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.

1,023

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!!!!

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/articl … 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.

1,025

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.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/articl … 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.

https://www.cnn.com/2020/03/14/health/c … index.html

1,026

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:

https://www.the-sun.com/news/539494/cor … med-guard/

1,028

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.

https://www.cnn.com/2020/03/15/politics … 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.

https://www.thejakartapost.com/life/202 … 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.

1,031

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.

1,033

Re: American Politics: Discuss and Debate

New Biden ad hitting Trump on virus response.

https://twitter.com/JoeBiden/status/1241471645233053699

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 Cracked.com'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.

https://www.cracked.com/article_27196_p … idlly.html

1,035

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 Sliders.tv 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 Sliders.tv and that the Sliders.tv 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.

1,038

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.

1,039

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.

1,041

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...

https://www.theminutemanblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/03/Joe-Biden-Creepy.jpg

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: http://sliders.tv/bboard/viewtopic.php?pid=8601#p8601

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. https://medium.com/@scarterdc/the-metoo … 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.

1,045

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!!!!!!

https://i.ibb.co/yf6MnFb/90987158-2963858333635086-3811839601832624128-n.jpg

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.

1,051

Re: American Politics: Discuss and Debate

Here's a good one, Trump literally admits if voting were easier, Republicans would never win.  ROFL!

https://twitter.com/JohnJHarwood/status … 9455464449

Re: American Politics: Discuss and Debate

ireactions wrote:

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.

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?

Transmodiar wrote:

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

ireactions wrote:
  • Lucy Flores: Put his hands on her shoulder, 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.

Slider_Quinn21 wrote:

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.

...

Okay then. I guess this is as settled as it's going to get.

Damn it.

Re: American Politics: Discuss and Debate

Oh I was trying to accentuate your point. smile

Re: American Politics: Discuss and Debate

Despite all my many, many, many, many, many issues with Biden -- I cannot imagine that sweet old man slamming a woman into a wall, fingering her by force, then telling her, "You're nothing to me." Biden is a man of absolutely no self-control whatsoever, getting into moronic arguments with auto workers and college students -- but the impulses he can't control are impulses to call people out for buying into conspiracy theories or for lying to his face or to hug people when they describe the loss of a family member or to whisper support to a woman who bruised herself badly on some ice or to describe his grief over his wife and daughter dying in a car crash and his son dying of brain cancer and nearly spitting out his phone number on national TV for grieving families to call him.

If Biden were a rapist, I don't believe he could hide it because he's incapable of any real subterfuge -- or that's a part of his act, but if Biden were pretending, wouldn't his act have less rambling, less random bursts of incoherent thought, less outbursts of frustration, less everything?

Re: American Politics: Discuss and Debate

I voted for Yang. I'm still voting for Yang.

For a million more reasons why Biden is a terrible choice: https://www.reddit.com/r/Biden_OnTheRecord/

Earth Prime | The Definitive Source for Sliders™

Re: American Politics: Discuss and Debate

I support and respect Transmodiar voting for whoever he wants to vote for and I am extremely nervous about Joe Biden; I don't personally think he is a TERRIBLE choice. I think he is a crashingly mediocre choice, but, as Slider_Quinn21 points out, the system defaults to privileged white men who instinctively seek to maintain the status quo that gave them their privilege and are old enough to have known war rationing as toddlers, so the options are either mediocre/terrible or apocalyptic. Yang is an excellent choice. Would that excellence were a target within range. If I were an American, I'd probably vote for Yang too.

Re: American Politics: Discuss and Debate

ireactions wrote:

I support and respect Transmodiar

Bless you, my son.

Earth Prime | The Definitive Source for Sliders™

Re: American Politics: Discuss and Debate

We shouldn't have to vote out of fear.  We should vote for someone that inspires us.  The last couple elections, it's been slim pickins.

Re: American Politics: Discuss and Debate

Grizzlor wrote:

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.

Reade's story is proving difficult to corroborate which is why mainstream media hasn't reported on it heavily. There are many oddities even when you take into consideration that abuse victims have confused and erratic memories. Her accounts of her employment with Biden were extremely positive and flattering from 2016 - 2018 where she, on Twitter, repeatedly called him a hero against sexual assault, saying, "My old boss speaks the truth. Listen to him."

Now, sexual assault victims often maintain a relationship with their abuser in an attempt to normalize what happened, but Reade now claims she was fired after reporting Biden for raping her and hadn't worked for Biden in over 20 years; there was no relationship to normalize. She was declaring herself a fan of Biden -- and I find it difficult to reconcile her accusations with her actions. Unlike the actresses who were forced to keep dealing with Harvey Weinstein to maintain a career, Reade had been out of Washington for decades and was ardently praising and retweeting her former employer from far, far away.

And with Russia -- from 2016 - 2017, she was constantly tweeting fury at Russian interference in US elections -- until 2018 when she began writing bizarre and infatuated essays about Putin and calling Russia as a picture of a perfect society. Her fondness for Russia has continued straight into 2020 when she was criticizing John Cusack for expressing concern at Russian interference in US elections. There has been no turnaround aside from a claim that her 2018 love letter was "research."

It's difficult to find her credible on Biden or Russia. That doesn't mean her story can't possibly be true, of course, but it's difficult to believe -- at least for me. Reade seems too schizophrenic to be trustworthy and Biden seems to lack the self-control needed to cover up a predilection for rape.

An auto worker accused him of wanting to shut down the Second Amendment; Biden threatened to kick his ass. A college kid asked Biden, when his poll numbers were bottoming out, why anyone should think he could recover; Biden asked if she'd ever been to a caucus; the girl nodded uncertainly and Biden snapped at her, "You're a lying, dog-faced pony soldier!" and the student later confessed that she had never been to a caucus. Biden, for all his faults, reads people well and could see her lack of conviction and saw that she was lying and it pissed him off and he said so.

While Biden has not treated women with respect for their personal space, his behaviour conveys a (foolish and outdated) sense of benevolent ownership over women -- seeing them as objects to be held and protected -- as opposed to a contemptuous, abusive disdain. If he had such hatred for women in him, I don't believe he could hide it.

But I've been wrong before. I didn't think Bryan Singer was a rapist, after all.

1,060

Re: American Politics: Discuss and Debate

Slider_Quinn21 wrote:

We shouldn't have to vote out of fear.  We should vote for someone that inspires us.  The last couple elections, it's been slim pickins.

You shouldn't need inspiration.  Confidence the candidate can perform the duties of the office.  Trust the candidate will actually do what he or she says.  People got spoiled with Obama's hope and change.  I have to be honest, I was leery of him early on.  He won me over not when he espoused liberal edicts or propaganda, but when he promoted his sensibility and pragmatism.  His one out was that he didn't support the Iraq War, that gained a lot of support, but for me he kept on hitting the point that he was here to govern, to get things done.  If need be, he would compromise.  He won over a lot of people that way, and once the stock market fell apart, he won over the rest of the doubters because he was seen as someone with the capacity to lead.  Hillary tried the inspiration route twice, and failed, twice. 

This time around, when the incumbent is a daily nuclear explosion of stupidity, ego, deceit, and cowardice, sorry but ANYBODY with a pulse is an improvement on day one.  Again, I've always like Joe Biden.  Is he the best for the job out there compared to other Dem candidates?  Maybe not, but he'll be the nominee.  Whatever faults he's got, the alternative is a childish loon who refused to head warnings of a pandemic, because they didn't agree with his bloated "gut."  There comes a time when civic responsibility to the Constitution first, and the protection of the nation second, are at grave risk.  Trump has taken a crap over the former, and these days, the latter is in serious jeopardy on his watch as well.  That should be enough inspiration alone for an exit plan in November.

Re: American Politics: Discuss and Debate

Oh I'm voting for Biden.  Don't worry.  And if the economy stays stalled and Trump keeps getting people killed, my Texan vote might even matter. 

I agree that looking for a savior is wrong.  But the idea of "anybody with a pulse" is also wrong.  We've turned the presidency into "the best of two bad choices" when it should be the best of us.  Someone we trust completely with the prospects of nuclear war, with taking care of our most vulnerable, and to leading the nation through crisis.  We shouldn't have to choose between two old men who may or may not be going senile.  This wasn't the intention of the office.

The problem is that politics doesn't attract our best people.  It attracts used car salesmen.  It attracts the corrupt.  So it ends up being the least slimy of two slimeballs.

*********

I still don't understand why anyone sees Trump as some sort of criminal mastermind.  If you watch his press briefings on COVID, he's so clearly a moron.  And not a Boris Johnson "I'm pretending to be a moron so you'll let me get away with stuff."  Trump is the opposite - he's a moron who is trying so desperately to look smart.  He's constantly trying to come up with things that sound clever.  He wants to be seen as smart.  But he's just so clearly an idiot.

Re: American Politics: Discuss and Debate

He'll still beat Biden. And that's fine by the Democrats because Biden's nomination will stamp out true liberal party members and keep the status quo in line for four more years. Even if Biden somehow manages to mushmouth his way into the Oval Office, he's more conservative than many Republicans, so nothing will change.

Earth Prime | The Definitive Source for Sliders™

Re: American Politics: Discuss and Debate

I agree that Biden is basically a Republican -- but Biden would never have ignored warnings of an impending pandemic or declared that it wasn't happening or encouraged unproven drug treatments or seen mass deaths as a ratings bonanza. A lot would change -- not necessarily due to having Biden in the White House but certainly with Trump out of the Oval Office and that outcome seems likely given Trump's disastrous non-handling of a pandemic with hundreds of thousands likely to die and the States on the verge of a depression.

I take no pleasure in declaring that the suffering of Americans is Trump's defeat. I'm terrified for my American brothers and sisters. I'd take a Trump victory if he could earn it through demonstrating the competence needed to save lives.

Re: American Politics: Discuss and Debate

Man, I don't see any path to victory for Trump.  None.  Maybe I'm crazy (well, not maybe), but this whole mess is going to destroy him.  He'll keep his loyal evangelical base, but you have to remember that the Republican party, while much more united than the Democratic one, still has sensible people in it.  And I think, for the reasons you're saying, there are going to be enough people on the left side of the Republican party that are going to see Biden and think "Yeah, I can live with that."  Even if that's 0.1% of the people who voted for Trump, that could be significant. 

Then there are the people who vote purely on the economy.  No matter what happens, they're going to look at Trump with skeptical eyes.  Again, even if it's just 0.1% of people, it could be significant.

Then you look at the other side.  Even if the Bernie Bros revolt at the same rate they did in 2016, there are *tons* of people who stayed home because they didn't like Trump or Clinton.  A lot of those people were African Americans, and Biden does *very* well with them.  Add in the fact that you'll probably get more enthusiastic campaigning for Biden over what he did for Clinton, and it could be enough right there.

I think one of the most underreported aspects of 2016 was how many people voted for Trump simply because they hated Hillary.  Nothing to do with Trump's policies or his record or his white supremacy or his businesses or even her emails.  They just hated her as a person and didn't want her to win.  Even if "spite voters" were a super small percentage, we're not talking about large numbers of votes.  Clinton crushed Trump in the electoral college, and that's with a Republican party that was 1) fully unified and 2) highly motivated to vote against a Democratic party that was 1) highly fractured and 2) at least moderately unmotivated.

If you have a very vulnerable Donald Trump with a bad economy coming off disastrous leadership against a "Republican" who will appeal to at least some sectors of the Republican party?  When Biden just needs 14,000 votes in Michigan, 28,000 votes in Wisconsin, and 69,000 votes in Pennsylvania, I don't see it for Trump.  He'll get every evangelical vote from sea to shining sea, but I don't think that's going to be enough.

#FreezingColdTakes

Re: American Politics: Discuss and Debate

I have a hot take of my own.

It's the same one as Slider_Quinn21's.

1,066

Re: American Politics: Discuss and Debate

Well boys, my concern is do we HAVE a full election in November?  Dems are screaming for the government to start doing something about mail in voting nationwide.  If states have huge shortages in polling places, workers, etc., you depress the vote and Trump wins.

Re: American Politics: Discuss and Debate

Yeah, that's my two concerns.  First is that he'll postpone the election - I still don't see any reason to believe we'll have anything resembling normalcy until we have nationwide vaccines - and God knows when that will happen.  There are ways to work around that and still have a "normal" election in November, but people are going to have to take advantage of mail-in ballots and early balloting (where they could sterilize everything and keep the 6-foot rule).

Second is that we get massively low voter turnout and the evangelical vote ends up being a much bigger sect.

Re: American Politics: Discuss and Debate

The short of it is, Trump doesn’t really have the power to postpone the election - the Constitution lays that power solely with Congress.  But the article below lays out some interesting scenarios. 

My favorite is a wild idea you might see on Sliders - a world where everything shakes out to see Senator Patrick Leahy of Vermont become President as the next person legitimately in the line of succession come January 20, 2021.

https://www.bostonglobe.com/2020/04/03/ … ronavirus/

But yeah - I feel depressed turn out and lack of passion for those supporting Biden will give it to Trump.  A new federal mail-in voting and ballot harvesting law is dead in the water - it doesn’t matter what Pelosi tries to tie it to.

1,069

Re: American Politics: Discuss and Debate

Boston Globe is pay-walled TF.  The cities have been hit hardest by the pandemic, and those will have the harder time establishing in person voting.  It's really up to the states and counties.  Biden actually mentioned drive-in voting, which probably makes the most sense in suburbs, again in cities, that's pointless.  Plus you have GOP states that routinely purge the voting roles, meaning more and more people are forced to re-register.

Re: American Politics: Discuss and Debate

Grizzlor wrote:

Boston Globe is pay-walled TF.

Strange.  It’s not walled for me.

Well, to give an excerpt of the fun alt-history part:

James Pindell of Boston Globe staff wrote:

Superseding the federal law on elections is the 20th Amendment, which makes it clear that if the Electoral College doesn’t reelect Trump, he and Vice President Mike Pence must vacate their office on Jan. 20.

In other words, it is not Constitutionally possible for Trump to extend his term even if Congress delays the election.

But just say the Nov. 3 election was delayed past January 2021. What would happen? Here is where things could get pretty wild. Buckle up.

Without Trump or Pence around, the third in line to become president is Nancy Pelosi. Pelosi fans, however, shouldn’t get too excited about her becoming the first female president. After all, if there is no general election held before then, that means that Pelosi, who as a member of the House has a two-year term, also wouldn’t be reelected. In fact, every member of the House will no longer be in office as of Jan. 3.

This then kicks over the title of president to the fourth person in line, the US Senate pro tempore. As the longest-serving member of the majority party, Iowa Republican Chuck Grassley has that title. But Grassley won’t be president either.

That’s because 35 of the Senate’s 100 seats are up for election this year and, if their elections aren’t held, they won’t be seated by the time Jan. 20 comes around. And because 23 of the 35 seats are currently held by Republicans, the vacancies would give Democrats the Senate majority. Then, in this surreal unlikely power vacuum world, Senator Pat Leahy of Vermont — who would be 80 years old — would likely be the first president from New England since JFK.

Re: American Politics: Discuss and Debate

In seven months time, we may know far more about the virus and how to prevent its spread in the midst of others and treat it's symptoms.

In seven months, we may find that the absence of passion for Biden is balanced by a fervent determination to remove Trump from office.

In seven months, we may find that NBCUniversal has renewed SLIDERS for a sixth season.

Bringing back SLIDERS is a process, not an event, and this route was never free of challenges. It must be overcome with inventiveness, cleverness, commitment and no small degree of compromise and often accepting an approximation of the intended result.

Re: American Politics: Discuss and Debate

That would be amazing. No way those who sit in the shadows would let anything like that happen, though.

And I can see why some of you don't see a path to victory for Trump in the fall. But between Trump's largesse and Biden's incoherent mush-mouthed ambivalence to marking a clear path through the pandemic or supporting M4A, Trump will emerge on top. Biden can't string two sentences together, even with prepared notes just off camera. He is the ultimate Democrat in this election; stands for nothing, changes nothing, advances nothing. His victory doesn't better America - it is a slightly less bellicose status quo.

Trump is a boob but he's a showman - and he will run circles around Biden. You think Crooked Hillary was bad? Wait 'til the Trump campaign latches on to the Anita Hill testimony, Biden's plagiarism during his first presidential campaign, his appreciation for Strom Thurmond's support, lies about apartheid-era visits to Nelson Mandela in South Africa, lies about marching for desegregation. Not that he'll even have to - the stuff with his kid in Ukraine, or his absolute inability to say anything that makes sense during televised interviews is right at their fingertips.

I don't even like Trump. But I know Biden doesn't have the stamina or eloquence to duke it out with the president. And, in seven months, people could see Trump as the savior who kept America together during a massive pandemic. Don't assume anything.

Earth Prime | The Definitive Source for Sliders™

Re: American Politics: Discuss and Debate

Transmodiar wrote:

And I can see why some of you don't see a path to victory for Trump in the fall. But between Trump's largesse and Biden's incoherent mush-mouthed ambivalence to marking a clear path through the pandemic or supporting M4A, Trump will emerge on top. Biden can't string two sentences together, even with prepared notes just off camera. He is the ultimate Democrat in this election; stands for nothing, changes nothing, advances nothing. His victory doesn't better America - it is a slightly less bellicose status quo.

I'd agree that Biden stands for nothing, but in this case, it also means that he stands for not being Trump, a man now responsible for failing to prepare for a clearly warned pandemic that has crashed the economy, the success of which was his argument for re-election. Biden's lack of ideology may be an asset. There may be no passion for Biden, but there is passion against Trump.

Transmodiar wrote:

Trump is a boob but he's a showman - and he will run circles around Biden. You think Crooked Hillary was bad? Wait 'til the Trump campaign latches on to the Anita Hill testimony, Biden's plagiarism during his first presidential campaign, his appreciation for Strom Thurmond's support, lies about apartheid-era visits to Nelson Mandela in South Africa, lies about marching for desegregation. Not that he'll even have to - the stuff with his kid in Ukraine, or his absolute inability to say anything that makes sense during televised interviews is right at their fingertips.

I think you and I have very different memories of Trump's debate performances. Trump was an incoherent, inarticulate mess of entitled rage and pathetic desperation, wandering the stage in a confused haze and then pettily trying to intimidate Hillary by lurking closer to her. Trump isn't any more articulate than Biden and his lack of focus is further defined by pitiful insecurity as he desperately tries to seem clever and is clearly an ignoramus. In contrast, Biden's waffling and confusion conveys warmth and sincerity. Yes, Trump might blow Biden off the stage -- or Biden might seem an oasis of reassurance in contrast to Trump being dangerously incompetent.

Transmodiar wrote:

Don't assume anything.

I'm assuming what was true before the pandemic and during the pandemic: there is a chance to topple Trump and it will be long and hard and fraught with difficulty and compromise. But there's a chance.

1,074 (edited by Grizzlor 2020-04-03 22:44:38)

Re: American Politics: Discuss and Debate

TF, I've probably gone to the Boston Globe too many times, so it stopped me from reading.  Anyway, wow, that's an amazing designated survivor scenario no doubt!  Idk if anybody saw an old TV (HBO) movie called, By Dawn's Early Light?  Starred James Earl Jones, Rebecca De Mornay, Martin Landau, and Darren McGavin, was really good.

As for Biden and his "stamina," he might not need any.  The Democratic Convention is now in August, if that happens.  He might be stuck in his house either way all summer.  I certainly haven't claimed Trump won't win, quite the opposite.  They could bring back Obama (if possible), and there's a multitude of factors in favor of Trump.  Voter suppression, Russian interference, and a massive fundraising war chest his campaign is sitting on. 

While I think Biden will be fine in debates against a guy who does nothing but lie, I would agree that he's in trouble on social media and whatnot.  But then again, any Democrat was going to be.  Trump's campaign and the Russian intelligence hackers are well prepped for this election.  Trump's handling of the crisis has not been polling very well.  Messaging from the White House is schizophrenic at best, with constant in fighting.  He's offered zero empathy for the victims, nurses, doctors, and unemployed.  A bunch of checks and business loans (if you can figure out how to get them) won't counter the disgust or trepidation people feel for his capacity to lead in a crisis.

PS: Here's the reality, Trump campaign does not want you to vote.

https://www.politico.com/news/2020/04/0 … rus-162152

Re: American Politics: Discuss and Debate

I think the Biden campaign will have to do everything to equip people to minimize the risks of voting physically. Election edition masks. Biden branded gloves. Joe's election day hand sanitizer. The Biden face shield. The Biden measuring tape that extends six feet. The Biden MP3 playlist.

Assuming defeat is an assumption too.

Re: American Politics: Discuss and Debate

*

I think we're all missing the key point here - there's no undecideds.  This isn't a normal election where any of the issues, any of the debates, or any of the campaigning is going to matter one bit.  Trump could walk out on to the debate stage on a dog leash carried by Vladimir Putin, and it won't dissuade Trump voters from voting for him.  Biden could spend the debates in a medically-induced coma, and anti-Trump voters are still going to vote for him.  It doesn't matter.

What does matter is the math.  And despite wildly different candidates, Hillary and Obama (in 2012) got essentially the same number of votes.  Trump had a couple million more votes than Mitt Romney in 2012.  Those two million were essentially the difference between an Obama rout and a Trump victory.  And Trump needs all two million of those people if he wants to win.  I think there's risk that some of the Bernie Bros are going to jump to Trump (or a 3rd party/write-in) over Biden, but I think it's the same number of people who jumped to Trump (or a 3rd party/write-in) over Hillary.  This campaign has still left Bernie people feeling disenfranchised, but I don't think there's as much vitriol this year.  So I think the Bernie Bros are static.

Where this election will be won isn't "who do I vote for?" but "will I vote?" - obviously the the Trump hardcores will vote no matter what.  But how many of the 60 million Trump votes were hardcore Trump believers?  I think the consensus is that every Trump voter is alike, and I think that's just a product of the media.  I think there are people who regret voting for Trump and hoped that he'd be something different.  I don't think there are people who voted for Hillary and have been wildly impressed by Trump enough to switch.  Again, I don't think there are undecideds.

Trump needs 100% of the people who voted for him in 2016 to vote for him.  I don't even think he can survive with 99.9% as those 600,000 votes could be critical in several critical states.  He needs fiscal conservatives to vote for him even though the economy will be down.  He needs every Bernie Bro that jumped ship to stay "Bernie or Bust".  He needs every "#NeverHillary" Republican and Democrat to be just as hardcore about "#NeverBiden".  He needs every disenfranchised poor white to still believe that Trump is going to help him even though he's just as poor and disenfranchised as they were under Obama.

And I just can't imagine that all of those people still believe in Trump.  Biden doesn't need to do anything.  The Democratic voting base has been remarkably consistent in 2012 and 2016.  The people that voted for Obama and Hillary will vote for him.  He doesn't need to inspire people or unite the party.  And he doesn't need to court Republicans.  All he needs is for a *very small piece* of Trump's 2016 electorate to reconsider.  And I think enough of them already have.

* All of this is dependent on the turnout being anywhere near the same as 2012 and 2016.

Re: American Politics: Discuss and Debate

The truth is that voter suppression is going to be a serious problem in November and if the federal and state and municipal governments are no help, then support must come from a grass-roots, DIY level.

https://www.npr.org/2020/04/06/82712285 … arks-anger

We're seeing some of that now in Wisconsin and it will be up to voters and campaigns and activists to work together to minimize the risk of voting. There is absolutely no way to make it completely safe, but the risk of contracting COVID-19 while voting is, by my calculations, not as hazardous as another four years where this incompetent non-leader will be in charge for the next crisis on top of COVID-19. Because there will be another crisis that needs federal leadership and we're already seeing what happens when you don't have any.

1,078 (edited by Grizzlor 2020-04-06 14:29:45)

Re: American Politics: Discuss and Debate

Wisconsin primary called off by Governor, Republicans are suing.

Meanwhile, we have this whackjob Peter Navarro looking to punish China while we're still relying on them for PPE.  Writing op-eds under a pen name, and announcing that he had a shouting match with a medical doctor Fauci, arguing the still not clinically proven malaria drug should be given to everyone!!!!! 

British PM is in ICU.

WE ARE DOOMED!

and yet, The Queen delivered an absolutely gracious, uplifting, and poignant video address. 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2klmuggOElE

I'm not one of her subjects, but I was greatly moved nonetheless.  It hearkened back to the famous King's Speech delivered by her father during WWII.  Such a total travesty that America has no one capable of such compassion and resolved at our highest level of government.

Re: American Politics: Discuss and Debate

Please don't say that we're doomed. Even if we are, that attitude never helped anyone ever.

**

It's interesting that the Governor of Wisconsin has called off the election, a move certain to issue a court challenge as he had earlier conceded that he didn't have the authority to do it and is now declaring that authority or not, he's not letting a public health hazard unfold. It will most definitely be hit with a court challenge and I have the sense that he hasn't stopped it; he's stalled it, but every effort is worthwhile.

Re: American Politics: Discuss and Debate

The thing I don’t understand is why we haven’t made masks mandatory in public for this.  The types of masks we would use don’t work well as a shield, but they work as a “catcher’s mitt”.  If you’re sick or don’t realize your sick, it stops you from spreading germs.  It’s a lot better option than destroying the world economy.

And as with everything, I know the reflex is to blame Trump; but he isn’t even needed for this.  The cities can make their own ordinances; the legislatures and governors can make their own laws.  They did it in 1918:

https://www.cnn.com/2020/04/03/americas … index.html

But the current push seems to be to not hold your local officials accountable for anything.  Contact your mayor, your city council, your state representative - ask why we’re not doing this?