529

Posted
Posted

It’s difficult to support Bernie when he says that public colleges should all be free. I agree that college tuitions have been allowed by the states to grow too high but flipping them to free seems like the worst idea. I’m cool with more scholarships/grants or even tax breaks but just making college free? 

or that all healthcare is free regardless of the impact to level of care. Doctors and hospitals will just have to figure out how to handle the massive revenue cuts as they only get Medicare payments.

bernie is just finding people’s problems and basically offering them future money to support him. Don’t get me wrong it’s a powerful message that will continue resonate as American becomes poorer.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Cheeseweasel

Cheeseweasel 26438

Posted
Posted
8 minutes ago, Nice Guy Eddie said:

bernie is just finding people’s problems and basically offering them future money to support him. Don’t get me wrong it’s a powerful message that will continue resonate as American becomes poorer.

Good point. The question becomes how do we deal with the wealth inequality that is growing in our country. 

Three "quick fixes":

1. Raise the upper tax rates (Over 500k per year)

2. Stop the limit on SS earnings tax. 

3. Set a minimum tax requirement (by percentage) on earnings. Let's say everyone who earns over 100k per year must have an effective tax rate of no less than 10%. That would cover people who make little "taxable" income due to stocks / family wealth.

 

That money could be used to shore up SS and have a medicare option for low wage earners

Link to comment
Share on other sites
406W30th

406W30th 1111

Posted
Posted
34 minutes ago, Calihorn said:

That's the wrong answer, the correct answer is literally never. Remember when republicans thought Beto wouldn't even come close after the primary turnout? 

Also, for the love of god, shut the fuck up about this point.

Previously, Aqua Buddha was saying how Bernie was unviable because he hadn't gotten over 35% of the vote in either Iowa or NH and needed to prove that he could do that. Bernie got 46.8% of the vote in so now that's no longer a talking point.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
GW Hayduke

GW Hayduke 1953

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, Calihorn said:

Feel free to tell me when primary turnout has correlated to GE turnout.

Why? That has already been answered for you. But go ahead keep being a dick to everyone and anyone that doesn’t fall lock-step in line with everything you say. Better yet, don’t. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Dropout

Dropout 355

Posted
Posted (edited)
20 minutes ago, Nice Guy Eddie said:

bernie is just finding people’s problems and basically offering them future money to support him. Don’t get me wrong it’s a powerful message that will continue resonate as American becomes poorer.

So our point here Eddie is that this happens. Republicans and Democrats find people’s problems and offer them solutions in return for money to support them. Billionaires own politicians. This is it.

Edited by Dropout
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
GW Hayduke

GW Hayduke 1953

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, Calihorn said:

It was an incorrect answer 

You are the decider of correctness and everyone else “has an agenda” or should “use their brain.” 

I keep hearing about this Bernie bro phenomenon where there are a bunch of dicks online. That’s some fake news if you ask me

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Zonahorn

Zonahorn 8079

Posted
Posted
6 minutes ago, GW Hayduke said:

You are the decider of correctness and everyone else “has an agenda” or should “use their brain.” 

I keep hearing about this Bernie bro phenomenon where there are a bunch of dicks online. That’s some fake news if you ask me

I am indeed, kneel before me.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
bad_teammate

bad_teammate 13226

Posted
Posted

This dude has spent $500M on this campaign. Think of how many kids that could feed. How many sustainable jobs that could create.

Good god.

It's actually kind of hilarious that you're going to have Bloomberg, Biden, and Buttigieg running Richard Nixon's anti-free love and anti-Communist messaging during the debate tonight.

Honestly we're going to need Bloomberg to do better than this. Whoever the candidate is, he or she needs to be hit with everything. There has got to be better stuff than old essays where he says banal things.

I posted the RAPE FANTASIES essay earlier.

Regarding the orgasms and cancer...

"Cancer, Disease, and Society" - Bernie Sanders (1969) (nice)

As usual, the actual thrust of the article is solid and right: Health outcomes aren't just about what doctors measure, but are also holistic and systemic. And his claims were based on what he read in a journal-published scientific studies and books. The science might have been wrong, but he's actively quoting scientific journals  and books, not just rambling. Over and over he quotes studies and books.

It's not "loopy" at all.

In fact, I think it's fair to accuse Bernie of padding his writing with huge, long-form quotes from other sources. Classic essay-padding from the lazy socialist. Tsk Tsk

As for naked toddlers touching each others' genitals? No idea. I just re-read the cancer article and I didn't see that in there. Maybe I spaced out and missed it because it is a slog.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
 Share
Go to topic listing


Football ... Basketball ... Baseball ... Other Sports ... Futbol ... 🤫995🤫 ... Gambling ... Movies & TV ... Music ... Hobbies ... Lulz ... Food & Travel ... Daily Texan ... Business and Markets ... Cloak Room ... Help ... For Sale ... Board Discussion ... Subscribe!... Donate!... Advertise... COOKIE MONSTER!

×
×
  • Create New...