Jump to content

2020 Democratic Nominee

used2b

By used2b
in Cloak Room

 Share

Recommended Posts

  • 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

gmr548

gmr548 16688

Posted
Posted
15 minutes ago, EuroHorn said:

It’s going to be the battle of the socialist millionaires.  Warren, Biden, Beto, Sanders, Harris

you gotta love it...

 

.  

Don't forget Trump. Loves him some socialism for himself and fellow rich folks. Entire GOP platform is socialism for the rich. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Zonahorn

Zonahorn 8079

Posted
Posted
17 hours ago, EuroHorn said:

It’s going to be the battle of the socialist millionaires.  Warren, Biden, Beto, Sanders, Harris

you gotta love it...

 

.  

Look at this fucking galaxy brain posting what passes for wit on the right.

  • Like 1
  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
David Dennison

David Dennison 19518

Posted
Posted
20 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

Broke: Being associated with Obama isn't enough to make Joe Biden attractive
Woke: Being associated with Obama is bad for Joe Biden's image

Read the thread. Obama started locking families up for crossing the border and Trump merely carried it forward.

 

They detained families together. They did not separate families as a matter of policy.

That is important.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Zonahorn

Zonahorn 8079

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, David Dennison said:

They detained families together. They did not separate families as a matter of policy.

That is important.

Yes, that makes up the difference and makes detaining entire families together a good policy instead of the abhorrent, soulless, shitty policy it is.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
David Dennison

David Dennison 19518

Posted
Posted
Just now, Calihorn said:

Again, that doesn’t make it a good policy decision.

No one argued that it was. But you have to process folks before they get in front of a judge. Families that are taken into custody have to go somewhere while that process is taking place. The policy should be to make that detention as brief as possible. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
henrygandorf

henrygandorf 29225

Posted
Posted

there's also the matter of the current administration actively trying to change asylum laws while families are separated/locked up.  there isn't a fun part of this, but what's going on now isn't helping.

and this is without bringing up the whole "trump telling border officials to break the law and get a pardon afterwards".  ridiculous.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
henrygandorf

henrygandorf 29225

Posted
Posted
29 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

Broke: Being associated with Obama isn't enough to make Joe Biden attractive
Woke: Being associated with Obama is bad for Joe Biden's image

Read the thread. Obama started locking families up for crossing the border and Trump merely carried it forward.

 

biden will do whatever he can to align himself with obama.  it's his only chance.

if he was more savvy about it, he would run from him when it suited his campaign, but he isn't.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Js1

Js1 87174

Posted
Posted
Just now, Biff Tannen said:

Gillibrand just went up a couple of notches on my radar.

Warren - up
Harris - up
Gabbard - down
Pete - up
Gillibrand - up
Castro - down
Booker - way down
Klobuchar - no change
Williamson - probably autistic from all the vaccines 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Guest Lobo

Guest Lobo

Posted
Posted (edited)

^

okay, there’s pandering and then there’s just being a fucking asshole.  Four of those people can go suck a bag of shit with answers like that.  

Guy who lives in San Antonio and his comfort food is iced tea?   Congrats on ditching the ‘lame and weak’ tag fuckface. 

Vegan cupcakes aren’t a thing.   You sound like the fat woman in HR on Karen’s birthday trying to impose what you know you should be eating on your diet on everyone else in the office.  

Williamson waffles on picking a comfort food.  Yeah, very inspiring as we ramp up a possible war you’ll inherit in Iran...you indecisive child.  

And booker?   The black guy who made it a point to get photographed in ever soul food joint in New Jersey years ago, picks ‘veggies’?  Really?  Not even fried or pickled or spiced?   Just veggies?   You sound whiter than Mayor Pete dude.  If you want to pan to white suburban women, just go the whole way and say ‘organic, fair trade veggies.  Maybe with a fun, gluten free dip”

I’m donating $25 to gillibrand for saying whiskey.  

Edited by Lobo
Link to comment
Share on other sites
bad_teammate

bad_teammate 13496

Posted
Posted

The Republicans will do literally nothing for the climate and will grind the government to a halt to prevent any movement of any kind.

The idea that we should be giving our tax money to private corporations to induce them to action is braindead stupidity that will not work. It is a complete waste of time to even try. The only real answer is a massive public movement to nationalize and decarbonize industries that add the most to climate change.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
BradInATX

BradInATX 9208

Posted
Posted

We're going to see some fireworks at the debates with all these candidates struggling to differentiate themselves. Maybe not so much infighting but pure sound byte battles. Wouldn't be totally surprised if someone straight up said "Donald Trump is a fucking idiot" or similar. It'd probably work. Would be awesome I'd Kamala or Liz did it.

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Js1

Js1 87174

Posted
Posted (edited)

LOL @ Clyburn 100% projecting Biden's struggles

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2020-election/clyburn-explains-why-harris-booker-haven-t-caught-s-carolina-n1020061

Quote

Booker and Harris have "been a little bit of amazement to me as well, because I thought for sure that there would be much more of a surge and I can't quite figure that out yet," Clyburn said.

Of Harris, he offered that she "hasn't spelled out the policy stuff with her vision" — vision that he praised as "tremendous."

Wasn't Biden too fucking busy to put out policy?  Was the fuck is his vision?

Quote

About Booker, on the other hand, Clyburn said, "I think he is suffering from the shadows, coming out from under the shadows of Barack Obama."

That is literally 99.9% of the reason why Joe Biden is running. 

Edited by Js1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
bad_teammate

bad_teammate 13496

Posted
Posted
8 minutes ago, Hank Kingsley said:

If the establishment Democrats on the sidelines have their way, the result will be Trump's re-election. 

eyes_1f440.png

By coming out in public as "anyone but Bernie", the centrists/corporates/shills are finely honing the blade on Trump's populist sword. If they are going to go all-in on Buttigieg or Warren for fear of a Sanders presidency, they need to be completely silent about the "anyone but Sanders" part, because Trump will say, "Oh, look, phony Pocahontas/Alfred E. Newman was chosen by the corrupt Democratic elites because they want to keep the swamp. So unfair to Bernie. I really liked Bernie and think he would've run a great campaign."

He did it with Hillary. And just like then, it will have resonance because it will be true (again).

But it's not enough for them to just support the candidate(s) they prefer.

And, when the attacks come and land with meaning, the centrists/corporates/shills will complain it's Bernie's fault in a repeat of 2016's, "Why do you make me hit you!?!?"

Link to comment
Share on other sites
bad_teammate

bad_teammate 13496

Posted
Posted
3 hours ago, Mojo Hand said:

An acceptable answer would be the correct one:  she's surging because she's running a great campaign and getting her message out there.   Not that she's surging now because of two identity characteristics that have never changed.

"Elizabeth is a friend of mine and I think she's running a good campaign"

He literally said that in the fucking interview. That's the point. Click and read. The headline is a 100% mischaracterization of his statement as the two women (Natalie and Elizabeth, who both rule, especially Liz who is from North Texas) are pointing out.

It is very difficult to not see Warren's recent surge and Bernie's dip as unaffected by an incessant barrage of dishonest and misleading opinion-pushing against Bernie from the usual outlets. If that is the case, will this persistent anti-Bernie media narrative continue unchanged for 6 months and/or will Warren be able to weather her own session in the media barrel as it were?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Hank Kingsley

Hank Kingsley 21749

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, bad_teammate said:

The headline is a 100% mischaracterization of his statement

Agreed, and this is happening ALL THE TIME with other candidates as well. 

I've considered starting at thread about it but have always refrained.  The headline writers for biased and legitimate media outlets are doing a huge disservice to the electorate in the name of clicks/revenue.  The problem is most Twitter users just read the headline instead of reading the article or watching the video. It infuriates me how irresponsible the media has become on Twitter. 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mojo Hand

Mojo Hand 4580

Posted
Posted
9 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

"Elizabeth is a friend of mine and I think she's running a good campaign"

He literally said that in the fucking interview. That's the point. Click and read. The headline is a 100% mischaracterization of his statement as the two women (Natalie and Elizabeth, who both rule, especially Liz who is from North Texas) are pointing out.

It is very difficult to not see Warren's recent surge and Bernie's dip as unaffected by an incessant barrage of dishonest and misleading opinion-pushing against Bernie from the usual outlets. If that is the case, will this persistent anti-Bernie media narrative continue unchanged for 6 months and/or will Warren be able to weather her own session in the media barrel as it were?

I'm not sure I understand what you think the mischaracterization is.   I mean, he didn't literally say ovaries, but that wasn't presented as a quote, and I think any reasonable reader would see that as just snark.

If it's something other than that, Sanders was asked what the reason was for Warren catching up to him in the polls.  What do you hear as the first two reasons Bernie gives for that? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Patrick Bateman

Patrick Bateman 3966

Posted
Posted (edited)
33 minutes ago, Hank Kingsley said:

Agreed, and this is happening ALL THE TIME with other candidates as well. 

I've considered starting at thread about it but have always refrained.  The headline writers for biased and legitimate media outlets are doing a huge disservice to the electorate in the name of clicks/revenue.  The problem is most Twitter users just read the headline instead of reading the article or watching the video. It infuriates me how irresponsible the media has become on Twitter. 

 

The other issue is if someone wants to educate themselves and read the article, they're taken to a portal to sign up and pay for the article in a lot of cases.  Often, the more salacious headlines or leads are to free content, which is good for the reader, but if you're not going to charge, you need clicks and eyeballs.  It's a vicious circle as independent and objective media or press is incredibly important but in the digital economy, it's hard to generate revenue.

 

Edited by Patrick Bateman
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Js1

Js1 87174

Posted
Posted
31 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

I can't believe Bernie is sitting in FRONT of a woman, like women are supposed to be BEHIND him at all times.

 

$20 Bernie orders a water, no ice.  Liz probably is a Diet Coke drinker. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Hank Kingsley

Hank Kingsley 21749

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, Patrick Bateman said:

The other issue is if someone wants to educate themselves and read the article, they're taken to a portal to sign up and pay for the article in a lot of cases.  Often, the more salacious headlines or leads or to free content, which is good for the reader, but if you're not going to charge, you need clicks and eyeballs.  It's a vicious circle as independent and objective media or press is incredibly important but in the digital economy, it's hard to generate revenue.

 

Agreed that's it's a vicious circle. Now more than ever, we just can't have media outlets purposely misleading readers about candidates they generally prefer over Trump. 

 

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...