Re: American Politics: Discuss and Debate

Where the hell is Informant? Now I have to do his job for him.

I identify as liberal. That said, never have I been more aware of the massive gulf between holding liberal views and being a Democrat. It'd be easy to consider Republicans and anyone who's conservative to be men's right activists and neo-Nazis who are so delusional loyal to alt-right dogma (while denying any of those labels, goodness) that they make scam artist Donald Trump their standard bearer, a man who makes Chevy Chase seem well-adjusted. That said... liberals (Democrats?) are in no way immune to this.

I found a Trump/Russian coordination plausible myself given how Russia seemed determined to support the Trump campaign. But Mueller's report has come in and it hasn't been released, but if it didn't offer evidence or an indictment to collusion, then it indicates another likely truth: that (a) the Russian government had no need to coordinate their assistance with the Trump campaign in order to assist it (b) the Trump campaign passively benefiting from Russian interference is not a crime and (c) that maybe Russian agents wouldn't be so foolish as to make any sort of agreement with Trump, a man notorious for being unable to stop from bragging about affairs that should be kept secret.

Rachel Maddow in her Trump exposes (which didn't expose much) looked like a shining beacon of resistance; now she continues to bleat that the Mueller report has been censored and she just looks ridiculous. If there were a smoking gun in there, it would have come out in the indictments of the probe and because Mueller isn't the sort to permit his work to be misrepresented.

It would have been awesome to expose Trump as a Russian agent if he actually were one, but if he isn't, then this isn't an avenue worth pursuing and it makes Democrats look as deranged as their FOX News/Alex Jones counterparts for continuing to chase after something that clearly doesn't exist. Men are often declaring that no one should ever acknowledge defeat, but knowing when you are beaten isn't a weakness. Actual weakness would be continuing to contribute time, energy and resources to a route that has proven unproductive no matter how worthwhile it seemed at the outset. There's no shame in knowing when you're beaten and finding another battle.

Re: American Politics: Discuss and Debate

Where the hell is Informant? Now I have to be here to express my frustration with Joe Biden, a potential Democratic nominee for 2020. If he runs and wins the nomination, it will be another indication of how Democrats aren't really liberals at all. I don't think Biden is a rapist, but he is a harasser. And I don't think it's with malice: he, like me, was born to a culture that commodifies women's bodies as possessions for men's pleasure.

Like Biden, I grew up thinking that it was flattering to women to lay hands on them to indicate appreciation, that it was acceptable to touch hips and shoulders and legs and hair and backs without permission because, in this asinine belief system, it indicated regard for the female form.

Unlike Biden, this only lasted from age 18 - 24 for me at which point I started to befriend a lot of women who described their rage and violation from such behaviour; how it made them feel like their permission and autonomy didn't exist; how it made them feel powerless and furious with the world around them declaring them insane or easily offended for wanting control of their own bodies and the power to decide who touches them and who doesn't. I heard and understood and mended my ways.

I imagine that, like Biden, at some point, women whose space I've invaded will come out with their accusations. Unlike Biden, I wouldn't offer a meaningless ramble about lack of malicious intent in response. The best thing to do in these circumstances is confess, apologize, admit our lack of concern and respect for others, directly acknowledge the harm we’ve caused to women and their self-esteem and sense of self-ownership, note our upbringings and how such behaviour is not inherent to our natures and we can change, indicate that upbringings aren't excuses for mistreating others, accept whatever professional and personal consequences will result and hope that friends and co-workers and employers will understand that we're not who we used to be except Biden remains exactly who he used to be and should not represent liberal values, wokeness, democracy, democrats or the Democratic Party. Ugh.

Re: American Politics: Discuss and Debate

Where the hell is Informant? Now I have to be him and I have to be him in my way.

So, it looks like Joe Biden is on track to win the Democratic nomination. Dear God.

I think that as human beings and politicians go, Biden is better than the worst. However, his electoral message and vision is naive, flawed and stupid. Biden declares that Trumpism is an aberration, a temporary shift in the culture of the American identity. That is simply not true: Trumpism arose because Americans are suffering from some of the worst health care and education systems in the world, a horrific inadequacy of social services and the overall collapse of the middle class with severe income inequality.

Americans are ensickened by pollution and burdened with bankruptcy-inducing medical bills and disappearing jobs that, even when found, are insufficient to pay rent and buy food. Trumpism tapped into this agony by proposing that all these social, economic and environmental ills be blamed on anyone who isn't Caucasian.

Biden may put a friendlier, kinder face on a broken system, but he would simply mark time until the next Trump-esque figure emerged and consolidated discontent into power. If Democrats aren't prepared to address the ills of society that led to this situation, then even a Biden victory over Trump is simply a palliative that doesn't treat the underlying causes.

Re: American Politics: Discuss and Debate

ireactions wrote:

Biden declares that Trumpism is an aberration, a temporary shift in the culture of the American identity. That is simply not true: Trumpism arose because Americans are suffering from some of the worst health care and education systems in the world, a horrific inadequacy of social services and the overall collapse of the middle class with severe income inequality.

Americans are ensickened by pollution and burdened with bankruptcy-inducing medical bills and disappearing jobs that, even when found, are insufficient to pay rent and buy food. Trumpism tapped into this agony by proposing that all these social, economic and environmental ills be blamed on anyone who isn't Caucasian.

Biden may put a friendlier, kinder face on a broken system, but he would simply mark time until the next Trump-esque figure emerged and consolidated discontent into power. If Democrats aren't prepared to address the ills of society that led to this situation, then even a Biden victory over Trump is simply a palliative that doesn't treat the underlying causes.

The most upsetting part of it to me is the complete lack of empathy for the other side (from either side).  When Trump was elected, one of the things I was hoping for from our society was that the Democratic Party (certainly the party that cares more about people) would realize that they'd been ignoring a big part of their base (lower income white people).  While Trump's campaign strategy was certainly racially motivated, I think one of the things he did was tell lower income white people that the Democrats didn't care about them.  And it worked because, for the last few elections, the Democrats haven't.

The Democrats took lower class white people for granted.  They assumed that, since they're in a similar situation to minorities, they'd always be a reliable part of their base.  And since it was more "cool" to campaign to minorities, to women, and to Hollywood elites, the Democrats essentially ignored the lower income white people in the Rust belt.  And Hillary lost all those states.

Unfortunately, the Democrats didn't learn.  They haven't spent the last three years trying to understand what they did wrong, re-evaluate their strategy, and get the low income white Democrats back.  Since Trump was elected, they've done....nothing?  They've been angry at Trump.  They've made some gains in Congress.  But they haven't done much else.  I don't know if they learned anything from 2016 except to blame outsiders like Russia and the GOP.

There was someone on Twitter (I think Jason Alexander) who said something like "The GOP are going to trick us into another war.  Why do they do this?  And why do we let them?"

A ton of people responded.  Almost every one of them answered the first question.  No one focused on the second one.  I think Democrats have a problem of self-reflection.  I think they're on the right side of history, but they're a little too interested in playing the victim card.  No one focuses on the fact that the Democrats didn't have a real primary in 2016 - they had a coronation (and that's not even about Bernie Sanders.  Since he was an Independent, that means zero Democrats ran against Hillary in the primary).  No one focuses on the mistakes that were made in 2016 and how to fix them.  It's all about Trump.  It's all about Russia.  Democrats might've had their house broken into and vandalized, but they haven't gone through the trouble to fix the broken door or the broken windows or paint over the graffiti.

Even with impeachment, Democrats are essentially ignoring their party's part in things.  Tons of Democrats scream "IMPEACH HIM." No one seems to be asking Democrats to do it.  There seems to be some sort of hope that Republicans will simply change their minds and impeach him themselves.  If Democrats wanted impeachment, it could be done whenever.  The Democrats don't seem to want it.  I sorta agree with them, but the people that scream "IMPEACH HIM" aren't screaming it at their own party.  They're screaming it at Republicans.

The whole thing sorta drives me crazy.  There's no empathy.  There's no real debate.  There's two sides that *hate* each other that have left the other side to burn.  And, honestly, I don't see anyone trying to recruit moderates or independents.  The Democrats and Republicans are running to their fallout shelters, requiring a loyalty oath for admission, and they're getting ready to launch their nukes.  The rest of us be damned.

Re: American Politics: Discuss and Debate

The Erica Thomas Stuff:

PREFACE - I think the "send her back" stuff is abhorrent, and I don't think any human should ever tell any other human to go back where they came from.  It's important to make all immigrants, especially minorities, feel welcome and American. 

(I shouldn't have to have this preface but I felt it necessary).

If he told her to go back to where she came from or her original country, then roast him.  We don't have room in our society for that, and if you want to say that in public, you get whatever blowback comes at you.  My problem is with two aspects of the story:

1. She's walked back enough of her statement that it might be possible that it wasn't racial at all.  It may just be an asshole who wanted to make a scene at a grocery store.  I'm almost more mad at him for yelling at her because she's pregnant than yelling at her because she's black.  If he didn't say "go back to your country" or "go back to where you came from" then I don't think that's okay either.  You can't yell fire in a crowded room for a reason.

2. Finding the truth these days is exceptionally hard.  When you have to throw out 90% of all publications because they're clearly biased one way or another (#IStandWithErica or #HateHoax), it's hard to find your center.  There are so many different versions of the story out there.  Does he not identify as being white?  Does that matter?  Is he actually an Anti-Trumper and a hardcore Democrat?  Does that matter?  Would he use Trumpy language if he hates Trump?  Does that matter?

There are real, vile, horrible racist things being done and said.  We don't need to make anything up or even give the impression that stuff is being made up.  It's way too volatile.

Re: American Politics: Discuss and Debate

This is why I like to wait. Just wait. Let the information come. Reflect upon it. Otherwise, you end up being one of those people ranting about how BATWOMAN is a disaster when it hasn’t even aired.

Re: American Politics: Discuss and Debate


Re: American Politics: Discuss and Debate

Yeah. I figure that anyone saying such things is clearly predisposed to dislike content without bothering to see it.

And the sad truth is, the world is not split into Republicans and Democrats and while Republicans tend to be of the "BATWOMAN will suck even though I've never seen a frame" persuasion, Democrats are just as likely to jump on a bandwagon and sometimes, those bandwagons are headed to good places and just as often, they're headed for a brick wall.

Re: American Politics: Discuss and Debate

Not really an *american* politics question, but regarding the Amazon Rainforest.

Does the UN have the authority to declare the Amazon Rainforest a protected area and, in essence, take control of it?  Brazil's president openly doesn't care about it, and it's fairly important to the entire planet.  It seems irresponsible of all of us to just let it stay in control of one country when it benefits everyone.

Re: American Politics: Discuss and Debate … ll-of-shit

Joe Biden, the likely Democratic nominee for 2020, shows a total inability to control his hostility or communicate coherently in conflict.

I'm liberal, but I'm not a cultist who declares that whoever's been selected as a supposed standard bearer for my end of the political spectrum can do no wrong. That's something crazy people do. People like Allison Mack. I'm not insane, just a bit unsteady. And 2020 is looking like a contest between one incompetent, privileged, volatile, incomprehensible white man and another incompetent, privileged, volatile, incomprehensible white man.

Re: American Politics: Discuss and Debate

Well, I've been wanting to say some things, but I wasn't sure if we were going to let this post stay in exile with Informant.

I don't think Biden is the best candidate, but I like him for two reasons.  One, I think he can win.  I think he has overwhelming popularity with African Americans that Hillary never did.  I saw an infographic that showed, without a doubt, that black Americans could've easily elected Hillary over Trump (all by themselves) and didn't.  I also think the math shows that Democrats have complete control over the electoral college, and it's just a matter of whether or not they want to use it.  Trump won on a list of things that went in his way, and everything has to fall the exact same way for him to win again.  I just don't see it.

Second, he's a one-term guy.  I think his gaffes are, for the most part, harmless.  And I think he can get some control back in the government.  I think a lot of the exciting people we saw in the last several months are going to get big promotions in a Biden administration, and I think we're going to get some level of stability in our government again.  There will be people who know what they're doing in places of power, and that's essentially all I want from 2020-2024.

After that, we'll have another person run.  We survived four years of Trump, and I have no doubt we'll thrive a little better with four years of Biden.

All that being said, I'm sad that the race was still a bunch of people in their 70s.  Mayor Pete wasn't my favorite candidate either, but I liked something he said.  He said he was running because there are a lot of issues that are future issues.  Whether it's climate change or immigration or education or health care, a lot of issues have impacts 10 years, 15 years, 20 years down the road.

And in 20 years, Trump will be dead.  Bernie will be dead.  Biden will be dead.  Warren will be dead.  All these candidates will be dead.  So while I'm sure they are doing what they think is best for the future, they don't have to live with the consequences of their actions.  They'll be gone.  And Pete was saying that he thinks we should have leaders who have to stand and live with their consequences.  And as presidents get older, they're not going to have to do that anymore.  They can just be wild and crazy because who cares?  If the world burns down during their term, they had one foot in the grave already.

I'm disappointed in Gen X.  This should be their time, and no one seems particularly interested in stepping up.

Re: American Politics: Discuss and Debate

Could have had Yang.

Biden is a wolf in sheep's clothing:

Earth Prime | The Definitive Source for Sliders™

Re: American Politics: Discuss and Debate

I mean you want the wolf in sheep's clothing or the wolf in wolf's clothing?

Re: American Politics: Discuss and Debate

As Democrats go, Biden is a Republican, albeit one capable of not falling in with neo-Nazis and able to do his job or delegate others. Is marginal competence the best we can hope for? Is the alternative to having a cruel man with dementia in the White House instead an at-best tolerable man with Alzheimer's there instead?

Democrat strategist James Carville Jr. points out that liking or disliking Biden is irrelevant in this situation and I don't know if I agree. I think Slider_Quinn21 would agree. So here are Carville Jr.'s thoughts: that right now, what matters is winning.

James Carville Jr. wrote:

Do we want to be an ideological cult or do we want to have a majoritarian instinct to be a majority party?

Sanders might get 280 electoral votes and win the presidency and maybe we keep the House. But there’s no chance in hell we’ll ever win the Senate with Sanders at the top of the party defining it for the public. So long as McConnell runs the Senate, it’s game over. There’s no chance we’ll change the courts, and nothing will happen, and he’ll just be sitting up there screaming in the microphone about the revolution.

We’ve got to be a majoritarian party. The urban core is not gonna get it done. What we need is power! Do you understand? That’s what this is about.

The fate of the world depends on the Democrats getting their shit together and winning in November. We have to beat Trump. The Republicans have destroyed their party and turned it into a personality cult, but if anyone thinks they can’t win, they’re out of their damn minds.

You’re not going to change the turnout model. It’s never been done and it’s not going to be done.  Eighteen percent of the country elects more than half of our senators. That’s the deal, fair or not.

The party has to have a majoritarian instinct. We’ve got to be skilled enough to excite our most important voters, African Americans, to get our own new exciting demographic out, these college-educated women, and also to cut into the margins in the more rural and small-town parts of Pennsylvania, Michigan, Wisconsin, places like that.

The purpose of a political party is to acquire power. All right? Without power, nothing matters. It means building coalitions to win elections. It means sometimes having to sit back and listen to what people think and framing your message accordingly.

That’s all I care about. Right now the most important thing is getting this career criminal who’s stealing everything that isn’t nailed down out of the White House. We can’t do anything for anyone if we don’t start there and then acquire more power.

Without power, you have nothing. You just have talking points. … le-podcast … s-carville … ical-cult/

TF and I are on opposite ends politically, but I once asked him why Cleavant Derricks was friends with David Peckinpah. Didn't Peckinpah fire all of Cleavant's friends and run SLIDERS into the ground? Why was Cleavant taking Portia and the kids to Peckinpah's house for family dinners and whatnot? Was the Peckinpah housekeeper's meatloaf really that good? Did they have bumper cars in the backyard? Dear God, WHY?

TF said that Cleavant was a professional and a businessman and that to accomplish anything in this world, you sometimes have to work with people you don't necessarily like or who have done things you find repugnant. That may or may not be why he didn't strangle me in my sleep for working with Transmodiar on SLIDERS REBORN.

Transmodiar would add/counter that Cleavant found SOMETHING to admire in Peckinpah, presumably their mutual love for their families. And that we should all do that; we should all look at the people around us and find some point of admiration or respect. This may or may not be why he kept resigning from SLIDERS REBORN and kept helping me with it.

It's possible the endpoint of Slider_Quinn21's view is that until someone other than the extremist Republicans have power, ideology is meaningless and so is ideological distaste for Joe Biden.

Re: American Politics: Discuss and Debate

Well, I don't consider myself a Democrat.  I'm not even sure I'm fully a liberal.  I think if you were to ask me questions on a real "liberal vs conservative" chart, I'd be right in the middle.  I think the government should help people, but I also think the government is bad at helping people.  I think it's important to have a strong military, but I don't think any one country should be policing the rest.  I would like to live out the words from the Statue of Liberty, but I don't think we should give all illegal aliens a bunch of free things.  I think we need to fix our criminal justice system, but I support the death penalty when it's appropriate.

So, yeah, I'm probably cooler with Biden than most because he's more moderate like me.

My problems are twofold:

1. I think the republicans have sold their souls for Trump.  I don't really understand it, either.  Coming into 2016, the Republicans seemed to hate Trump, but the voters went with him.  And in the end, he helped them win the White House and both chambers of the Senate.   So I see why a lot of them, at least publicly, supported him.  He helped them win a lot.  But I figured as soon as he was in office, he'd have a short leash.  They got a guy that they liked as VP, and I assumed they'd mutiny the second he stepped out of line.  And they didn't.  Even after 2018 when it seemed like his brand was poisoned, they stuck by him.  Even when he did a few impeachable things, they stuck by him.  I figured they would've loved to have something like Ukraine on him in 2016 because they'd have a chance to say "we gave him a chance but he screwed up.  Now he's a *true* republican".  They didn't.  And I think they need to pay for that and learn that selling their soul wasn't good for them.

2. I think we need to stop the pendulum.  I think Trump is a direct response to Obama.  I liked Obama - I voted for him twice.  So don't think of any of this as an indictment of Obama.  But Republicans *hated* Obama.  So when it was time for the Democrats to pick their leader, zero Democrats ran against him (remember, Bernie was an independent, that was the big knock on him in 2016 "He's not even a democrat!").  So to republicans, it looked like the democrats were rubbing their nose in it "You hated having a black dude?  Now get ready for a WOMAN that you HATE."  I think that sentiment is a big reason why Trump won - I think (some) Democrats believed they were untouchable and they could elect whoever they want - why not someone that pisses off the republicans?  And so the republicans picked the guy that democrats would hate the most.  Someone who's against everything they stand for and loud and brash and nationalist and white supremecist.  Someone who would undo everything that OBAMA did.

The pendulum could easily swing back the other way to someone like Bernie who's further left than traditional american democrats.  Which I think is better than what we have now, but what happens when the pendulum swings back?  What if the republicans pick an actual Nazi who's openly Nazi and actually has the strength and charisma to trick the country into supporting him as a whole?

It has to stop.  And I think, in some ways, Biden is a throwback to the pre-Internet ways.  I don't think he's particularly exciting, but I think that's the point.  I think we'd have a boring four years.  And maybe in those four years, we can grow up as a country.

Probably not.  But maybe.


Re: American Politics: Discuss and Debate

I'd take my dog over Trump right now.  Here's your mic drop moment.... … fell-short

“Trump did not push to do aggressive testing because more testing might have led to more cases being discovered of the Coronavirus outbreak, and Trump made it clear the lower the numbers on Coronavirus, the better for the president and his re-election this fall.”

Re: American Politics: Discuss and Debate

I think Trump is done.  The tanking economy is going to lose him a ton of conservatives who just care about the economy (many of who will secretly be okay with someone like Biden), and the coronavirus debacle is going to cause a bunch of people who have faith in him to lose faith.  His base, brainwashed evangelicals, will still be faithful to him, but there aren't enough of them for him to win.

If I were a betting man, I'd bet "Trump loses in historic landslide" over "Trump wins" in any scenario.

Re: American Politics: Discuss and Debate

If today’s date was October 13, I would agree Trump is done.  But it’s happening now with eight months for it to play out before Election Day.  What does a person’s life look like in October?  I believe that’s what is going to tell the tale, and really what always does in these elections.


Re: American Politics: Discuss and Debate

If today's date was October 13, Trump would "postpone" the election.  He may yet attempt to do that anyway.


Re: American Politics: Discuss and Debate

I cannot see the economy or stock market having enough of a turn around over the summer.  Historically, when Presidents commit big scandals, it often harms his successive candidate from that party.  When the President directly or indirectly presides over nationwide disruptions or loss in people's livelihoods, that's the end of the line.  Hoover, Truman with Eisenhower, Carter, Bush Sr., even Bush Jr. with McCain all doomed.  They'll try to paint Biden as senile but their own guy has now been carved into granite as incompetent. 

Just think, had the Republicans in the Senate done what was right, and kicked Trump out back in January, Mike Pence would have taken over.  It's quite likely he would have been about 20,000x more receptive to his staff's seriousness of this pandemic, and acted quickly.

Re: American Politics: Discuss and Debate

pilight wrote:

If today's date was October 13, Trump would "postpone" the election.  He may yet attempt to do that anyway.

I worry about that, but he's so incompetent that he'd screw it up.  He'd try to postpone after the election was already over or he'd delegate to the wrong person and they'd screw it up, or he'd forget to do it.

COVID-19 was his big chance to show that he's capable of strong leadership, and he screwed it up.  He has no idea what to do with power, and he doesn't have any idea how to use it.

Re: American Politics: Discuss and Debate

I cannot stress enough in the name of Quinn's bumper stickers, the Professor's bow-ties, Wade's sweaters and Rembrandt's vocal warmups that my views do not represent those of Sliders.TV.

I would identify as liberal, but I don't see most mainstream Democrats as liberal. Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama were quite determined to prop up the banks that crashed the global economy, Biden presents as socially liberal but is economically and legislatively conservative. Again, this is where James Carville Jr. would say that a liberal political party needs to have its ideology as wide as possible to be broadly tolerable by centrists and those on either side -- "majoritarian" -- or it will never acquire sufficient votes to gain political power.

Why have Republicans become a cult that declares their leader cannot be questioned or criticized? Because their gerrymandering and closed ranks have helped them win political power and keep it without any serious challenge to losing it. It's a position of (political) strength.

And this is why I find Carville Jr.'s mentality alarming: I wouldn't want Democrats to simply become oppressors who wear blue sweaters instead of red hats. But he points out, not unreasonably, that if Democrats don't win, then they have nothing but empty, symbolic gestures of process and rhetoric in the House and the Senate.

Slider_Quinn21 and I have a mutual friend. And while our old conservative pal would declare that I do NOT understand him, I suspect that I understand him perfectly. Our acquaintance is an ardent Trump supporter who declares his supreme leader cannot be criticized and declares that anyone who does so is off their meds and needs psychiatric help.

It might be helpful to look at his attitude on a different subject -- and observe his angry declarations that no criticism of MAN OF STEEL or BATMAN VS. SUPERMAN is acceptable, valid or reasonable even when there are at least two flaws that are objectively present. MAN OF STEEL has a climax where Zod and Clark tear up Metropolis and crash buildings into each other, the equivalent of a citywide terrorist attack -- and the ending has people cheerily traipsing through the city with no trauma, grief, loss or even visible damage to the city.

Then with BATMAN VS. SUPERMAN  -- Bruce spends a portion of the film befriending Wonder Woman, but when she shows up, Bruce nonsensically says he thought Wonder Woman was Superman's friend. Our acquaintance simply ignored these two errors, declared us wrong to note them -- because he couldn't reconcile the idea that something to which he'd pledged allegiance could have genuine flaws or it would mean that reality does not always reflect his inclinations and preferences and he's spent too many years insisting that it does.

Then there's his consistently declaring that the Marvel movies are "a failure" and that they "don't work." If a 23 film series over 11 years is a failure by this gentleman's standards and measurements, then his metric is deeply flawed.

I am not immune to this myself. I was once infuriated by fellow fans who declared that Quinn in Season 4 was a valid depiction of the character. I pestered poor Slider_Quinn21 for daring to dislike Rey in STAR WARS. I was grossly inappropriate in my absurd contempt for pilight's ideas for rebooting SLIDERS. I was at the time angry that the world and others didn't reflect my inner thinking.

After some time and reflection, I came to realize that if I had nothing open-minded, kind or constructive to say, I should shut the fuck up. Also -- it is vital that we realize our likes and dislikes are not necessarily how the world around us is formed. That we may make mistakes ourselves.

We might have jumped on the wrong bandwagon, might be out of step with reality, might have backed the wrong horse or chosen someone whose conduct is ultimately not in line with the beliefs our political party of choice supposedly represents. I was certain VENOM would crash and burn at box office. I was wrong and it clearly struck a chord with a large audience.

Maybe my distaste for Biden will be proven wrong. I just know that Biden isn't the horse I would personally choose to ride. But I respect that Slider_Quinn21 is not blindly joining Biden's cult (if Biden has one) and sees Biden as (a) flawed but better than the worst and (b) a path forward. I can respect Slider_Quinn21 supporting Biden because Slider_Quinn21 remains capable of criticizing his chosen leader.


Re: American Politics: Discuss and Debate

Trump took ZERO responsibility today.  Meanwhile Jared Kushner put in charge, has no clue what to do, asked his brother's father in law, who asked for help ON FACEBOOK!!!! … 1jwHXZPA8U

Re: American Politics: Discuss and Debate

pilight wrote:

If today's date was October 13, Trump would "postpone" the election.  He may yet attempt to do that anyway.

You would probably want him to.  One of the things that got Trump elected was low turn out in certain areas; and this virus would depress turn out.

Trump would be better served to let the election happen as planned.  Trump’s passionate supporters would turn out; but that passion just isn’t there for Biden.  Biden’s votes have been driven by fear; and in a battle of fears, fear of getting infected is going to win.


Re: American Politics: Discuss and Debate

First of all, if the virus isn't gone by effing November, we have bigger problems than an election.  There would have been anarchy and violence in the streets, a total breakdown of society.

So this sounds pretty bad, in that even our cancellation of large events may not make a difference. Are they exaggerating? Nobody knows. I will report that some larger cities in the NY area have begun curfews and closing bars early. … lized.html

It seems that fresher research is beginning to find more evidence that the virus spreads quite well from asymptomatic people (not sick), perhaps most widely of all. This is likely why countries like France, Spain, and Israel have basically quarantined everyone like Italy. … index.html


Re: American Politics: Discuss and Debate

TemporalFlux wrote:
pilight wrote:

If today's date was October 13, Trump would "postpone" the election.  He may yet attempt to do that anyway.

You would probably want him to.  One of the things that got Trump elected was low turn out in certain areas; and this virus would depress turn out.

Trump would be better served to let the election happen as planned.  Trump’s passionate supporters would turn out; but that passion just isn’t there for Biden.  Biden’s votes have been driven by fear; and in a battle of fears, fear of getting infected is going to win.

He'd never reschedule it.  It would be the end of American democracy.

Re: American Politics: Discuss and Debate

And here we are: … med-guard/


Re: American Politics: Discuss and Debate

The armed guard thing is a bit ridiculous.  That said, Fauci isn't ruling out a nationwide lockdown of restaurants and bars. … index.html

Re: American Politics: Discuss and Debate

So has chloroquine stopped working, or is it just not being used for some reason?  I was surprised to learn about it only tonight - it’s not being reported at all. … icial.html

The important part at the bottom - it can work as a preventative measure blocking the virus.

Look at the date of that article - February 20.

Re: American Politics: Discuss and Debate

The drug fell out of use when malaria became resistant to it, so supplies may not be readily available. It’s still being tested.


Re: American Politics: Discuss and Debate

At this point, it seems the general plan is to keep the number of cases steady so the hospitals are not overloaded.  That's the whole reason for the lockdowns and what not.  I don't think the CDC actually expects it to go away anytime soon.  Herd immunity followed by a vaccine seem like the primary ways to stop it, though both are months and months away.

Re: American Politics: Discuss and Debate

Not necessarily.  There's a town in Italy that essentially shut down for two weeks - the people that had it were quarantined and recovered and the ones that weren't stayed away.  Transmission is down to zero.

We can't exactly shut the country down, but if we can get the transmissions to slow down even a little bit, get the tests out there, then we could get back to normal in a couple of weeks.  The problem now is that there's a lot of confusion, no tests, and we're still in cold and flu season (so symptoms can be confusing).  When we get into spring, some of that will have worked itself out, and hopefully the medical community (with or without Washington's help) will be better prepared.


Re: American Politics: Discuss and Debate

New Biden ad hitting Trump on virus response.

Re: American Politics: Discuss and Debate

Informant had previously posted links to videos by discredited journalist James O'Keefe claiming he had proof of electoral fraud in 2016, but given his history of deceptive editing, only Informant took him seriously. Recently, O'Keefe made's list of political smear artists whose methods backfired spectacularly upon them.

James O'Keefe Has Become a Laughing Stock
Conservative filmmaker James O'Keefe rose to prominence for his selectively-edited takedown of ACORN, a government-funded NGO that advises low-income residents about everything from welfare to housing to healthcare. Yeah, he's that kind of an asshole. However, that was in 2009 -- since then O'Keefe largely spends his days tripping up over his dick.

In 2010, for instance, he attempted to 'sting' CNN reporter Abbie Boudreau, casting her as a sex-addled lunatic by luring her aboard a floating "pleasure palace" filled with sex toys, condoms, erotic paintings, and a video camera. As O'Keefe described in a piece-to-camera he recorded before Boudreau's arrival, the transcript of which reads like an incel's manifesto:

"Instead of giving her a serious interview, I'm going to punk CNN. Abbie has been trying to seduce me to use me, in order to spin a lie about me. So, I'm going to seduce her, on camera, to use her for a video. This bubble-headed-bleach-blonde who comes on at five will get a taste of her own medicine, she'll get seduced on camera and you'll get to see the awkwardness and the aftermath."

This was his response to believing CNN wanted to portray his organization as crazies, as non-journalists, as unprofessional... Great plan, James.  That'll show 'em.

Except as soon as Boudreau pulled up outside the boat, an O'Keefe staffer warned her about the sting and the whole thing had to be abandoned (We're sure Operation: James Loses His Virginity would have gone off without a hitch otherwise). The whole fiasco got out to the media, leaving O'Keefe a laughing stock. Later, that same year, O'Keefe was arrested after he and several colleagues snuck into the office of Louisiana Senator Mary Landrieu. They posed as telephone repairmen in an attempt to bug her phone lines -- which is a federal offense for reasons that should be pretty damn obvious.

In 2016, under the banner of 'Project Veritas' (dork), O'Keefe attempted to sting the philanthropic organization operated by the billionaire, conservative boogeyman, and not-a-Nazi George Soros. O'Keefe left a voicemail in which he -- under a fake name of 'Victor Kesh' -- posed as a foreign national "fighting for European values." A super basic, low-effort, attempt to entrap Soros' organization into saying something that O'Keefe could spin as being sinister and shady (Soros isn't good enough for the Love Boat plan, James?). But O'Keefe couldn't even pull that off without crapping the bed -- as he forgot to hang up, and left behind a seven-minute-long voicemail of him and a colleague describing their plan to sting Soros in great detail like the dumbest Bond villains imaginable. "What needs to happen [is for] someone other than me to make a hundred phone calls like that," said "Kesh".

And hits are still coming. In November 2017, The Washington Post busted O'Keefe's group for trying to run a con on them whereby a woman, Jaime Phillips, presented herself as a victim of sex monster and creep-ass politician Roy Moore. Their end goal was to get the Post to publish a fake story that could then be used to discredit all of the mainstream media's reporting about Roy Moore.

Unfortunately for O'Keefe, this wasn't the Post's first day and they quickly discovered several odd things about Phillips' story -- as well as a GoFundMe campaign that she set up to raise funds to go work for Project Veritas and "combat the lies and deceit of the liberal MSM." A campaign which, apparently, involves stanning alleged sexual predators. The Washington Post told Phillips to kick rocks and splashed a story about the failed sting over their frontpage. Meaning, in the end, O'Keefe technically did play a part in exposing dishonest media frauds. … idlly.html


Re: American Politics: Discuss and Debate

O'Keefe is useless now, same for Alex the Drunk Jones.  Anybody can make crap up, and Fox News runs with it, and Trump repeats it as his own.  Middle-aged and older white men LOVE this stuff, they eat it up.  I truly don't know where that comes from?  It's quite bizarre.  For decades my father (an old school union-backing liberal) was the one who talked about conspiracies the right wing was often a part of.  Usually falling on deaf ears.  Now it's flipped, it's seemingly every other guy in his generation who are spouting them nonstop, usually against liberals or the establishment.  Most are so silly.  The virus is a perfect example.  Trump babbled about a couple of "miracle drugs," so a dentist we know literally stormed a pharmacy for them the same day!!  Sheep.

Re: American Politics: Discuss and Debate

Well, I can tell you why Informant devoured James O'Keefe: it's because Informant desperately needs to believe that the world at large loved BATMAN VS. SUPERMAN: DAWN OF JUSTICE (actual title) as much as Informant did and that anyone who didn't care for it is lying, delusional, unfair, mentally ill or in Marvel's pocket because the alternative would be to concede that Informant's personal views are not a universal default, not shared by all and not even within the mainstream. I noticed this when noticing how much it pissed him off to constantly be told, "I cannot stress enough in the name of all that is holy that the views of Informant do not reflect those of the community."

By the way, I cannot stress enough in the name of Quinn's highlights, Wade's "Dead Man Sliding" dress, Rembrandt's shotgun and the Professor's orange slushie that the views of ireactions do not reflect those of and that the community at large is much smarter and cleverer than ireactions.

Informant, for example, is a much better writer and reviewer than I'll ever be. However... a person like O'Keefe assures Informant that his views are indeed shared by all and that anyone who claims otherwise is part of a conspiracy of electoral fraud and human trafficking because otherwise, Informant might have to concede that his point of view is only his own and a conspiracy panderer like O'Keefe assures Informant that anyone who disliked BATMAN VS. SUPERMAN: DAWN OF JUSTICE (actual title) is an agent of Disney.

And in terms of actual politics -- you have regularly pointed out that Republicans govern by minority rule; they use extensive gerrymandering to elect their candidates which undermines Informant's chosen belief that his politics are the default for all. O'Keefe's deceptively edited videos allowed Informant to justify gerrymandering by claiming it balances out the supposed electoral fraud that Democrats engage in. O'Keefe's work encourages white men to justify their sense of feeling under threat when their privilege is challenged, when a corrupt economic system that benefits them is questioned or when the world that's always validated them is called out as unjust for benefiting the few at the expense of the many.

I don't doubt Informant's sincerity in most areas -- except that curiously, O'Keefe is the one area -- the only area -- in which I caught Informant flat out lying. He claimed to be unfamiliar with O'Keefe's attempt to seduce a reporter and create a sex tape, but he later shared more and more of O'Keefe's newer videos; he was clearly following the man's career and would have known what he'd been up to.

Anyway. I am at the age where I welcome people challenging anything and everything I believe. I DEMAND that all of you disagree with me. My opinions are mine. You get your own!


Soooo, awhile ago, Temporal Flux made a very astute observation: the American population is fed up with Democrats and Republicans alike who promise economic relief, job creation, the chance to buy a home and start a family and have health care -- only to fail to deliver any real change. Temporal Flux said that the people voting for Trump didn't actually think Trump would help them; voting for Trump was a way to damage a government that had done nothing to help those citizens survive a collapsing economy and debilitating addiction and the breakdown of essential services and a social safety net. It was a protest vote, a scream of outrage.

And I understand that, but I think it's fair to say that not having a functional, semi-competent leader in government is possibly not the best move when that leader will be expected to, say, prepare his country for a pandemic with something resembling organization and an ability to solve problems and work with others.

Re: American Politics: Discuss and Debate

ireactions wrote:

Temporal Flux said that the people voting for Trump didn't actually think Trump would help them; voting for Trump was a way to damage a government that had done nothing to help those citizens survive a collapsing economy and debilitating addiction and the breakdown of essential services and a social safety net. It was a protest vote, a scream of outrage.

I just wish the Democratic Party had attempted some introspection after the loss.  I’ve never seen them ask themselves “what did we do wrong?”  Instead, they say “Russia helped Trump cheat”; “Trump voters were uneducated”; “Hillary won the popular vote, so the Constitution must be outdated and unfair”; etc. No real attempt to learn from the failure or perform an outreach to the voters they lost - only blame.  It’s a shame.


Re: American Politics: Discuss and Debate

There was plenty of introspective.  Why do you think there's a collective gasp, grown, sigh for 2+ years every time the media suggested Hillary would run again?  She was an awful candidate.  The Benghazi hoopla was absurd, same as the emails, same as Comey, Russia, etc.  Like Gore in Florida in 2000, I believe he got robbed, but the failure was being in that position to begin with.  Could have had 6,000 other Dems run vs. Trump and beat him handily.  Clinton and her husband blew it. 

That being said, the unbelievable psychotic vitriol coming from the Bernie Bros is just unbelievable.  They have done nothing but attack Joe Biden for weeks, little to nothing on Trump.  They're putrid.


Re: American Politics: Discuss and Debate

Don't blame Bill for Hillary's failure.  She wouldn't listen to him.  Plus, the Access Hollywood tape limited his campaigning value.  Can't claim the moral high ground with him as a prominent surrogate.

Re: American Politics: Discuss and Debate

I think there's been some introspective.  I don't think there's been nearly enough.  I thought Trump's election would be a wakeup call for the left, and it's been more of a light budge.  I think Grizzlor's right in the sense that they realized that Hillary was the wrong candidate, especially for that election. 

But I think the real test will be how Biden (or Bernie, I guess) campaigns.  2016 was lost because of one group and one group alone - poor whites.  They historically vote Democrat because poor whites have a lot of the same issues as poor blacks, poor Latinos, etc.  But the Democratic message ended up getting twisted as "white men are the reason for all America's problems" and that turned off poor whites.  That and, at the same time, the Democrats stopped campaigning for their votes.  In stepped Donald Trump who pretended to listen and it invigorated a forgotten base.  And invigorated the disgusting white supremacy we've seen.

In my opinion, the Democrats stopped talking to people and they tried to be too many things.  Their message should be simple - "We know you have problems.  We want to help."  And they can't just say it during elections - they have to mean it and follow through.  I think Donald Trump was a middle finger to politicians because Americans have lost faith in politicians.  We'll know if 2016 was a wake up call if we see any effort to gain that trust back.


All that being said, we need both sides to work together on this.  No more political bullshit.  We need to stand united against this damn virus, and we need to do it yesterday.  Democrats and Republicans.  China and the US.  Russia and Europe.  Everyone.  This is one of the big moments in human history, and we need to act like it.


Re: American Politics: Discuss and Debate

Bill's sidebar with the Attorney General in the plane was incredibly damaging, made Hillary look very crooked.

As for 2020, honestly the Dems best candidate was Elizabeth Warren.  Her take down of Michael Bloomberg was the proof right there.  She's a debate assassin.

As for the virus, while everyone is hunkering down for some time in isolation, Trump is now dismissing medical experts because, shocking shocking, his hotels are all shut down!  Gotta go back to work!

Re: American Politics: Discuss and Debate

Oh crap.

VOX: A sexual assault allegation against Joe Biden has ignited a firestorm of controversy
A woman says Biden assaulted her in 1993. Now #TimesUpBiden is trending.

Re: American Politics: Discuss and Debate

If only people had known in advance...

The “Creepy Joe” label wasn’t a random Republican attack.

Re: American Politics: Discuss and Debate

Well, I wrote a bit in this thread about my irritation with Biden's lack of respect for women's personal space here:

In addition, the first photo you're using -- that one is not a fair example. The lady in the photo is Stephanie Carter who has insisted that Biden was very welcome to touch her like that; she had hurt herself earlier in the day and Biden was helping her stand.

Stephanie Carter wrote:

On February 17, 2015, my husband was being sworn in as the Secretary of Defense — a job his years of work at the Pentagon had prepared him for and the crowning achievement of his career. I could not have been prouder and I had gushed to friends that it was like “seeing Secretariat run the Kentucky Derby”. We had started the cold, snowy day at Arlington Cemetery in Section 60 visiting the graves of our fallen. It was somber and quiet and the weight of Ash’s new responsibility was palpable.

Upon our arrival at the Pentagon, I had slipped and fell on some ice — which a few journalists were nice enough to tweet about. Later, we went to the White House for the swearing in and I was feeling self-conscious and tentative (not a normal state for those who know me) about the fall.

By the time then-Vice President Biden had arrived, he could sense I was uncharacteristically nervous- and quickly gave me a hug. After the swearing in, as Ash was giving remarks, he leaned in to tell me “thank you for letting him do this” and kept his hands on my shoulders as a means of offering his support. But a still shot taken from a video — misleadingly extracted from what was a longer moment between close friends — sent out in a snarky tweet — came to be the lasting image of that day. … er=twitter

The problem is that there is a gap between being handsy with women and raping them.

I don't want Trump to win, but if Biden assaults women, he shouldn't be president. And it terrifies me that people who want Biden to win might simply refuse to acknowledge the accusation the way Informant ignored over 20 women accusing Trump of assault because he couldn't assimilate any criticism of his chosen leader.


Re: American Politics: Discuss and Debate

Well it's going to be Creepy Joe and a complete sociopath who is now RAVING about the ratings his press conferences are getting!  They're besting The Bachelor!!!!!!

Re: American Politics: Discuss and Debate

Biden's accuser once penned an absurd, deranged opinion piece declaring Putin's rule in Russia to be benevolent, democratic, loving and peaceful -- an utterly delusional piece of propaganda that suggested she was a Russian plant and not a particularly covert one. But you can be a Russian mouthpiece and still be a rape victim.

Trump is unquestionably a violent sexual offender. He has bragged about entering women's change rooms and abusing women on radio and television; his entire demeanor conveys physical entitlement as he grabs world leaders hands and yanks them forward to put them off balance, sticks his fingers into politicians' faces -- just imagine how he treats women.

Biden's trespasses, in contrast, are from a misguided affection that was bred in a generation of men taught that women were objects -- objects of artistry and value to be protected and admired and treasured -- but ultimately possessions, and Biden's behaviour with women has reflected what was intended as benevolent ownership. And being treated as property, even valuable property, is intrusive and obnoxious and upsetting -- but it isn't necessarily the behaviour of someone who assaults people. Biden come off as my sweet, harmless, loving, naive grandfather.

However, that's just his public image. And as we know from watching the intellectual, reclusive, thoughtful Quinn Mallory onscreen as played by the dim, brash, arrogant Jerry O'Connell, someone's public image is not always their true self; it is what they choose to put out into the world. Trump is someone who deliberately presents himself as narcissistic, self-delusional, volatile and erratic and I suppose we can trust that. Can we trust that Biden is who he says?

Are we at the point where we say that voting for the man with one accusation of assault is a better option than voting for the man with 21 accusers for the same?

I think Biden should submit to an independent investigation of the assault accusation.

1,047 (edited by Grizzlor 2020-03-29 23:47:15)

Re: American Politics: Discuss and Debate

Look I got into it on another forum on this accusation with Biden.  The left screwed this up badly with Dr. Christine Ford and Brett Kavanaugh.  Ford was credible, but she had zero corroboration, in fact her potential witnesses went the other way.  They kept pushing and pushing and pushing this.  Did young drunk Brett do it?  Yeah probably, but that was 35 years ago or whatever, and the backlash cost Democrats the Senate in 2018.  In other words, going down that rabbit hole bit them badly. 

It was 1993, and she supposedly told her immediate family.  I think the brother backs her story, but unless someone from the campaign does, where is this going?  Biden denied it.  Do I think Biden did this?  Ehhh, I'd say 50/50 but beyond that, unless you're going to file charges on him, which after this many years I don't think you can, again, what is the point? 

The Russia stuff I think was overblown and irrelevant.  Ms. Reade explained that she's basically socialist and commended Putin, but then quickly realized he was no socialist just a thug so she denounced him, unlike our President.  There was so a pro-Biden twitter account trying to say Ms. Reade was some nutcase on an old Dr. Phil episode but that was debunked. 

The Bernie-sphere, who as we know, claim everything from Mother Nature to Klingons to God Himself (despite their mass atheism) are conspiring at all times to prevent Sen. Sanders from being President.  This Biden accusation is going viral in that sphere, where they have accused Times Up of hiding this.  Well, what they told Ms. Reade was that this involved a candidate, and since this was not apparently a criminal matter, their involvement would be perceived as electioneering.  So they declined to help her.  That was a year ago.  Well she gave up when it seemed Biden wasn't going to win, but then was right back on it when he was resurrected. 

I am left again with a question of not so much Ms. Reade's motive, but her end game?  What does she want?  Biden to admit it?  Not happening.  She can get on 10 news programs tomorrow, he's not admitting it.  There is only one end game, she wishes to derail his candidacy.  Look that's her choice, it's a free country, but is handing the election to Trump worth some personal vindication?

ireactions wrote:

Are we at the point where we say that voting for the man with one accusation of assault is a better option than voting for the man with 21 accusers for the same?

I think Biden should submit to an independent investigation of the assault accusation.

PS: To answer you directly outside my rant there.... It's pointless to even compare accusations with Trump's because the American voter has already clearly decided they do not care about these accusations.  Shameful as that is.  When you're trying to unseat a walking, talking King of immorality, I guess you can't be picky can you?  Biden as I said, will never agree to an investigation, nor can there be.  He's not a sworn elected official now.  There's no government review that can happen.  1993 was outside any statue of limitations.

Re: American Politics: Discuss and Debate

ireactions wrote:

Are we at the point where we say that voting for the man with one accusation of assault is a better option than voting for the man with 21 accusers for the same?

It's not just one - there have been eight women who have come forward about Biden's behavior/assault:

  • Lucy Flores

  • Amy Lappos

  • D.J Hill

  • Caitlyn Caruso

  • Ally Coll

  • Sofie Karasek

  • Vail Kohnert-Yount

  • Tara Reade

Earth Prime | The Definitive Source for Sliders™

Re: American Politics: Discuss and Debate

  • Lucy Flores: Put his hands on her shoulders, smelled her hair and kissed the back of her head.

  • Amy Lappos: Rubbed noses with her.

  • D.J Hill: Put his hand on her shoulder and then slid it down her back.

  • Caitlyn Caruso: Put his hand on her thigh and hugged her too long.

  • Ally Coll: Squeezed her shoulders and held her too long.

  • Sofie Karasek: Took her hand and pressed his forehead against hers.

  • Vail Kohnert-Yount: Put his hand on the back of her head and pressed their foreheads together and called her a pretty girl.

  • Tara Reade: Says Biden raped her.

One through seven are not good -- but they aren't accusing Biden of rape and they reflect his upbringing from a past generation with views of women that are outdated and should never have been tolerated even when they weren't outdated. I wouldn't call him a perpetrator of assault based on one to seven -- certainly a harasser, possibly an unwitting one.

Re: American Politics: Discuss and Debate

When you only nominate people who were born before the Civil Rights movement, you're going to have people who didn't grow up with the benefits of the Civil Rights movement.

Want better candidates?  Vote for younger candidates.  Until then, we're stuck with old creepy men.