Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted
  On 1/3/2019 at 1:24 PM, Onboard 2.0 said:

So you agree with trumps decision to pull out of Syria ?

Expand  

Absolutely.

We need to extricate ourselves from the forever-war, not only for our own good but for general peace in the region. In many ways it is a 21st century's White Man's Burden attitude that has driven centrists and libs into the arms of the neo-cons in favor of the forever-war (the same who now hold up generals and feds as heroes).

He's a rash, venal, dishonest, pathetic piece of human shit, but even those are right 1 out of 100 times.

There's a way to do it with more ~*~ decorum ~*~ but he's the head of the military and he doesn't owe his underling generals much more than an order and expectation that they'll follow it.

  • Like 1
Posted
  On 1/3/2019 at 3:00 PM, bad_teammate said:

There's a way to do it with more ~*~ decorum ~*~ but he's the head of the military and he doesn't owe his underling generals much more than an order and expectation that they'll follow it.

Expand  

What an absolutely abysmal leadership model.

Posted
  On 1/3/2019 at 3:25 PM, Pancho Negro said:

 

Expand  

Great, no "The Wire" reboot based on the Mayor's ascension to the Governor's Mansion and then the White House.  Thanks a lot, asshole!  

Posted
  On 1/3/2019 at 1:59 PM, Bozo_Casanova said:

That’s nonsense. Running a balanced budget or a modest surplus during protracted periods of expansion to allow the debt/GDP ratio to resettle and store dry power for the next recession does not cause recession, that’s crackpot nonsense. That entire argument is based on the self-evident observation that recession follows boom.

No shit- it’s called the business cycle.

Expand  

business cycles aren't determined exogenously.  the government is a huge component of it, and you're advocating vast recessionary pressures be applied intentionally. and then claiming it doesn't have anything to do with the outcome.  now that's nonsense.

Posted
  On 1/3/2019 at 8:30 PM, ADHD said:

Bernie Sanders is over. 

Expand  

I'm starting to think that he is.

Hypothesis: Bernie's popularity wasn't so much his super-progressive ideas.  Yes, those gave him a core, unique base on which to build.  But what gave him the real numbers was the same charming attribute that Trump had -- he wasn't Hillary.

This time around, there's no need for a "not Hillary."  Take that element away, and Bernie falls back into the pack.

Again, just my off-the-cuff hypothesis. 

Posted
  On 1/3/2019 at 10:51 PM, Brisketexan said:

I'm starting to think that he is.

Hypothesis: Bernie's popularity wasn't so much his super-progressive ideas.  Yes, those gave him a core, unique base on which to build.  But what gave him the real numbers was the same charming attribute that Trump had -- he wasn't Hillary. 

This time around, there's no need for a "not Hillary."  Take that element away, and Bernie falls back into the pack.

Again, just my off-the-cuff hypothesis. 

Expand  

Make it a combo of "not Hillary" + further left than Hillary.

In walks a cadre of Democrats who want to run and are to the left of Hillary.  Now all the air has been sucked out the room.

And Warren snatched up Bernie's Iowa caucus director from 2016.  No mention that she also snatched his wig and he won't run now. 

Posted
  On 1/3/2019 at 5:14 PM, elfenix said:
business cycles aren't determined exogenously.  the government is a huge component of it, and you're advocating vast recessionary pressures be applied intentionally. and then claiming it doesn't have anything to do with the outcome.  now that's nonsense.

No, I’m not. You’re begging the question by asserting that balance or any level of surplus is “vastly recessionary”. Of course the government is a huge component of the business cycle and of course, less spending is by definition less aggregate demand than more. But so what? You could just as easily turn that around and assert that deficit guarantees against recession, which is obviously also bullshit.
Posted
  On 1/3/2019 at 10:51 PM, Brisketexan said:

I'm starting to think that he is.

Hypothesis: Bernie's popularity wasn't so much his super-progressive ideas.  Yes, those gave him a core, unique base on which to build.  But what gave him the real numbers was the same charming attribute that Trump had -- he wasn't Hillary.

This time around, there's no need for a "not Hillary."  Take that element away, and Bernie falls back into the pack.

Again, just my off-the-cuff hypothesis. 

Expand  

Yeah, but he's also not seen as a guy who used his gov't employment to get rich, so that also makes him very popular.  He's the kind of person  I'd love to see more of in office. I think his ideas of too much frees stuff is wrong, but he isn't talking out of both sides of his face.

He's mostly gone now because he's just too old, and he'd never get support from the democrats.  He nor any other candidate is winning as an independent yet.

Posted
  On 1/3/2019 at 11:11 PM, Onboard 2.0 said:

Yeah, but he's also not seen as a guy who used his gov't employment to get rich, so that also makes him very popular.  He's the kind of person  I'd love to see more of in office. I think his ideas of too much frees stuff is wrong, but he isn't talking out of both sides of his face.

He's mostly gone now because he's just too old, and he'd never get support from the democrats.  He nor any other candidate is winning as an independent yet.

Expand  

Well, your first sentence also translates into "no, seriously, DEFINITELY not Hillary."  How the Venn diagram overlap on those concepts looks, I'm not sure, but I think there's a fair amount of overlap.  Otherwise, I generally share your take.

Posted
  On 1/3/2019 at 10:51 PM, Brisketexan said:

I'm starting to think that he is.

Hypothesis: Bernie's popularity wasn't so much his super-progressive ideas.  Yes, those gave him a core, unique base on which to build.  But what gave him the real numbers was the same charming attribute that Trump had -- he wasn't Hillary.

This time around, there's no need for a "not Hillary."  Take that element away, and Bernie falls back into the pack.

Again, just my off-the-cuff hypothesis. 

Expand  

I think that's a very sound hypothesis.  

This is a guy who ran four years ago in Iowa and damned near won.  Now, he's running a distant second (with the guy who's in third place nipping at his heels).  The loss of that much support tells you that a lot of it wasn't about the candidate himself.

Posted
  On 1/3/2019 at 11:16 PM, Brisketexan said:

Well, your first sentence also translates into "no, seriously, DEFINITELY not Hillary."  How the Venn diagram overlap on those concepts looks, I'm not sure, but I think there's a fair amount of overlap.  Otherwise, I generally share your take.

Expand  

Oh yeah there's an anyone but Hillary vibe, but the "Bernie" kind of candidate is definitely not done. People are really friggin' tired of the inside the beltway crowd (Hillary was their poster child). That's really my point. Inside the beltway solutions and gridlock aren't working.

Look at AOC, She wouldn't have stood a chance before 2016 (and Trump) of un seating an incumbent.  She's a Bernie type candidate, and while Bernies done, that type of candidate isn't.

 

Posted
  On 1/3/2019 at 11:20 PM, Ghost of LL said:

I think that's a very sound hypothesis.  

This is a guy who ran four years ago in Iowa and damned near won.  Now, he's running a distant second (with the guy who's in third place nipping at his heels).  The loss of that much support tells you that a lot of it wasn't about the candidate himself.

Expand  

The candidate himself no (now), but the type of candidate yes (now).

Posted
  On 1/3/2019 at 11:25 PM, Onboard 2.0 said:

Oh yeah there's an anyone but Hillary vibe, but the "Bernie" kind of candidate is definitely not done. People are really friggin' tired of the inside the beltway crowd (Hillary was their poster child). That's really my point. Inside the beltway solutions and gridlock aren't working.

Look at AOC, She wouldn't have stood a chance before 2016 (and Trump) of un seating an incumbent.  She's a Bernie type candidate, and while Bernies done, that type of candidate isn't.

 

Expand  

I definitely agree that the most attractive thing about AOC (okay, okay, aside from how she looks in a dress) is her vibe: she's got good energy, she gives off a "not gonna take shit from you" vibe, she's quick on her feet on social media (we have seen how important that is), that she's questioning stale and stodgy ways of doing things, etc.

I may not agree with a good chunk of her policy positions (impractical as they may be), but I'm glad that voices like hers are speaking up and being heard.  Give her several years of learning by experience, and she might be an attractive candidate for something more.  Or, she may find herself way out of her league, and floundering.  But if she fares well, she is the type of candidate who may garner significant Bernie-like support.  Time will tell.

Posted
  On 1/3/2019 at 11:32 PM, Brisketexan said:

I definitely agree that the most attractive thing about AOC (okay, okay, aside from how she looks in a dress) is her vibe: she's got good energy, she gives off a "not gonna take shit from you" vibe, she's quick on her feet on social media (we have seen how important that is), that she's questioning stale and stodgy ways of doing things, etc.

I may not agree with a good chunk of her policy positions (impractical as they may be), but I'm glad that voices like hers are speaking up and being heard.  Give her several years of learning by experience, and she might be an attractive candidate for something more.  Or, she may find herself way out of her league, and floundering.  But if she fares well, she is the type of candidate who may garner significant Bernie-like support.  Time will tell.

Expand  

Yeah, we need that kind of candidates on both sides the voting booth (yeah, I said it  #bothsides) Give and take compromise is going to be crucial to take us back from this stupid ass brink of blood letting partisanship. 

Posted

Literally the only thing attractive about Bernie is his leftish agenda. He's a disheveled, rumpled, hectoring, monotone grandpa.

There is nothing to Bernie Sanders EXCEPT substance. That is what makes him attractive.

And no one in the current crop is going to steal that from him, because the only person in the current crop who has 1/10th of his authenticity is Warren.

But the Dems are going to spend the primary fighting Bernie because that's what the centrists and center-right never-Trumpers will demand. As we have seen on this board for years now.

Posted (edited)
  On 1/3/2019 at 11:42 PM, bad_teammate said:

Literally the only thing attractive about Bernie is his leftish agenda. He's a disheveled, rumpled, hectoring, monotone grandpa.

There is nothing to Bernie Sanders EXCEPT substance. That is what makes him attractive.

And no one in the current crop is going to steal that from him, because the only person in the current crop who has 1/10th of his authenticity is Warren.

But the Dems are going to spend the primary fighting Bernie because that's what the centrists and center-right never-Trumpers will demand. As we have seen on this board for years now.

Expand  

So which is it, his leftist agenda or his substance ?  You contradict yourself.  His leftist agenda was a hollow wish list of un fulfillable promises. His substance is he seems to be a man of honor like Mr. Carter.  A man who will always try to do the right thing.

 

Top of the page bitches....

Edited by Onboard 2.0
Posted
  On 1/3/2019 at 11:42 PM, bad_teammate said:

Literally the only thing attractive about Bernie is his leftish agenda. He's a disheveled, rumpled, hectoring, monotone grandpa.

There is nothing to Bernie Sanders EXCEPT substance. That is what makes him attractive.

And no one in the current crop is going to steal that from him, because the only person in the current crop who has 1/10th of his authenticity is Warren.

But the Dems are going to spend the primary fighting Bernie because that's what the centrists and center-right never-Trumpers will demand. As we have seen on this board for years now.

Expand  

You, along with many others, don't seem to grasp that style is substance 

Posted
  On 1/4/2019 at 12:16 AM, Hank Kingsley said:

I like Bernie. I think he’s more useful helping other candidates than running himself. Plus I think people have PTSD with anyone involved in the 2016 election.

Expand  

Definitely agree here.  He's much more of shark then he gets credit for, but his best place is right where he is, pushing ideas, maybe even some ahead of their time and being a watchdog against some corruption.

 

Posted (edited)
  On 1/4/2019 at 12:48 AM, Bama Chick said:

I wonder if Kyrsten Sinema has any aspirations to higher office.

She looked fabulous today.

62a6212ba7e5430af3918fb0f511e14a.jpg

[getthefemalevote]bephysicallyattractive[/getthefemalevote]

Expand  

She’s hot! I like her. 😊 I could say she’s someone I could drink a beer with. Now I know I’m not giving her the respect she deserves. But I could watch her giving the State of the Union. 

Edited by Brandywine
Posted

It looks more and more like Uncle Joe is probably going make a run for it.

From the NYTimes:

Biden Sees Himself as Democrats’ Best Hope in 2020, Allies Say

WASHINGTON — Former Vice President Joseph R. Biden Jr. is in the final stages of deciding whether to run for president and has told allies he is skeptical the other Democrats eyeing the White House can defeat President Trump, an assessment that foreshadows a clash between the veteran Washington insider and the more liberal and fresh-faced contenders for the party’s 2020 nomination.

Many Democratic voters, and nearly all major Democratic donors, are keenly interested in Mr. Biden’s plans because of their consuming focus on finding a candidate who can beat a president they believe represents a threat to American democracy. But there is also a rising demand in the party for a more progressive standard-bearer who reflects the increasingly diverse Democratic coalition.

Mr. Biden would instantly be the early front-runner if he ran, but he would have to bridge divides in a primary that would test whether Democrats are willing to embrace a moderate white man in his 70s if they view him as the best bet to oust Mr. Trump.

“He has the best chance of beating Trump, hands down,” said Senator Tom Carper of Delaware, Mr. Biden’s longtime friend and former colleague. “On a scale of one to 10, that’s probably about a 12 for us.”

  Reveal hidden contents

 

Posted

Matt Dowd had an interesting take on this field this morning on ABC Sunday talk show.  Because I didn't turn it off and suck off the DNC though, it means I'm a trumper and can't post on most threads on here.  

Posted
  On 1/7/2019 at 12:02 AM, bolverk said:

It looks more and more like Uncle Joe is probably going make a run for it.

From the NYTimes:

Biden Sees Himself as Democrats’ Best Hope in 2020, Allies Say

WASHINGTON — Former Vice President Joseph R. Biden Jr. is in the final stages of deciding whether to run for president and has told allies he is skeptical the other Democrats eyeing the White House can defeat President Trump, an assessment that foreshadows a clash between the veteran Washington insider and the more liberal and fresh-faced contenders for the party’s 2020 nomination.

Many Democratic voters, and nearly all major Democratic donors, are keenly interested in Mr. Biden’s plans because of their consuming focus on finding a candidate who can beat a president they believe represents a threat to American democracy. But there is also a rising demand in the party for a more progressive standard-bearer who reflects the increasingly diverse Democratic coalition.

Mr. Biden would instantly be the early front-runner if he ran, but he would have to bridge divides in a primary that would test whether Democrats are willing to embrace a moderate white man in his 70s if they view him as the best bet to oust Mr. Trump.

“He has the best chance of beating Trump, hands down,” said Senator Tom Carper of Delaware, Mr. Biden’s longtime friend and former colleague. “On a scale of one to 10, that’s probably about a 12 for us.”

  Reveal hidden contents

 

Expand  

[sarcasm] Exceptional journalism from the New York Times giving a fair and objective analysis of Joe Biden THINKING about running for President. Very newsworthy and very cool. [/sarcasm]

Posted
  On 1/7/2019 at 12:02 AM, bolverk said:

It looks more and more like Uncle Joe is probably going make a run for it.

From the NYTimes:

Biden Sees Himself as Democrats’ Best Hope in 2020, Allies Say

WASHINGTON — Former Vice President Joseph R. Biden Jr. is in the final stages of deciding whether to run for president and has told allies he is skeptical the other Democrats eyeing the White House can defeat President Trump, an assessment that foreshadows a clash between the veteran Washington insider and the more liberal and fresh-faced contenders for the party’s 2020 nomination.

Many Democratic voters, and nearly all major Democratic donors, are keenly interested in Mr. Biden’s plans because of their consuming focus on finding a candidate who can beat a president they believe represents a threat to American democracy. But there is also a rising demand in the party for a more progressive standard-bearer who reflects the increasingly diverse Democratic coalition.

Mr. Biden would instantly be the early front-runner if he ran, but he would have to bridge divides in a primary that would test whether Democrats are willing to embrace a moderate white man in his 70s if they view him as the best bet to oust Mr. Trump.

“He has the best chance of beating Trump, hands down,” said Senator Tom Carper of Delaware, Mr. Biden’s longtime friend and former colleague. “On a scale of one to 10, that’s probably about a 12 for us.”

  Reveal hidden contents

 

Expand  

Fuck yes.  I can get behind  Uncle Joe.  He will absolutely destroy Fucktard in any and all debates.  

Posted
  On 1/7/2019 at 1:45 AM, ChiTownDoc said:

Fuck yes.  I can get behind  Uncle Joe.  He will absolutely destroy Fucktard in any and all debates.  

Expand  

I would be perfectly fine with Biden but honestly, he’s boring AF.  He’s already run for President twice and never won a state in the primaries.   

Yeah, he’d crush Trump in the debates but who wouldn’t?  Biden has a slight weakness there too as he carries the perceived Obama baggage.

I kinda hold Biden/Obama responsible for the conditions that gave us Trump.

Again, I’d vote for him in a heartbeat against any Republican but I think the democrats can do better.

Posted

I feel like in this day and age, where people are able to keep up with politics in real time and in the palm of their hands, you can't just spout off the same old bullshit talking points, which is what I get from Castro.  Especially in the age of the dotard.  You have to have real ideas, or at least ideas that aren't rehashing the same talking points from the past 20 years.

Posted
  On 1/7/2019 at 1:53 AM, Hugo Stiglitz said:

I would be perfectly fine with Biden but honestly, he’s boring AF.  He’s already run for President twice and never won a state in the primaries.   

Yeah, he’d crush Trump in the debates but who wouldn’t?  Biden has a slight weakness there too as he carries the perceived Obama baggage.

I kinda hold Biden/Obama responsible for the conditions that gave us Trump.

Again, I’d vote for him in a heartbeat against any Republican but I think the democrats can do better.

Expand  

Im ok with all that.  I wanna see some good candidates then will get behind whoever.  

Can we just put Bernie on the sidelines?  

Posted (edited)

and the thing among others that is different between him and Beto is that he isn't personable or charismatic

not that that's what we necessarily need or should need in a president, but why I don't think he'll succeed in a race where the vast majority of people have no idea who he is

Edited by Celery Man
Posted

The thing about Biden jumping in is that it immediately makes him the frontrunner and the likely winner in the primaries (it's too early to make such predictions - I know). But I think that's bad news for our boy, Beto, who's already getting criticized for being too moderate by the left wing of the party.

To keep them in line, Biden will probably have to choose a younger, more lefty (maybe browner; maybe female) candidate as his Veep. Further, because of is age, I could even see him say he's only going to serve one term just to stabilize the country and focus on repairing the damage of the Trump administration, which would be an implicit promise made to the more progressive caucus that whoever he chooses as his Veep would be the heir apparent.

Of course, I'm talking out of my ass here, but it would strategically make a lot of sense. In light of this reasoning, I could see Biden's announcement potentially being good news for any of the younger, non-Anglo, female, and/or more liberal Dem candidates. Again, I don't think that probably bodes too well for Beto, even though I'd prefer him to be selected. I'm not sure if he'll be able to relight the fire of Betomania nearly two years after losing in the Senate race, thereby forcing Biden's hand to pick him as Veep. 

Posted

But well before the 2008 race began, Warren had harsh words for Biden, one of its eventual contenders who has said he is still deciding whether to run in 2020. In March of 2006, Warren wrote that Biden's 2005 vote in favor of the bankruptcy bill that spurred her foray into blogging made him part of "a bi-partisan coalition to prefer powerful corporation [sic] over hard-working families."

"For years, Senator Joe Biden vied with Republican Senators Charles Grassley and Oren [sic] Hatch for head cheerleader for this bill," Warren wrote. “Even as he tried to position his national image as a strong supporter of women, Senator Biden was twisting arms to get the bankruptcy bill through Congress.”

The blog posts also contain glimpses of Democrats who would rise under Warren’s mentorship. In 2007, Warren highlighted work on a blog called CreditSlips, written by Katie Porter, who was then a University of Iowa law professor, and is now a member of Congress after flipping a Republican-held seat. Negron went on to work in the Obama administration and is now a candidate for alderman in Chicago. A frequent contributor to the blog, Dan Geldon, is expected to serve as Warren’s 2020 campaign manager, and another, Ganesh Sitaraman, is involved, too.

During Warren’s three years as a regular blog contributor, the subjects she wrote about gained wider interest, as the Great Recession threw the country into turmoil. It was out of these years that Warren gained a political leadership role — and continued to develop her online presence.

Posted

I'll vote for whomever the Dems roll out there in 20 because they aren't Trump.  But, holy hell, they need to get their shit together.

So far it appears either Warren or Bidden have the inside track.  Joe's fine and, I think, basically honest but he's far from impressive or inspiring.  Warren just seems....meh, to me.  No presence that I can really feel and pretty lacking in charisma.  

It would be nice to find a rock star but just don't see it, yet. 

 

  • Like 1
Posted
  On 1/7/2019 at 1:30 PM, DigglerontheHoof said:

I'll vote for whomever the Dems roll out there in 20 because they aren't Trump.  But, holy hell, they need to get their shit together.

So far it appears either Warren or Bidden have the inside track.  Joe's fine and, I think, basically honest but he's far from impressive or inspiring.  Warren just seems....meh, to me.  No presence that I can really feel and pretty lacking in charisma.  

It would be nice to find a rock star but just don't see it, yet. 

 

Expand  

Yeah, I agree on Biden. I like the guy, but I think people are putting on rose colored glasses when remembering how he is as a campaigner.

Posted
  On 1/7/2019 at 1:30 PM, DigglerontheHoof said:

I'll vote for whomever the Dems roll out there in 20 because they aren't Trump.  But, holy hell, they need to get their shit together.

So far it appears either Warren or Bidden have the inside track.  Joe's fine and, I think, basically honest but he's far from impressive or inspiring.  Warren just seems....meh, to me.  No presence that I can really feel and pretty lacking in charisma.  

It would be nice to find a rock star but just don't see it, yet. 

 

Expand  

It's January 2019, please calm your fucking tits.

Posted

Biden has real legislative baggage that will eventually sink him with the current issue trends.  Bernie's staff issues, and his inattentiveness to them, also betray a talk but don't walk personal attitude which will nip his heel.  

Warren has some mo.  Warrant/Beto?

Posted

Dems need to get what exactly together?

 

The election is in 23 months and primaries start about 13 months from now.

 

Multiple candidate are in the process of deciding whether or not to run or forming exploratory committees.

 

Is the party to be expected to already have an anointed candidate?

 

Isn’t that what fucked them the last time with Hillary?

 

I want a good selection of diverse candidates and a primary process that enables the selection of the best candidate to beat Trump.

 

The only fly in the ointment is Bernie and his bros and outside interference aimed at fracturing the voters; resulting in a damaged candidate before they general election even begins.

 

The unrealistic expectation of the Democrats having some mythical perfect savior rise from nowhere and ride to our rescue on a unicorn is driving the narrative as Democrats are the gang who can’t shoot straight.

 

Take a breath and let more than one candidate declare and get to the primaries before everyone defaults to catastrophe syndrome.

 

  • Like 3
Posted

All good points. 

What many are worried about is that there is no reason to believe that the good selection of candidates and a primary process will enable the selection of the best candidate to beat Trump.  In fact the track record of such is piss poor, in general.  So the shit that is hoped to be gathered together involves some magic in overcoming this dismal reality.

Posted
  On 1/7/2019 at 1:53 AM, Hugo Stiglitz said:

I would be perfectly fine with Biden but honestly, he’s boring AF.  He’s already run for President twice and never won a state in the primaries.   

Yeah, he’d crush Trump in the debates but who wouldn’t?  Biden has a slight weakness there too as he carries the perceived Obama baggage.

I kinda hold Biden/Obama responsible for the conditions that gave us Trump.

Again, I’d vote for him in a heartbeat against any Republican but I think the democrats can do better.

Expand  

You're not nearly the first person to bring this up, but I think "Obama baggage" is a weird conservative/far left narrative that really doesn't exist.

Obama left office with a 60% approval rating, nearly 90% with Democrats.  The dude had his faults, and a number of people REALLY hated him, but the idea that a candidate needs to distance themselves from him to win a general election isn't really supported by any data.

  • Like 1


×
×
  • Create New...