Democratic insiders: Bernie could win the nomination

  
Via:  badfish-hd-h-u  •  2 months ago  •  273 comments

Democratic insiders: Bernie could win the nomination

S E E D E D   C O N T E N T


Suddenly, Bernie Sanders’ presidential campaign is being taken seriously.

For months, the Vermont senator was written off by Democratic Party insiders as a candidate with a committed but narrow base who was too far left to win the primary. Elizabeth Warren had skyrocketed in the polls and seemed to be leaving him behind in the race to be progressive voters’ standard-bearer in 2020.

But in the past few weeks, something has changed. In private conversations and on social media, Democratic officials, political operatives and pundits are reconsidering Sanders’ chances.

“It may have been inevitable that eventually you would have two candidates representing each side of the ideological divide in the party. A lot of smart people I’ve talked to lately think there’s a very good chance those two end up being Biden and Sanders,” said David Brock, a longtime Hillary Clinton ally who founded a pro-Clinton super PAC in the 2016 campaign. “They’ve both proven to be very resilient.”

Democratic insiders said they are rethinking Sanders’ bid for a few reasons: First, Warren has recently fallen in national and early state surveys. Second, Sanders has withstood the ups and downs of the primary, including a heart attack. At the same time, other candidates with once-high expectations, such as Kamala Harris, Cory Booker and Beto O’Rourke, have dropped out or languished in single digits in the polls.

“I believe people should take him very seriously. He has a very good shot of winning Iowa, a very good shot of winning New Hampshire, and other than Joe Biden, the best shot of winning Nevada,” said Dan Pfeiffer, who served as an adviser to former President Barack Obama. “He could build a real head of steam heading into South Carolina and Super Tuesday.”

If Sanders’ candidacy continues to be taken seriously, he will eventually be subjected to the scrutiny that Warren and Biden have faced for prolonged stretches. That includes an examination of his electability. “That conversation has never worked well for anyone,” Pfeiffer said.

Former California Gov. Gray Davis stopped short of saying firm support for "Medicare for All" would be an impediment for Democrats in the primary but suggested the risk for the nominee is significant.

“Californians and Americans, in general, like options — not mandates,” he said.

Faiz Shakir, Sanders’ campaign manager, said political insiders and pundits are rethinking his chances “not out of the goodness of their heart,” but because “it is harder and harder to ignore him when he’s rising in every average that you see.” And he welcomes a conversation about Sanders’ electability, he said

“We want that,” he said. “I’d love to be able to argue why he stands a better chance to beat Donald Trump than Joe Biden.”


Tags

jrDiscussion - desc
smarty_function_ntUser_is_admin: user_id parameter required
[]
 
The People's Fish
1  seeder  The People's Fish    2 months ago

Bernie will be the nominee. Warren's campaign is in trouble. Her latest lie is being disputed by her own brother and the cash flow has dried up.

Biden's corruption has relegated him to another Hillary.

Mayor Butt can't find a single minority voter.

The party will align behind a millionaire communist who spent his honeymoon in Mother Russia. He's called for nationalizing the fortune 500 companies. This dirtbag hates our country with a passion.

Will you lefties go full commie and vote for him?

 
 
 
Buzz of the Orient
2  Buzz of the Orient    2 months ago

Looking on from afar, I would say that (if he's still alive) Bernie could be the shoe-horn that would guarantee Trump to slip into re-election with ease.

 
 
 
Drakkonis
2.1  Drakkonis  replied to  Buzz of the Orient @2    2 months ago

The sad thing is, should the likely outcome of Sanders getting the nomination result in Trump's reelection, no one on the left will understand why it happened. The left thinks it's all about who's the better person. They don't understand it's actually about policy. 

 
 
 
TᵢG
2.1.1  TᵢG  replied to  Drakkonis @2.1    2 months ago

In the match-up of Sanders vs. Trump I think you are correct.   Trump would win based on his policies.

In general, however, a strong economy and good supplier / consumer confidence for an incumbent president is an extremely enviable position to be in.   Displacing Trump under those conditions will be tough.    The only candidate that might pull that off is Bloomberg,  but he has quite a challenge to first secure the D nomination.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
2.1.2  JohnRussell  replied to  TᵢG @2.1.1    2 months ago

Donald Trump has lied thousands of times. He is also immoral, a bully, and an idiot. If Trump is re-elected the American people will be in disgrace. You can't choose as a national leader someone who lies thousands of times and claim to be a good people. 

The economy will come and go.  We dont have a spare soul of the nation to throw away.  

The "never Trumpers" are the people who understand all this the best. They are willing to accept a Democratic president for four years as a tradeoff for getting rid of Trump and Trumpism. 

People who want to sit back and suggest that "policies" are the key are only adding to the disgrace. 

 
 
 
TᵢG
2.1.3  TᵢG  replied to  JohnRussell @2.1.2    2 months ago

John, while I would prefer to not see Trump re-elected, there are certain historically evidenced dynamics that simply cannot be ignored.   

If the economy continues to be strong and the electorate is confident in the economy, do you think Trump will lose to Biden, Warren or Sanders?

 
 
 
JohnRussell
2.1.4  JohnRussell  replied to  TᵢG @2.1.3    2 months ago
John, while I would prefer to not see Trump re-elected

Thats nice of you. 

 
 
 
JohnRussell
2.1.5  JohnRussell  replied to  TᵢG @2.1.3    2 months ago
If the economy continues to be strong and the electorate is confident in the economy, do you think Trump will lose to Biden, Warren or Sanders?

How many lies will Trump tell in the course of this re-election?  You dont seem to understand that our national character and national honor are on the line. The country is in a profound crisis. 

 
 
 
TᵢG
2.1.6  TᵢG  replied to  JohnRussell @2.1.5    2 months ago

Answer my question.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
2.1.7  JohnRussell  replied to  TᵢG @2.1.6    2 months ago

LOL. Trump should lose to any of them. No one should vote for Donald Trump. Whats so sad is that it is obvious. 

Rick Wilson , who is a Republican, and now heads The Lincoln Project, has said specifically, that none of the Democrats running could do as much damage to America in one term as Trump is sure to continue to do if he is re-elected. That is reality. 

It is unconscionable, to me, that people can think Trump and Trumps re-election are a commme ci comme ca proposition, in other words something that receives or merits indifference. . 

 
 
 
TᵢG
2.1.8  TᵢG  replied to  JohnRussell @2.1.7    2 months ago
Trump should lose to any of them.

Then I think you are kidding yourself.    No matter how unconscionable you hold this to be, the electorate will decide in spite of your position.   Something might happen between now and election day, but it is a shame that you refuse to recognize the fundamental strength of an incumbent with a good economy and confident suppliers/consumers.   

If Bloomberg somehow gets the D nomination I am not going to deny the challenge he faces against these mega factors favoring Trump.   It is what it is, regardless of desire.

 
 
 
1stwarrior
2.1.9  1stwarrior  replied to  JohnRussell @2.1.2    2 months ago

24/7/365 - gads John - you've really got it bad.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
2.1.10  JohnRussell  replied to  TᵢG @2.1.8    2 months ago

You are indifferent to Trump. Thats your problem and your shame, not mine.  

 
 
 
JohnRussell
2.1.11  JohnRussell  replied to  1stwarrior @2.1.9    2 months ago

[Deleted]

 
 
 
TᵢG
2.1.12  TᵢG  replied to  JohnRussell @2.1.10    2 months ago

This is of course my biggest complaint with how you deal with Trump.   You take what could be an objective analysis and turn it personal.    

Even if I was as emotionally charged as you seem to be regarding Trump, I like to think that I could see through that and not deny macro historical trends.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
2.1.13  JohnRussell  replied to  TᵢG @2.1.12    2 months ago

The president has lied 15000 times (they have a list) and you want to talk about macro historical trends. 

It is nauseating. 

 
 
 
Perrie Halpern R.A.
2.1.14  Perrie Halpern R.A.  replied to  JohnRussell @2.1.11    2 months ago

John,

Let me remind you of this phrase:

It's the economy, stupid

And I know you know who said that. But for all the other readers, it was James Carville and he used that to put Bill Clinton in the White House. 

Voters are erratic at best and that is what Tig is trying to say to you. Even people who find Trump distasteful might vote for him because of their wallet, ethics be damned. 

So while you might find that incredible and disgusting, it is still a big possibility. 

And that doesn't make Tig indifferent to Trump. He isn't. He is just laying out the facts as they are.

 
 
 
TᵢG
2.1.15  TᵢG  replied to  JohnRussell @2.1.13    2 months ago

Are you attempting to put forth some reasoning now?    Okay, so you posit that Trump's 15,000 lies will counteract the factors of an incumbent with a good economy and confident suppliers/consumers?

What factual evidence can you put forward that those 15,000 lies will counteract the local, personal factors (the impact of a good economy) that drive most voters?   In my view, most everyone knows that Trump is a pathological liar.   I think many (if not most) knew that before he was elected.

See, if Bloomberg/Biden gets the D nomination (???) I would like some comfort that he could prevail.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
2.1.16  JohnRussell  replied to  Perrie Halpern R.A. @2.1.14    2 months ago
what other election has had a candidate who lied 15000 times since he took office?
of course that should take precedence
the idea that this election will be a choice between two equally valid people and one of them has the economy on his side is ABSURD. 
One of them is a pathological lying, diseased narcissist who embarrasses America every day he is in office.  Every day. 
Newstalkers is becoming an alternate reality where a group of nutcases on the right pretend all this is normality, and even a good thing. 
And then there is the fake news and the lying and the bamboozling. When are you going to speak out against all that?  
 
 
 
TᵢG
2.1.17  TᵢG  replied to  JohnRussell @2.1.16    2 months ago
what other election has had a candidate who lied 15000 times since he took office?

We are in new territory.   But, again, Trump was elected as a known liar, bully, cheat and asshole.   

the idea that this election will be a choice between two equally valid people and one of them has the economy on his side is ABSURD. 

Slimy strawman.

 
 
 
Perrie Halpern R.A.
2.1.18  Perrie Halpern R.A.  replied to  JohnRussell @2.1.16    2 months ago
Newstalkers is becoming an alternate reality where a group of nutcases on the right pretend all this is normality, and even a good thing.
What are you talking about? That there are members who support Trump here. Sure there are. We are a non-partisan site. There are also plenty of members who don't want Trump for another 4 years and some who are still making their minds' up. 
And then there is the fake news and the lying and the bamboozling. When are you going to speak out against all that?  
There are rules about what is and is not allowed on the site. After the New Year, we will be doing an update of the CoC. You have a complaint, log it then. 
 
 
 
JohnRussell
2.1.19  JohnRussell  replied to  TᵢG @2.1.15    2 months ago

You are the king of logic.  So why do you fall for the bs that the economy is at some unknown of plateau and Trump is the reason? 

I heard a news bit a day or two ago. 70% of the new jobs created under Trump pay 30,000 dollars or less annual salary.  Do those sound like "good jobs"?  Pay raises people have received are roughly in line with what happened the last year of Obama's term. Much of consumer spending is being paid for by people incurring personal debt. 

Rising cost of housing, food ,and transportation , and education, is eating up all of the "gains" in the Trump economy. 

In other words, things are ok, but not "the greatest ever". 

Not worth tolerating a pathological liar who is destroying the national character of our people. 

 
 
 
TᵢG
2.1.20  TᵢG  replied to  JohnRussell @2.1.19    2 months ago
You are the king of logic.  So why do you fall for the bs that the economy is at some unknown of plateau and Trump is the reason? 

Where do I suggest to you that I believe Trump is the reason for the economy?    Stop with the slimy strawman crap and engage in a reasoned discussion.

It does not matter what Trump did.   All that matters are the factors that cause people to vote a certain way.    Perception.   Perrie's reminder of 'it is the economy stupid' points out the simplistic calculus of the electorate.   

 
 
 
Tacos!
2.1.21  Tacos!  replied to  TᵢG @2.1.15    2 months ago
What factual evidence can you put forward that those 15,000 lies will counteract the local, personal factors (the impact of a good economy) that drive most voters?

Just as we debate the quality of the economy, we should look at the quality of Trump's lies (I know JR won't do this. He's a man of principle).

For the rest of us, as you say,

most everyone knows that Trump is a pathological liar

And I think that's true. But look at what he lies about. He lies about crowd size. He lies about his personal relationships with politicians or other famous people. He lies about where he had lunch and who was there. He lies about his golf score. He lies about his mistresses. In short, he mainly lies about shit no one cares about.

It's like teenagers lying about all the sex they're having. Is it morally wrong? Sure. Does it matter to anyone in their actual lives? Not really.

Now, compare that to the unemployment rate, the steady economy, the lack of new wars, the death of Al-Baghdadi, and other things Trump will point to. If all the Democrats bring to the conversation is "Trump is a terrible person" he'll get reelected.

 
 
 
WallyW
2.1.22  WallyW  replied to  JohnRussell @2.1.2    2 months ago
Donald Trump has lied thousands of times. He is also immoral, a bully, and an idiot.
Most rational sane, intelligent, educated, and moral people don't feel this way.

 
 
 
The People's Fish
2.1.23  seeder  The People's Fish  replied to  Perrie Halpern R.A. @2.1.18    2 months ago

The biggest challenge in treating delusions is convincing the delusional that they are the  ones with the problem. They blame every one else in their world.

 
 
 
WallyW
2.1.24  WallyW  replied to  JohnRussell @2.1.5    2 months ago

You dont seem to understand that our national character and national honor are on the line. The country is in a profound crisis. 

Many  would say that these are irrational statements

 
 
 
The People's Fish
2.1.25  seeder  The People's Fish  replied to  WallyW @2.1.24    2 months ago

All or nothing with some. You either agree with their politics or you are a unpatriotic, dishonest person unworthy of oxygen.

It's really sad to see such hate.

 
 
 
WallyW
2.1.26  WallyW  replied to  JohnRussell @2.1.16    2 months ago
Newstalkers is becoming an alternate reality where a group of nutcases on the right pretend all this is normality, and even a good thing. 

No....it's  about the economy, consumer confidence, and right wing  policies....especially in the Courts.

 
 
 
The People's Fish
2.1.27  seeder  The People's Fish  replied to  WallyW @2.1.26    2 months ago

No one can possibly believe eliminating all jobs related to fossil fuels, eliminating the private insurance market and providing free college to all with wide open borders will improve our economy do they?

Please tell me no one is that stupid?

 
 
 
TᵢG
2.1.28  TᵢG  replied to  Tacos! @2.1.21    2 months ago
Just as we debate the quality of the economy, we should look at the quality of Trump's lies (I know JR won't do this. He's a man of principle).

That is certainly an approach one can take, but I am looking at this from a macro electorate perspective.   My question is:  what are the dominant factors that will elect the next PotUS?  I have answered this question as I see things.

Trump, regardless of his character, ethics, history, etc. has three historically powerful factors on his side:

  1. incumbency
  2. good economy
  3. suppler and consumer confidence

This translates into:  the electorate is content with what matters most to them — the short-term well-being of their immediate circle of family and friends.

If Warren or Sanders is the D nominee, then Trump has the additional factor of running against a candidate who cannot win in today's political environment.   If Biden or Bloomberg is the D nominee then there will be a race.   I do not think Biden brings enough to the table to displace Trump's factors.   Being a respected (and respectable) elder statesman and a grandfatherly kind soul is not likely going to do it.   Bloomberg might, but it would require convincing the electorate that their economic situation will continue in full force with him as PotUS.   Bloomberg could make such an argument, Biden not so much.

In short, the only chance that I see for having someone else as PotUS in 2021 is Bloomberg and he has a long way to go before he is a viable candidate for the D nomination.   The likely match-up right now is Trump vs. Biden and short of something major happening, we are going to have Trump for four more years.

 
 
 
MUVA
2.1.29  MUVA  replied to  TᵢG @2.1.28    2 months ago

I think what will decide this election is rural whites that never or rarely  vote with only half the country voting in the biggest turn out  years Trump will get a boost.  

 
 
 
TᵢG
2.1.30  TᵢG  replied to  MUVA @2.1.29    2 months ago

You are referring to 'who' you think will determine the winner.   I was speaking more of the 'what'.    The 'who' analysis seems to me would be more complex so I am not sure at this early stage.

 
 
 
MUVA
2.1.31  MUVA  replied to  TᵢG @2.1.30    2 months ago

My dominate factor is all the rural white people that normally don't vote that Trump has targeted.

 
 
 
TᵢG
2.1.32  TᵢG  replied to  MUVA @2.1.31    2 months ago

So you think Trump will win because he will get supporters out to vote?    The obvious question then is why do they support him?   That gets into the 'what'.

 
 
 
MUVA
2.1.33  MUVA  replied to  TᵢG @2.1.32    2 months ago

I think rural will turn out in numbers that have never been because they are sick of political correctness and being told the left they are stupid and racist.

 
 
 
TᵢG
2.1.34  TᵢG  replied to  MUVA @2.1.33    2 months ago

I think that is the main reason why Trump won in 2016.   It probably will be a major factor in 2020 too.   In my view it is not as fundamental as the three I mentioned, but it is no doubt a factor.    It might be lessened due to Trump's inability to build a wall on Mexico's peso (proving that he will make truly absurd claims with no hope of fulfilling to get elected) but that will probably be rationalized away.

 
 
 
loki12
2.1.35  loki12  replied to  MUVA @2.1.33    2 months ago

I think that is only true if you are talking about 4 states, rural voters in Alabama, Tennessee, and Mississippi don't matter as much as Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, and Ohio,  and he may be able to flip Minnesota.  Other than those  4 states the only advantage IMO is we won't have to listen to the endless bleating of the idiot class about the popular vote, like it's somehow relevant.

 
 
 
Tacos!
2.1.36  Tacos!  replied to  MUVA @2.1.31    2 months ago
My dominate factor is all the rural white people that normally don't vote that Trump has targeted.

That might be especially so if the impeachment is still in the news come November. If the popular perception of Democrats is that they will continue to fuck around with investigations and bullshit impeachments rather than help move the country forward, those people will not only get out and vote for Trump, they'll put Republicans in charge of the House again.

I think that's why Pelosi was in a such a big hurry to approve the USMCA (ne NAFTA) and it may be the real reason she's holding back the impeachment from the Senate.

 
 
 
loki12
2.1.37  loki12  replied to  Tacos! @2.1.36    2 months ago
she's holding back the impeachment from the Senate.

Pelosi no longer has any good options, If she doesn't submit it by the 6th of January, then she will been seen as putting her finger on the scales of the democrat primary scale again, like the DNC did last time. If she holds it until June after it is decided who the nominee is, if it's one of the Senators, Mitch can hold a 6 week to 10 week trial keeping the nominee there through the entire election season while trump is free to campaign. If she just holds onto it, it proves it was all bullshit in the first place.

Somebody explain to me what a brilliant tactician she is again?  She appears trapped by her own actions.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
2.1.38  JohnRussell  replied to  The People's Fish @2.1.25    2 months ago
Donald Trump retweeted a tweet that was complimentary of him. The tweet was from someone named 4 Laura Loomer.

Laura Loomer is a far right nut case who is promoted on Infowars. Loomer is well known for saying mass shootings are hoaxes or false flags.  Loomer said the Parkland school shooting was a hoax. 

And the fucking president of the United States is approvingly putting this nutjobs name on his twitter page.  Because she is nice to him. 

Wake the hell up, all of you. 

Trump is tweeting from Q Anon people. Conspiracies, idiocies, nonsense. All intended to bamboozle Americans.  Reading a lot of the comments on this site , and on this thread, it appears to be working for him.

 
 
 
MUVA
2.1.39  MUVA  replied to  TᵢG @2.1.34    2 months ago

Most people just want the wall built that support him and could careless who pays for it in the end.

 
 
 
MUVA
2.1.40  MUVA  replied to  loki12 @2.1.35    2 months ago

It is in Northern states where non voting whites will have the biggest impact maybe not the states with big city's but the rest and you named them all.

 
 
 
TᵢG
2.1.41  TᵢG  replied to  MUVA @2.1.39    2 months ago

True but that was not my point.   My point was that Trump is clearly capable of making outrageous claims (lies) and those who believed him might not be so frigging gullible this time.    That is, he might have disappointed some of his 2016 supporters.   My example of an outrageous claim (one of many) was to build the wall and have Mexico pay for it.

 
 
 
loki12
2.1.42  loki12  replied to  TᵢG @2.1.41    2 months ago

The only people i saw that believed that claim was the left, I haven't seen one conservative who actually thought Mexico was going to write a check, but i have seen many on the left bleat that endlessly. we just laugh at anybody who took that seriously.  

And honestly if we wanted Mexico to pay for it all we would have to do is put a tarriff on remittances going back,  Put a 20% tax on it and the viola! the wall is paid for. They get 10% of their entire economy from cash flowing back from the US, that is more than they make from oil exports.

 
 
 
TᵢG
2.1.43  TᵢG  replied to  loki12 @2.1.42    2 months ago
The only people i saw that believed that claim was the left,

Your individual sampling is interesting but does not really matter.   To understand what the electorate actually thought we would need a poll with a statistically valid sample size and methods.   Short of that, we are largely using intuition.

My point, however, still stands (even though it seems to be routinely missed).   Being very candid:   Trump is happy to make outrageous public claims.   Now, almost in 2020, people can compare his outrageous claims to what he actually did and now have proof that he was full of shit.   (Although I do wonder how anyone could have believed him in the first place.)

I do not know what percentage of his supporters are disillusioned at this point, but as I stated @2.1.34:

TiG@2.1.34 -  It might be lessened due to Trump's inability to build a wall on Mexico's peso (proving that he will make truly absurd claims with no hope of fulfilling to get elected) but that will probably be rationalized away.

It might be lessened but, at I noted, it will probably be rationalized away.

 
 
 
Ed-NavDoc
2.1.44  Ed-NavDoc  replied to  JohnRussell @2.1.7    2 months ago

No matter what Trump's faults, not everybody has the unbridled and rabid hatred of him that you and others do. I'm not all that fond of Trump myself, but I find the choices by the left to be unable to reasonably challenge him in his reelection bid.

 
 
 
Donald J. Trump fan 1
2.1.45  Donald J. Trump fan 1  replied to  JohnRussell @2.1.5    2 months ago

Actually, it isn’t.  

 
 
 
Buzz of the Orient
2.1.46  Buzz of the Orient  replied to  TᵢG @2.1.28    2 months ago

My question is whether the electorate can be influenced by $100,000,000 worth of advertising. 

 
 
 
JohnRussell
2.1.47  JohnRussell  replied to  Ed-NavDoc @2.1.44    2 months ago

Ed if you wouldnt accept Joe Biden, Bloomberg , or Amy Kloubachar over Trump in a heartbeat, you've got "issues". 

Of course the right thing to do is vote Trump out no matter who the Democratic nominee is.  There is zero chance that Bernie Sanders could install a socialist government in the United States. Zero. 

 
 
 
TᵢG
2.1.48  TᵢG  replied to  JohnRussell @2.1.47    2 months ago
There is zero chance that Bernie Sanders could install a socialist government in the United States. Zero. 

... and that is not what Sanders has ever sought.   His policies are all capitalist.   The difference between him and, say, Biden is that he wants waaaaay more statism.   He wants much bigger 'benevolent' government and wants to aggressively redistribute wealth.    No change of our economic system away from capitalism, rather an increase of government size and power.    Sanders has no chance of getting elected with such a view.

 
 
 
Ed-NavDoc
2.1.49  Ed-NavDoc  replied to  JohnRussell @2.1.47    2 months ago

Anybody who wants those you mentioned got way more issues than I do! I just do not like progressive liberal leftist policies and never have so to you anybody that do not share your progressive and/or leftist libersl views are the hated enemy even when you don't even know them. That is really very sad.

 
 
 
katrix
2.1.50  katrix  replied to  Buzz of the Orient @2.1.46    2 months ago
My question is whether the electorate can be influenced by $100,000,000 worth of advertising. 

I think it absolutely can. Name recognition is huge with many voters. One reason Trump won the GOP primary, IMO, was because of all the media exposure he got.

 
 
 
katrix
2.1.51  katrix  replied to  Tacos! @2.1.21    2 months ago
But look at what he lies about. He lies about crowd size. He lies about his personal relationships with politicians or other famous people.

He lies about a lot more important stuff than that.

Then there are all the illegal activities. His fraudulent charity .. his supporters certainly screech enough about Hillary's charity, even though it is legit, and they don't care at all that his charity was a total fraud. His fraud with Trump University ... how he's ripped off all those small businesses ... the list goes on and on.

I find it really sad that so many Americans just don't give a shit about his utter inability to tell the truth, the laws he breaks with impunity, and his utter lack of ethics or common decency. But as has been pointed out, voters are perverse creatures

And I find it even sadder that with such a clearly flawed incumbent, the Dems can't even manage to come up with decent candidates. I really don't see any of them beating Trump, and I don't want another four years of him spitting on our Constitution and our system of government, and our military, our intelligence community, etc. I find it unpatriotic for people not to give a shit about those things, but that's just the way most voters apparently are.

 
 
 
Tacos!
2.1.52  Tacos!  replied to  katrix @2.1.51    2 months ago
His fraudulent charity . . . His fraud with Trump University ... how he's ripped off all those small businesses ... the list goes on and on

No one cares. Seriously, no one does. Maybe they should, but these things do not impact the lives of most Americans, so they will not figure in the voting calculus. Just like no one actually gave a shit about Whitewater or anything else the Clintons have ever been accused of.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
2.1.53  JohnRussell  replied to  katrix @2.1.51    2 months ago
And I find it even sadder that with such a clearly flawed incumbent, the Dems can't even manage to come up with decent candidates.

ANY Democrat should be supported against Trump. Any of them. At worst they could be a caretaker until a more sane election comes along. But it is likely the Democratic president would be far better than that. 

People need to get over this idea that there is some threshold Democrat candidates need to surpass before they are more worthy than Trump. They all are. 

 
 
 
JohnRussell
2.1.54  JohnRussell  replied to  Tacos! @2.1.52    2 months ago
Maybe they should, but these things do not impact the lives of most Americans, so they will not figure in the voting calculus. 

If this is actually true than America is a far lesser country than we imagine it to be. 

 
 
 
Tacos!
2.1.55  Tacos!  replied to  JohnRussell @2.1.54    2 months ago

I'd be happy to be proven wrong.

But how many Americans were genuinely, in their hearts, so worried about Whitewater that they thought it needed investigating? It doesn't matter if the Clintons actually did anything wrong. We're talking about the president. If we are genuinely that concerned about the morality and legal behavior of our leaders, that should have been a national emergency. It wasn't.

Neither were all of Bill's mistresses. The consensus in America is that it's perfectly reasonable and understandable that the president would lie about cheating on his wife. Even in the wake of that scandal and impeachment, he commands a quarter of a million dollars for speaking engagements and gets standing ovations at the Democratic National Conventions. No one cares.

You desire to see a moral standard of judgment in the American people with regard to Trump that they have never had for other leaders. It's who we are.

 
 
 
Buzz of the Orient
2.1.56  Buzz of the Orient  replied to  katrix @2.1.50    2 months ago

I believe that many people saw him as "the boss" on the Apprentice TV series, so he had a kind of celebrity image of a person in control.

 
 
 
Perrie Halpern R.A.
3  Perrie Halpern R.A.    2 months ago

According to Real Clear Politics, Biden is up over Sanders consistently.

512

And show a shift in the top 5 players 

512

 
 
 
The People's Fish
3.1  seeder  The People's Fish  replied to  Perrie Halpern R.A. @3    2 months ago

Party insiders are likely scheming to steal the nomination from him a second time.

2016 was one of the most crooked primaries in our history. Hillary bailed out the DNC from bankruptcy and they crowned her.

 
 
 
Perrie Halpern R.A.
3.1.1  Perrie Halpern R.A.  replied to  The People's Fish @3.1    2 months ago

This is not the DNC. This is polling the public. Bernie just doesn't have the numbers. And this is something that you should be glad about. He is a socialist, and you don't want socialism. I think that is why he is only appealing to a limited number of people and why Biden is so far ahead. 

 
 
 
The People's Fish
3.1.2  seeder  The People's Fish  replied to  Perrie Halpern R.A. @3.1.1    2 months ago

He will win the nomination.

Fishfact announcement!

 
 
 
Perrie Halpern R.A.
3.1.3  Perrie Halpern R.A.  replied to  The People's Fish @3.1.2    2 months ago

In your dreams and I am glad you put in there "fish fact" so no one will take it as an actual fact.

 
 
 
Sparty On
3.1.4  Sparty On  replied to  Perrie Halpern R.A. @3.1.3    2 months ago
Bernie just doesn't have the numbers.

Not enough Socialists in the US yet for that to happen.   Not even including the ones who say they are but really aren't.

 
 
 
Tacos!
4  Tacos!    2 months ago

In my late night fantasies (c'mon you wanna know!), the old-timer front runners in this thing (Biden, Warren, and Sanders) finally wear down the voters with their ancient out-of-touch politicking and get kicked to the curb. This allows the younger ones who stick it out to rise to the top. Then, we might have something interesting to talk about in this election.

Sadly, there's still a ton of devoted Democrats who will vote simply based on whoever they think can win. In fact, I would guess it might even be a majority of such voters. These loyal Democrats really aren't that picky. They just want to beat Trump. And in a reelection campaign like this one, they might be the bulk of the turnout.

Unfortunately, it's the DNC and the news media who are the ones doing the deciding. So, people like Booker, Klobuchar, Yang, and Gabbard, who get excluded from the debates - and, more importantly, the news coverage - aren't even on their radar.

Buttigieg - I predict - will burn out quickly. He might do well in Iowa and even New Hampshire, but there just aren't that many delegates in those states. He could start out in front, but as soon as the primaries move on to bigger states, the big three will catch him and leave him behind.

 
 
 
Perrie Halpern R.A.
4.1  Perrie Halpern R.A.  replied to  Tacos! @4    2 months ago
In my late night fantasies (c'mon you wanna know!), the old-timer front runners in this thing (Biden, Warren, and Sanders) finally wear down the voters with their ancient out-of-touch politicking and get kicked to the curb.

You have to be kidding. Biden and Bernie are contemporaries of Trump and Warren is younger.

Sadly, there's still a ton of devoted Democrats who will vote simply based on whoever they think can win.

How is that different from loyal Republicans who forgive Trump for anything that comes out of his mouth daily? And yes, they do want to beat Trump. Hasn't that always been the game for both parties? It's why I am not a party member. 

So, people like Booker, Klobuchar, Yang, and Gabbard, who get excluded from the debates - and, more importantly, thenews coverage- aren't even on their radar.

That is true.

 
 
 
The Magic Eight Ball
4.1.1  The Magic Eight Ball  replied to  Perrie Halpern R.A. @4.1    2 months ago
How is that different from loyal Republicans who forgive Trump for anything that comes out of his mouth daily?

because words are just words.... actions speak louder than that.

trump has done more for OUR country than the last three presidents combined.

oh no... trump said more words... LOL 

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1210750161174941696

and just like that, the doj is on it

hint: they already were :)

the hunters are now the hunted.

 
 
 
loki12
4.1.2  loki12  replied to  Perrie Halpern R.A. @4.1    2 months ago
You have to be kidding. Biden and Bernie are contemporaries of Trump and Warren is younger.

Trump is closer to Warrens age than he is to either Bernie or Biden. Only by about 6 months for biden but he a warren are closer in age, he is more her peer in age than Biden, and definitely Bernie.

Biden 42

Trump 46

Warren 49

 
 
 
Perrie Halpern R.A.
4.1.3  Perrie Halpern R.A.  replied to  loki12 @4.1.2    2 months ago

Loki,

Here are the ages of everyone (I am not sure what your numbers represent).

Trump:  73 

Biden: 76

Sanders: 77

Warren:  70

These people are all contemporaries by any definition. 

 
 
 
JohnRussell
4.1.4  JohnRussell  replied to  Perrie Halpern R.A. @4.1    2 months ago

Donald Trump retweeted a tweet that was complimentary of him. The tweet was from someone named 4 Laura Loomer.

Laura Loomer is a far right nut case who is promoted on Infowars. Loomer is well known for saying mass shootings are hoaxes or false flags.  Loomer said the Parkland school shooting was a hoax. 

And the fucking president of the United States is approvingly putting this nutjobs name on his twitter page.  Because she is nice to him. 

Wake the hell up, all of you. 

Trump is tweeting from Q Anon people. Conspiracies, idiocies, nonsense. All intended to bamboozle Americans.  Reading a lot of the comments on this site , and on this thread, it appears to be working for him. 

 
 
 
Tacos!
4.1.5  Tacos!  replied to  Perrie Halpern R.A. @4.1    2 months ago
Biden and Bernie are contemporaries of Trump and Warren is younger.

I hate to be mean, but let's be real: They're all old. Warren is 70. All four of those people have a 7 in front of their age. They are all contemporaries of each other. Everyone else I mentioned is 50 or younger, except Klobuchar, who is only 59.

How is that different from loyal Republicans who forgive Trump for anything that comes out of his mouth daily?

Trump is the incumbent president, running unchallenged. It's not like Republican primary voters are being given a big choice. In this cycle, at least, my analysis just doesn't apply to them. That's typical when a president is running for reelection.

In contrast, Democratic voters have some very interesting choices, but they will shy away from the bold, exciting choices and go with what they are being told is the safe choice. I really think some of the other candidates could beat Trump if only they had a shot at the nomination.

 
 
 
loki12
4.1.6  loki12  replied to  Perrie Halpern R.A. @4.1.3    2 months ago
These people are all contemporaries by any definition. 

Sigh...............

What you wrote:

                "Biden and Bernie are contemporaries of Trump and Warren is younger."

So now they are all contemporaries? 

 
 
 
Perrie Halpern R.A.
4.1.7  Perrie Halpern R.A.  replied to  The Magic Eight Ball @4.1.1    2 months ago
trump has done more for OUR country than the last three presidents combined.

The only thing that I can see that Trump has done for this country is the Economy and even that has come at a cost. He has added trillions to our national debt and this will come back to bite us. His conduct as President has been a total embarrassment. He is petty and small-minded. He is nothing more than a "Cult of Personality".

 
 
 
Perrie Halpern R.A.
4.1.8  Perrie Halpern R.A.  replied to  loki12 @4.1.6    2 months ago
What you wrote:

                "Biden and Bernie are contemporaries of Trump and Warren is younger."

So now they are all contemporaries? 

Are you kidding me? The facts are there in front of your face. They are all in their 70's. That makes them contemporaries. It's this kind of nonsense that makes having a discussion impossible. 

 
 
 
Perrie Halpern R.A.
4.1.9  Perrie Halpern R.A.  replied to  Tacos! @4.1.5    2 months ago
I hate to be mean, but let's be real: They're all old. Warren is 70. All four of those people have a 7 in front of their age. They are all contemporaries of each other. Everyone else I mentioned is 50 or younger, except Klobuchar, who is only 59.

Now I agree with you. 

How is that different from loyal Republicans who forgive Trump for anything that comes out of his mouth daily? Trump is the incumbent president, running unchallenged. It's not like Republican primary voters are being given a big choice. In this cycle, at least, my analysis just doesn't apply to them. That's typical when a president is running for reelection.

You are talking specifics and I am talking about behavior. 

In contrast, Democratic voters have some very interesting choices, but they will shy away from the bold, exciting choices and go with what they are being told is the safe choice. I really think some of the other candidates could beat Trump if only they had a shot at the nomination.

We agree again. Personally I like Klobuchar but she is lost in the crowd. 

 
 
 
Perrie Halpern R.A.
4.1.10  Perrie Halpern R.A.  replied to  JohnRussell @4.1.4    2 months ago
Trump is tweeting from Q Anon people. Conspiracies, idiocies, nonsense. All intended to bamboozle Americans.  Reading a lot of the comments on this site , and on this thread, it appears to be working for him. 

John, I don't disagree. But that is not what this article is about.

 
 
 
MUVA
4.1.11  MUVA  replied to  Perrie Halpern R.A. @4.1.7    2 months ago

The debt is perpetuated by spending with a budget nowhere in site it has been like this for 16 years before he took office.The two things Trump has done is basically get the trade imbalance at least discussed and slowed border crossings with his policy.  

 
 
 
The Magic Eight Ball
4.1.12  The Magic Eight Ball  replied to  Perrie Halpern R.A. @4.1.7    2 months ago
The only thing that I can see that Trump has done for this country is the Economy

look harder. besides the economy setting 50yr records...

  • tpp =dead
  • paris agrement = dead
  • ICC = dead
  • WTO = dead
  • supreme court = rightwing majority
  • military funded and growing a new branch (space force)
  • border being secured

the next act?

  • leftwing and neo con corruption being removed  next summer via durham, adm rogers, and barr

no president has done as much as for OUR country and the globalists are freekin pissed off... LOL

is all good fun :)

 

 
 
 
Perrie Halpern R.A.
4.1.13  Perrie Halpern R.A.  replied to  MUVA @4.1.11    2 months ago
The debt is perpetuated by spending with a budget nowhere in site it has been like this for 16 years before he took office.

Wrong. He has actually added to the debt. 

512

And remember he has one more year to spend. Obama did his spending in 8 years and Trump has almost done the same in 3 years. 

I am a fiscal conservative, and I am sorry, the national debt shows he is not.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
4.1.14  JohnRussell  replied to  Perrie Halpern R.A. @4.1.10    2 months ago

You dont disagree with what? That it is working for him? Maybe we should worry less about who is best suited to beat him and instead just worry about getting him the hell out. 

ANY Democrat is preferable to Trump. ANY of them , and you know it. 

 
 
 
loki12
4.1.15  loki12  replied to  Perrie Halpern R.A. @4.1.8    2 months ago

Agreed, you posted one thing, when you got called out in it, you changed what you said, that is the simple fact.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
4.1.16  JohnRussell  replied to  The Magic Eight Ball @4.1.12    2 months ago

Go back to posting disproven conspiracy theories. 

 
 
 
The Magic Eight Ball
4.1.17  The Magic Eight Ball  replied to  JohnRussell @4.1.16    2 months ago
Go back to posting disproven conspiracy theories.

the ones being proven are much more fun.

go back to posting I hate trump screeds... that is where your base is.

cheers :)

 
 
 
MUVA
4.1.18  MUVA  replied to  Perrie Halpern R.A. @4.1.13    2 months ago

I didn't say he was  Obama added almost 10 trillion dollars to the debt your graph is a projection we will see.Trump has been great for business Obama not so much. 

 
 
 
The Magic Eight Ball
4.1.19  The Magic Eight Ball  replied to  Perrie Halpern R.A. @4.1.13    2 months ago
Obama did his spending in 8 years and Trump has almost done the same in 3 years.

bush 1, clinton, bush 2, obama,   

they all played the same game.  selling out our country

shocker: it all started with the 11th director of the CIA

who could have guessed... ya cant just make this stuff up.

fbi, cia, fisa, our entire intelligence apparatus have to be re-structured.

maybe the CIA whistleblower trump outed has some ideas?  LOL


we all knew undoing generations of political bs was going to be expensive.

and worth every penny :)

 
 
 
Perrie Halpern R.A.
4.1.20  Perrie Halpern R.A.  replied to  The Magic Eight Ball @4.1.12    2 months ago
look harder.
  • tpp =dead
  • paris agrement = dead
  • ICC = dead
  • WTO = dead
  • supreme court = rightwing majority
  • border being secured

This goes to how I view his policies. 

  • supreme court = rightwing majority. Horrible. The court is not supposed to be political. 
  • supreme court = rightwing majority Terrible. He is over spending and adding to our National Debt. 
  • Has given industry free reign over how they dump their waste
  • Added trillions to the National Debt
  • Removed bans on animals and wild life that are endangered
  • Rejected a proposed ban on chlorpyrifos, a pesticide linked to developmental disabilities in children.
  • Narrowed the scope of a 2016 law mandating safety assessments for potentially toxic chemicals like dry-cleaning solvents.
  • And please take note, I didn't disagree with your first three. He has not done anything yet with the WTO and that would be a huge mistake if he did, so that item is false. 
  • His tariffs on China is a mixed bag. Tariffs in economics terms are a "value added tax" or VAT to consumers and prices have gone up across the board. But on the other hand, China has been abusing us. I think things could have been handled better and done in increments if China didn't play well. But then again, he could use the tariffs to further himself, placing them in effect to look tough, and then taking them away right in time for the election to boost the economy. 

I am expecting a proper response to these items.

 
 
 
loki12
4.1.21  loki12  replied to  Perrie Halpern R.A. @4.1.13    2 months ago
And remember he has one more year to spend. Obama did his spending in 8 years and Trump has almost done the same in 3 years. 

You should read your chart and try again, the total for trump is what is projected after 2 terms.   

 
 
 
loki12
4.1.22  loki12  replied to  loki12 @4.1.21    2 months ago

I want to put a caveat on my post, Presidents can't technically spend a single dollar that Congress doesn't give him. Not one Presidents budget in my memory has been accepted. Obama's got rejected 99 to 0 a couple of times so to blame him is intellectually dishonest. Congress is responsible for our debt, Period. they control the purse strings.

 
 
 
Perrie Halpern R.A.
4.1.23  Perrie Halpern R.A.  replied to  The Magic Eight Ball @4.1.19    2 months ago
bush 1, clinton, bush 2, obama,    they all played the same game.  selling out our country

Do you not read what is in front of your face or just deflect?

we all knew undoing generations of political bs was going to be expensive. and worth every penny

First, getting out of all this national debt that he is doing will take generations.

Second, he is not spending to undo generations of political bs. What are you talking about? He is spending on tax cuts, which is a bill that will have to be paid down the line. It is a false boost to the economy.

Furthermore, one of his promises was to eliminate the national debt, or have you forgotten that?

 
 
 
Perrie Halpern R.A.
4.1.24  Perrie Halpern R.A.  replied to  loki12 @4.1.22    2 months ago
I want to put a caveat on my post, Presidents can't technically spend a single dollar that Congress doesn't give him.

That is correct. Obama had a congress that was Republican and wouldn't work with him. Trump has one that will work with him. Both the President and the Congress are to blame. There, I fixed my comment, too.

 
 
 
The Magic Eight Ball
4.1.25  The Magic Eight Ball  replied to  Perrie Halpern R.A. @4.1.20    2 months ago
supreme court = rightwing majority. Horrible. The court is not supposed to be political. 

non political court? in a perfect world. I agree. but that train sailed before we were even born... I mean seriously... LOL 

had hillary won and appointed two more leftwing justices the left would have then used the court to destroy this country with their progressive socialist BS and we would have been powerless to stop them short of civil war

now the left is fuked for 20-30yrs - period - full stop.

  and that is a solid win for our country

as trump upset their apple cart civil war is avoided. that has to be a good thing also. I should have put it on my list of accomplishments.

I am expecting a proper response to these items.

I am a very busy person. my time is mine to use as I see fit.

I don't jump thru hoops for anyone... it is an unbreakable rule.

cheers :)

 
 
 
Perrie Halpern R.A.
4.1.26  Perrie Halpern R.A.  replied to  loki12 @4.1.15    2 months ago
Agreed, you posted one thing, when you got called out in it, you changed what you said, that is the simple fact.

What are you talking about?

 
 
 
TᵢG
4.1.27  TᵢG  replied to  Perrie Halpern R.A. @4.1.13    2 months ago
I am a fiscal conservative, and I am sorry, the national debt shows he is not.

As am I and Trump is not even close.   Worse, sadly, both major parties are fiscally irresponsible — saddling future generations that are not even born with our irresponsible debt.   It is disgusting.

 
 
 
Perrie Halpern R.A.
4.1.28  Perrie Halpern R.A.  replied to  The Magic Eight Ball @4.1.25    2 months ago
had hillary won and appointed two more leftwing justices the left would have then used the court to destroy this country with their progressive socialist BS and we would have been powerless to stop them short of civil war

That's funny. The court does not determine policy, but law. And again, talk of civil war. I find this very troubling. 

I am a very busy person. my time is mine to use as I see fit. I don't jump thru hoops for anyone... it is an unbreakable rule.

Let me translate that for you. Which means you have no answer for the things I said. Either have a proper discussion or your here for shits and giggles. Please let me know which, so I don't waste my time, which is valuable to me. 

 
 
 
Perrie Halpern R.A.
4.1.29  Perrie Halpern R.A.  replied to  TᵢG @4.1.27    2 months ago
As am I and Trump is not even close.   Worse, sadly, both major parties are fiscally irresponsible — saddling future generations that are not even born with our irresponsible debt.   It is disgusting.

I totally agree with you Tig. At least Clinton understood fiscal conservatism. I don't know what the rest of the clowns are doing.

 
 
 
Perrie Halpern R.A.
4.1.30  Perrie Halpern R.A.  replied to  loki12 @4.1.21    2 months ago

You are correct. It was hard to read. It is still not what he promised and way, which was to do away with the national debt and barely underspending Obama is no achievement in my books.

 
 
 
loki12
4.1.31  loki12  replied to  Perrie Halpern R.A. @4.1.26    2 months ago
What are you talking about?

Are you just a poor communicator?  In your very first post you copied this and responded. exactly what were you trying to say?

In my late night fantasies (c'mon you wanna know!), the old-timer front runners in this thing (Biden, Warren, and Sanders) finally wear down the voters with their ancient out-of-touch politicking and get kicked to the curb.

You have to be kidding. Biden and Bernie are contemporaries of Trump and Warren is younger.

Exactly what was the point of this if you weren't trying to separate Warren as "younger"?

 
 
 
Sparty On
4.1.32  Sparty On  replied to  Perrie Halpern R.A. @4.1.24    2 months ago

Not sure what dimension you are living in but in mine the house has had NO desire to work with Trump since he became POTUS.    Many of whom are very vocal about it so it’s no secret really.

 
 
 
loki12
4.1.33  loki12  replied to  Perrie Halpern R.A. @4.1.24    2 months ago
Obama had a congress that was Republican and wouldn't work with him.

And his level of debt went down every year after the republicans took over, his highest and Bush's were when the democrats controlled Congress, The best is usually a split congress because they can't agree so everyone gets screwed. Don't get me wrong. when either side has complete control they suck. 

 
 
 
Sister Mary Agnes Ample Bottom
4.1.34  Sister Mary Agnes Ample Bottom  replied to  The Magic Eight Ball @4.1.25    2 months ago
I am a very busy person. my time is mine to use as I see fit.

I don't jump thru hoops for anyone... it is an unbreakable rule.

cheers

Hahahahahahahahaha!!!!  Oh, shit...you were serious?  There are plenty of exits around here.  Feel free to use one de tout suite, m'dear.

 
 
 
Perrie Halpern R.A.
4.1.35  Perrie Halpern R.A.  replied to  Sparty On @4.1.32    2 months ago

Sparty,

First of all why get so snarky with me from the get go?

Second, the Senate is in his pocket... so much so that they said they will do the President's bidding. So it really doesn't matter what Congress wants. They are being overridden, otherwise, none of this could have passed. 

 
 
 
Perrie Halpern R.A.
4.1.36  Perrie Halpern R.A.  replied to  loki12 @4.1.31    2 months ago
Are you just a poor communicator? 

Did you have to make that personal? Don't freat I won't flag... but really?

You have to be kidding. Biden and Bernie are contemporaries of Trumpand Warren is younger. Exactly what was the point of this if you weren't trying to separate Warren as"younger"?

OMG, Loki, really? I was just stating a fact about the ages of the top 4 candidates. Please start at the top of the thread where somehow only Biden and Bernie were old and not Trump. They are all getting up there. 

 
 
 
loki12
4.1.37  loki12  replied to  Perrie Halpern R.A. @4.1.36    2 months ago

So poor communication, got it, they are all old and the younger comment was meaningless.  So one asks, what was the point of even putting it in there?

     "Please start at the top of the thread where somehow only Biden and Bernie were old (and strangely you leave warren out again, freudian?) and not Trump."

He never said that, again this is why we can't have communication, isn't that what you claimed?   He was talking about the democrats, never did he even hint that trump wasn't old,  this was your projection based on hate for trump.

Democrats are historically younger and minorities, thus the point of his comment, you read something that wasn't there. 

 
 
 
loki12
4.1.38  loki12  replied to  Perrie Halpern R.A. @4.1.36    2 months ago
Did you have to make that personal? Don't freat I won't flag... but really?

Flag away, 

 
 
 
Perrie Halpern R.A.
4.1.39  Perrie Halpern R.A.  replied to  loki12 @4.1.38    2 months ago

You discredit anything you say, by being nasty. 

 
 
 
Perrie Halpern R.A.
4.1.40  Perrie Halpern R.A.  replied to  loki12 @4.1.37    2 months ago
He never said that, again this is why we can't have communication, isn't that what you claimed? 

No it wasn't. He called the dems all old, and I pointed out to him that Trump was old, too. My point was he was trying to make age an issue while ignoring the age of his guy. 

Democrats are historically younger and minorities, thus the point of his comment, you read something that wasn't there. 

You would have to show me a stat on that. Most of our latest Presidents were somewhere in their 50's with the exception of Obama. And no that was not the point. Now you are reading something you want to be in there. 

Let's review his comment:

I hate to be mean, but let's be real: They're all old. Warren is70. All four of those people have a 7 in front of their age. They are all contemporaries of each other. Everyone else I mentioned is 50 or younger, except Klobuchar, who is only 59.

Yet he seemed not to notice the 7 in front of Trump's age.. but I hate to be mean.

 
 
 
loki12
4.1.41  loki12  replied to  Perrie Halpern R.A. @4.1.39    2 months ago

Sigh, again, you are allowing your feelings to color what you think i am saying, If you feel my comment is personal and not an accurate representation. FLAG IT!!!!!!

Lets try again,

they are all old and the younger comment was meaningless.  So one asks, what was the point of even putting it in there?

     "Please start at the top of the thread where somehow only Biden and Bernie were old (and strangely you leave warren out again,) and not Trump."

He never said that, again this is why we can't have communication, isn't that what you claimed?   He was talking about the democrats, never did he even hint that trump wasn't old,  this was your projection based on hate for trump.

Democrats are historically younger and minorities, thus the point of his comment, you read something that wasn't there. 

Better?

 
 
 
loki12
4.1.42  loki12  replied to  Perrie Halpern R.A. @4.1.40    2 months ago
Yet he seemed not to notice the 7 in front of Trump's age.. but I hate to be mean.

We are NOT talking about the general election, he is commenting on specifically the democrat primary. Quit projecting.

This is how he starts, 

In my late night fantasies (c'mon you wanna know!), the old-timer front runners in this thing 

What thing do you think he is talking about? he makes it clear right here.

"Unfortunately, it's the DNC and the news media who are the ones doing the deciding."

What part of the DNC primary do you think trump is a part of? 

Seriously, let it go, or flag away, at this point it may be kinder to put me out of your misery.

 
 
 
Perrie Halpern R.A.
4.1.43  Perrie Halpern R.A.  replied to  loki12 @4.1.41    2 months ago
Sigh, again, you are allowing your feelings to color what you think i am saying, If you feel my comment is personal and not an accurate representation. FLAG IT!!!!!!

I know the game you are playing which is trying to make me flip out. It won't work. I am hardly emotional, and my comment about flagging was your rude comment to me, not the content of the discussion. I don't flag anyone since I don't feel it's a fair being the lead mod.

He never said that, again this is why we can't have communication, isn't that what you claimed?   He was talking about the democrats, never did he even hint that trump wasn't old,  this was your projection based on hate for trump.

I am quite aware of the fact that he never said ANYTHING about Trump's age. That was my point. So answer me this. Why does it matter then what the 4 leading Dems age is? Why would he even mention it, if his point wasn't to make them all seem like old folks and yet somehow missed that he supports a man in his 70's. 

 
 
 
Perrie Halpern R.A.
4.1.44  Perrie Halpern R.A.  replied to  loki12 @4.1.42    2 months ago

I don't even know what you are talking about other than a bunch of deflections that have nada to do with this subject. 

Seriously, let it go, or flag away, at this point it may be kinder to put me out of your misery.

Seriously, I have a lot of other things in my life to make me miserable. You are not one of them.

But on a nicer note, my other twin daughter just got engaged! 

 
 
 
loki12
4.1.45  loki12  replied to  Perrie Halpern R.A. @4.1.40    2 months ago
You would have to show me a stat on that.

I was talking voters not politicians, Are you saying that republican voters aren't generally older while the democrat party leans younger in it's voter base?  in 2017 57% of those registered republican were over 50.  I really don't see that trending down.

 
 
 
loki12
4.1.46  loki12  replied to  Perrie Halpern R.A. @4.1.44    2 months ago
my other twin daughter just got engaged! 

Absolutely positively Awesome!!!!!!!! My baby girl just got married, I am one mean old asshole, it comes with the job, but i will freely admit there was possibly some ugly crying on my part. Mom held it together, she's a rock.   

Enjoy every aspect of it, it it truly a glorious thing to watch them start their new life.

 
 
 
Kathleen
4.1.47  Kathleen  replied to  Perrie Halpern R.A. @4.1.44    2 months ago

Congrats for your daughter and you too!

 
 
 
Kathleen
4.1.48  Kathleen  replied to  loki12 @4.1.46    2 months ago

Congrats to you too Loki!

 
 
 
MUVA
4.1.49  MUVA  replied to  TᵢG @4.1.27    2 months ago

That was my point remember it was Obama told us running up the debt is anti american.

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2013/03/13/flashback_obama_talks_unpatriotic_debt_in_2008.html

 
 
 
Perrie Halpern R.A.
4.1.50  Perrie Halpern R.A.  replied to  loki12 @4.1.46    2 months ago

Congrats to you and your wife on your daughter's wedding! Dad's and their daughters. Pretty much the same thing in our home. They are daddy's girls. I have one twin marrying in June and the other one says about in a year. 

it it truly a glorious thing to watch them start their new life.

You sound like a very sweet dad. What a lovely way of expressing this life transition. 

 
 
 
TᵢG
4.1.51  TᵢG  replied to  MUVA @4.1.49    2 months ago
That was my point remember it was Obama told us running up the debt is anti american.

I certainly agree with the opinion that Congress, regardless of party, has been irresponsibly borrowing and spending for decades.

 
 
 
Sparty On
4.1.52  Sparty On  replied to  Perrie Halpern R.A. @4.1.35    2 months ago

Well, I just thought it was a pretty outrageous comment coming from you.    Used to that from others here but not from you.    Prolly over snarked it but it just took me by surprise.

That said, it was a forgone conclusion that the senate wasn’t going to impeach him.  They didn’t have a real case for impeachment   Just like with Clinton but party inverted.

Both were partisan hack jobs IMO.

 

 
 
 
Perrie Halpern R.A.
4.1.53  Perrie Halpern R.A.  replied to  Sparty On @4.1.52    2 months ago

First of all, I didn't say anything outrageous and my comment wasn't to you.

Here is my comment:

That is correct. Obama had a congress that was Republican and wouldn't work with him. Trump has one that will work with him. Both the President and the Congress are to blame. There, I fixed my comment, too.

So I don't even get where this is coming from:

That said, it was a forgone conclusion that the senate wasn’t going to impeach him.  They didn’t have a real case for impeachment   Just like with Clinton but party inverted. Both were partisan hack jobs IMO.

We were not talking about impeachment. We were talking about budgets. Had you been following the discussion, you would have not jumped to that conclusion.

But I will respond to that comment. I was not for impeaching Trump. I was not for 4 years of Whitewater either. They are partisan in nature. 

 
 
 
Sparty On
4.1.54  Sparty On  replied to  Perrie Halpern R.A. @4.1.53    2 months ago

Testy testy .... talk about me.

Just one question to clarify what you meant.    Trump has one of what that will work with him?

 
 
 
Perrie Halpern R.A.
4.1.55  Perrie Halpern R.A.  replied to  Sparty On @4.1.54    2 months ago

Well, I wouldn't have been testy had you not jumped on me. Call it even. 

 
 
 
Donald J. Trump fan 1
4.1.56  Donald J. Trump fan 1  replied to  Perrie Halpern R.A. @4.1.10    2 months ago

Well we get to use all kinds of sites when we get to quote the President saying something to or about them.  I think it funny that so many groups that the SPLC wrongly libels as a hate group have never had so much power in our federal government.  I’ll take arguing cases before the Supreme Court, having members appointed as judges, having Members or leaders in key administration spots, on congressional staffs, haves members testifying before Congress, having them write content for other outlets, their actions publicized in the msm, etc. A variety of conservative and evangelical Christian groups covering a wide spectrum of issues have never been more powerful thanks to the SPLC.  Let’s see, what would be more important, being in the good graces a of secular progressive terrorist inspiring hate group or actually being a part of and or directly influencing the government.  I’m proud of them all. 

 
 
 
Sparty On
4.1.57  Sparty On  replied to  Perrie Halpern R.A. @4.1.55    2 months ago

Fair enough.   Really didn't mean to come off as insulting if i did.  

I just think any supposition inferring this House has willingly worked with Trump is outrageous and am surprised we apparently disagree on that.

 
 
 
The People's Fish
5  seeder  The People's Fish    2 months ago

Soon after Bernie takes the nomination they will adopt the sickle and hammer flag and organize a bolshevik goon squad. Wait they already have one, antifa.

When you see the goon squads at the polls you will say to yourself. That fish must be psychic....

 
 
 
Perrie Halpern R.A.
5.1  Perrie Halpern R.A.  replied to  The People's Fish @5    2 months ago

BF, I say this to you as a friend... knock it off. There is nothing close to indicate that Bernie is going to win, or that we are going to go socialist. 

 
 
 
Dean Moriarty
5.1.1  Dean Moriarty  replied to  Perrie Halpern R.A. @5.1    2 months ago

He’s one of the highest polling Democrats right now the party is full of socialists. 

 
 
 
JohnRussell
5.1.2  JohnRussell  replied to  Perrie Halpern R.A. @5.1    2 months ago
knock it off.

Why would he change now?   If anything, it is going to get worse as the election year takes hold. 

 
 
 
Tacos!
5.1.3  Tacos!  replied to  Perrie Halpern R.A. @5.1    2 months ago
There is nothing close to indicate that Bernie is going to win

Well . . . there is the title of this seed.

 
 
 
Perrie Halpern R.A.
5.1.4  Perrie Halpern R.A.  replied to  Dean Moriarty @5.1.1    2 months ago

Dean,

Let's get real. Yes, there is a small bunch of socialist in the party. He is also the only true socialist running. 

 
 
 
Dean Moriarty
5.1.5  Dean Moriarty  replied to  Perrie Halpern R.A. @5.1.4    2 months ago

Democrats now see socialism more favorably than capitalism. 
https://news.gallup.com/poll/240725/democrats-positive-socialism-capitalism.aspx

 
 
 
Perrie Halpern R.A.
5.1.6  Perrie Halpern R.A.  replied to  Tacos! @5.1.3    2 months ago
There is nothing close to indicate that Bernie is going to win Well . . . thereisthe title of this seed.

That's about it. The numbers across the board show otherwise. I think this is wishful thinking. 

 
 
 
Perrie Halpern R.A.
5.1.7  Perrie Halpern R.A.  replied to  Dean Moriarty @5.1.5    2 months ago

Dean,

If you looked further into that poll, you will see that the younger voters skewed the results. 

Also that is only part of the picture. The Pew is more careful. 

512

While Dems do view socialism with a more positive attitude, they still prefer capitalism. 

 
 
 
Dean Moriarty
5.1.8  Dean Moriarty  replied to  Perrie Halpern R.A. @5.1.7    2 months ago

The chart you posted does indicate a more positive view of Socialism from Democrats than Capitalism. 

Your chart indicates 55% percent of Democrats see capitalism positive and a higher percentage 65% see socialism as positive. 

 
 
 
The People's Fish
5.1.9  seeder  The People's Fish  replied to  Perrie Halpern R.A. @5.1    2 months ago

Am i not entitled to an opinion?

I made a prediction.

 
 
 
The People's Fish
5.1.10  seeder  The People's Fish  replied to  Dean Moriarty @5.1.8    2 months ago

Good catch, one could then assume the majority want socialism if they made assumptions based on data.

That is why Bernie will win. Warren lost ground when she called herself a capitalist. The cash dried up.

It's Bernie's to lose at this point.

 
 
 
The People's Fish
5.1.11  seeder  The People's Fish  replied to  JohnRussell @5.1.2    2 months ago

If Bernie is the nominee will you vote for him?

 
 
 
The People's Fish
5.1.12  seeder  The People's Fish  replied to  Tacos! @5.1.3    2 months ago

Barack Obama's advisers think he will win

https://www.newsweek.com/former-obama-advisor-take-bernie-sanders-very-seriously-polls-1479231

Oh look...

https://www.msnbc.com/am-joy/watch/sanders-could-win-nomination-new-report-states-dem-insiders-say-75797061596

https://www.salon.com/2019/11/24/quit-saying-that-bernie-sanders-cant-win-he-may-be-the-most-electable-democrat-running-in-2020/

Fivethirtyeight says he's winning 

https://qz.com/co/2279963/how-bernie-sanders-could-win-the-2020-democratic-nomination/

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2019/10/16/bernie-sanders-isnt-going-anywhere-anytime-soon/

If i need more i have them.

Bernie will win the nom!

 
 
 
Perrie Halpern R.A.
5.1.13  Perrie Halpern R.A.  replied to  The People's Fish @5.1.10    2 months ago

To both you and Dean,

I should have posted the whole thing. The chart is supposed to show that although Dems are like socialism, they still support capitalism. 

It will not be Bernie. 

 
 
 
Perrie Halpern R.A.
5.1.14  Perrie Halpern R.A.  replied to  The People's Fish @5.1.12    2 months ago

OK so you found every ultra-liberal paper to agree with you and the others who say he isn't going away anytime soon. I still don't buy it. 

 
 
 
The People's Fish
5.1.15  seeder  The People's Fish  replied to  Perrie Halpern R.A. @5.1.14    2 months ago

The commies are coming....hold me I'm scared!

 
 
 
Donald J. Trump fan 1
5.1.16  Donald J. Trump fan 1  replied to  JohnRussell @5.1.2    2 months ago

All the democrats running for President are socialist or socialist lite.  

 
 
 
Donald J. Trump fan 1
5.1.17  Donald J. Trump fan 1  replied to  Perrie Halpern R.A. @5.1.4    2 months ago

Well there is Bloomberg....

 
 
 
Perrie Halpern R.A.
5.1.18  Perrie Halpern R.A.  replied to  The People's Fish @5.1.15    2 months ago

512

Hush Child. Now close your eyes and go back to sleep. It's just a bad dream.

 
 
 
Donald J. Trump fan 1
5.1.19  Donald J. Trump fan 1  replied to  The People's Fish @5.1.9    2 months ago

Never!  

 
 
 
The People's Fish
5.1.20  seeder  The People's Fish  replied to  Perrie Halpern R.A. @5.1.18    2 months ago

Last time we had a socialist in the white house they had internment camps. They rounded up all the Japanese.

Truly aweful. Fortunately they forgave us or we might not ever had incredible sushi.

 
 
 
Perrie Halpern R.A.
5.1.21  Perrie Halpern R.A.  replied to  The People's Fish @5.1.20    2 months ago

Calling FDR a socialist is a truly revisionist history. 

Did you forget we were at war? I didn't see anyone standing up for them either. 

 
 
 
Donald J. Trump fan 1
5.1.22  Donald J. Trump fan 1  replied to  Perrie Halpern R.A. @5.1.18    2 months ago

I wonder what other seed that meme was posted on.  

 
 
 
Donald J. Trump fan 1
5.1.23  Donald J. Trump fan 1  replied to  Perrie Halpern R.A. @5.1.14    2 months ago

I’m glad that you agree that 538 and the Washington Post are ultra liberal news services.  Nice to have that on the record.  

 
 
 
TᵢG
5.1.24  TᵢG  replied to  Perrie Halpern R.A. @5.1.21    2 months ago
Calling FDR a socialist is a truly revisionist history. 

It amazes me that so many people refuse to distinguish social democracy / statism from socialism.    One thing that Bernie has accomplished is to solidify the confusion within the USA.   

 
 
 
The People's Fish
5.1.25  seeder  The People's Fish  replied to  Perrie Halpern R.A. @5.1.21    2 months ago

This is election will decide if we have the freedom to chose the color of our toothbrush and the liberty to have more than one child.

Oh and dearh panels. Stay productive or the state will deny your surgery....

Will old people be killed for the greater good to save resources?

Oh the horror!

 
 
 
The People's Fish
5.1.26  seeder  The People's Fish  replied to  TᵢG @5.1.24    2 months ago

Unless participation is 100% voluntary. It's tyranny.

If it's imposed on us with the threat of incarceration or deadly force, it's immoral.

 
 
 
TᵢG
5.1.27  TᵢG  replied to  Dean Moriarty @5.1.8    2 months ago
The chart you posted does indicate a more positive view of Socialism from Democrats than Capitalism. 

That translates (using terms that make sense) into more D's being in favor of statist policies rather than free-market policies.    Socialism, to most in the USA nowadays, seems to mean big, generous government taking care of us all and capitalism seems to mean self-sufficiency, classical work-ethic, etc.

In reality, both D and R are very much in favor of continued capitalism (properly defined as minority control over the productive resources of the economy), they just have different approaches on the role of government.

 
 
 
TᵢG
5.1.28  TᵢG  replied to  The People's Fish @5.1.26    2 months ago
Unless participation is 100% voluntary. It's tyranny.

Participation in what, exactly?   What, specifically, are you referring to?   And do not tell me 'socialism'.   Tell me in terms with meaning what you are referring to.

If it's imposed on us with the threat of prison or deadly force, it's immoral.

What is the 'it'?   Describe without using the meaningless term 'socialism'.

 
 
 
Donald J. Trump fan 1
5.1.29  Donald J. Trump fan 1  replied to  The People's Fish @5.1.26    2 months ago

You are right but it seems one wants to argue with you about it.  

 
 
 
TᵢG
5.1.30  TᵢG  replied to  Donald J. Trump fan 1 @5.1.29    2 months ago

Depends on the specific meaning of 'it'.  

 
 
 
Perrie Halpern R.A.
5.1.31  Perrie Halpern R.A.  replied to  TᵢG @5.1.24    2 months ago
It amazes me that so many people refuse to distinguish social democracy / statism from socialism.    One thing that Bernie has accomplished is to solidify the confusion within the USA. 

I hear ya Tig. 

 
 
 
Perrie Halpern R.A.
5.1.32  Perrie Halpern R.A.  replied to  Donald J. Trump fan 1 @5.1.23    2 months ago

The Wapo is liberal, but not ultra liberal and I never heard of the 538 other than to look at the page briefly.

Don't be so literal HA.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
5.1.33  JohnRussell  replied to  The People's Fish @5.1.11    2 months ago
If Bernie is the nominee will you vote for him?

Of course. I'd vote for you before I would vote for Trump. 

 
 
 
Donald J. Trump fan 1
5.1.34  Donald J. Trump fan 1  replied to  Perrie Halpern R.A. @5.1.32    2 months ago

I promise to never again take anything you say at literal face value.  

 
 
 
The People's Fish
5.1.35  seeder  The People's Fish  replied to  JohnRussell @5.1.33    2 months ago

Holy poop, you didn't answer the question.

I think we got our answer. You'd actually prefer Trump over Bernie.

Thanks for the honesty.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
5.1.36  JohnRussell  replied to  The People's Fish @5.1.35    2 months ago

Maybe when I said "of course" it was too vague. 

tenor.gif?itemid=5604034

Yes, I would vote for Bernie Sanders over Trump. 

 
 
 
Sparty On
5.1.37  Sparty On  replied to  JohnRussell @5.1.36    2 months ago

John Russell for angry grandpa ...... yippee ki yay !

 
 
 
JohnRussell
5.1.38  JohnRussell  replied to  Sparty On @5.1.37    2 months ago

Yeah, I admit it. I'm prejudiced against pathological liars, crooks, bigots and morons when it comes to picking a president. 

512

 
 
 
Sparty On
5.1.39  Sparty On  replied to  JohnRussell @5.1.38    2 months ago

So you must really hate Bubba

256

 
 
 
JohnRussell
5.1.40  JohnRussell  replied to  Sparty On @5.1.39    2 months ago

I would not vote for Bill Clinton again, unless he was running against Donald Trump.  While Bill Clinton made some mistakes of a personal nature, his character malfunctions are a grain of sand on a beach compared to Trump's. 

 
 
 
Sparty On
5.1.41  Sparty On  replied to  JohnRussell @5.1.40    2 months ago

Lol ... if Clinton had been a Republican you'd be spinning like a whirling dervish of hatred for him just like you are with Trump now.

John, you really should do something about your pathological hatred for Trump.   It's not healthy.   Really!

 
 
 
JohnRussell
5.1.42  JohnRussell  replied to  Sparty On @5.1.41    2 months ago

What makes you think I hate Trump?  All I do is point out the truth about him. There is no emotion. There is more evidence that you are obsessed with loving him.   After all, I'm not the one who forgives a known serial liar, crook , bigot and moron every day, you are. 

 
 
 
Sparty On
5.1.43  Sparty On  replied to  JohnRussell @5.1.42    2 months ago
What makes you think I hate Trump?

C'mon on John.   Now you're just being disingenuous.

You're better than that.   Aren't you?

Oh and thanks for the insult and a Hap, Hap, Happy New Year to you as well!!

 
 
 
JohnRussell
5.1.44  JohnRussell  replied to  Sparty On @5.1.43    2 months ago

I don't "hate" Donald Trump. I dont know him.  He's not fit for office because he is a known liar, crook, bigot and moron, among other things.  Why do you deny the obvious?

 
 
 
Sparty On
5.1.45  Sparty On  replied to  JohnRussell @5.1.44    2 months ago

John, the rage and hatred you feel for the man literally drips off your posting here almost every day but i don't expect you to see that since you are clearly in total denial in that regard.   I meant what i said earlier.   You have a very unhealthy obsession over the man, albeit maybe (i hope) only here on Newstalkers.   But i highly doubt that it ends here for you.

Very highly doubt it.

 
 
 
MUVA
5.1.46  MUVA  replied to  Sparty On @5.1.45    2 months ago

It's sad people put delusions over the country.

 
 
 
MUVA
5.1.47  MUVA  replied to  JohnRussell @5.1.40    2 months ago

He lied under oath and exposed himself to a female which seems to be his MO. 

 
 
 
TᵢG
5.1.48  TᵢG  replied to  JohnRussell @5.1.42    2 months ago
What makes you think I hate Trump? 

You do not think that is a reasonable assumption based on what you write here?    I can see how you can be against Trump as PotUS and criticize him daily while not hating him personally.   But surely you can see why people who read your words would get the impression that you hate him.   Your language gets rather emotive at times.

 
 
 
The People's Fish
5.1.49  seeder  The People's Fish  replied to  TᵢG @5.1.48    2 months ago

I didn't vote for Trump, I don't like him or hate him but I am fond of some of the economic policy. The irony here is some of John's biggest concerns during the Obama administration have been shored up by Trump's economic policy.

Can he admit it? No, all we get is the usual statement on every article.

Example:

"Trump Lies, his supporters lie, they are awful people, he is awful, Russia, he got two scoops of ice cream while everyone else got one, white supremacy, hookers peed on him in Moscow, dictator, worst president in history, i miss hillary.....etc

 
 
 
JohnRussell
5.1.50  JohnRussell  replied to  TᵢG @5.1.48    2 months ago

Oh please. 

I know how to express myself in direct ways.  It has nothing to do with hate. 

But even if I did hate him , so what?  He certainly deserves whatever negative opinions people have of him. 

 
 
 
JohnRussell
5.1.51  JohnRussell  replied to  The People's Fish @5.1.49    2 months ago
Trump Lies, his supporters lie, they are awful people, he is awful, Russia, he got two scoops of ice cream while everyone else got one, white supremacy, hookers peed on him in Moscow, dictator, worst president in history, i miss hillary.....etc

LOL. Who are you quoting, other than yourself? You are the only person on this site I have ever seen talk about Trump's ice cream. 

 
 
 
The People's Fish
5.1.52  seeder  The People's Fish  replied to  JohnRussell @5.1.50    2 months ago

It's out of concern for your welfare that we point out that based on your comments you seem consumed with all things Trump.

 
 
 
TᵢG
5.1.53  TᵢG  replied to  The People's Fish @5.1.49    2 months ago

Well, I personally dislike Trump.   Always have.   I find him to be entirely unsuitable to represent our nation as PotUS - a national embarrassment IMO.   And personally I find him to be a lying sack of shit who will throw anyone under the bus and not have a moment's concern about it.

His pro-business stance is good for the psychology (encourages investment) which is in turn good for the economy.   His lack of control in spending is helping the economy too at the expense of fiscal responsibility.   So, sure, is Trump good for the economy?  Looks that way.   And that is unfortunately what will likely keep him in office.

 
 
 
TᵢG
5.1.54  TᵢG  replied to  JohnRussell @5.1.50    2 months ago
Oh please. 

Oh please what?   You do not see why people would presume you hate Trump?   

Note that I am not saying you hate Trump.   I took you at your word.   Did you not read this?:

TiG @5.1.48I can see how you can be against Trump as PotUS and criticize him daily while not hating him personally. 

People seem to read posts too quickly.   I find myself constantly pointing people to what I have written because they did not read it before responding.  Why is that?   Is my grammar poor, improper use of vocabulary, ...?

But even if I did hate him , so what?  He certainly deserves whatever negative opinions people have of him. 

Sure, but that is not the point.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
5.1.55  JohnRussell  replied to  The People's Fish @5.1.52    2 months ago
It's out of concern for your welfare

Oh, ...reading your output here one would have thought your main concern was for social justice warriors who misuse the privacy rights of naive transgenders. 

 
 
 
The People's Fish
5.1.56  seeder  The People's Fish  replied to  TᵢG @5.1.54    2 months ago

Sometimes when i am in the privacy of my toilet room I see Trump's face in the swirls of the drywall. One time I saw Melania in the flame of a log in the fire place. I even heard a crippled boy saw Trump's face in the wood grain in a historic catholic church in Chile and was healed.

 
 
 
TᵢG
5.1.57  TᵢG  replied to  The People's Fish @5.1.56    2 months ago

 
 
 
Sparty On
5.1.58  Sparty On  replied to  The People's Fish @5.1.56    2 months ago

Hey, what happens in the shitter, stays in the shitter.

Literally hopefully!

 
 
 
JohnRussell
5.1.59  JohnRussell  replied to  TᵢG @5.1.54    2 months ago
Oh please what?   You do not see why people would presume you hate Trump?   

Whatever. I dont base my comments on mollifying those who think I hate Trump. 

 
 
 
TᵢG
5.1.60  TᵢG  replied to  JohnRussell @5.1.59    2 months ago

That's nice.   Not the point.   And you again do not answer the question that you quoted.

Yes, of course you understand why people would think you hate Trump.   You are on NT daily blasting Trump so of course people will presume you hate him.   The only way they would not presume that is if you were to state (as you have just done) that you do not hate Trump.

 
 
 
The People's Fish
5.1.61  seeder  The People's Fish  replied to  JohnRussell @5.1.59    2 months ago

I just want to say that I love you John. I consider you like family. Can I call you Uncle John?

 
 
 
JohnRussell
5.1.62  JohnRussell  replied to  TᵢG @5.1.60    2 months ago

Tig, if you actually want Trump to lose, stop 'normalizing' him on this forum.  The economy is marginally better than it was when Obama left office, and is not the "greatest in American history" as Trump claims.  It is not remotely sufficient as a reason to keep him in office for four more years, yet you seem to constantly give that as a reason he might win. 

How about some reasons he doesnt deserve to win despite the "good" economy?  Ever thought of that approach? 

 The "Never Trumper" Republicans are the ones independents should look to for guidance as to how to approach this election. They are promoting ANY Democrat over Trump because they realize the damage Trump is doing to our people. 

 
 
 
Sparty On
5.1.63  Sparty On  replied to  TᵢG @5.1.60    2 months ago

Many a child has denied taking a cookie when in fact they really did.

This denial  is a lot like that IMO.   But hey, that's just my opinion.   I could be wrong.

 
 
 
TᵢG
5.1.64  TᵢG  replied to  JohnRussell @5.1.62    2 months ago
Tig, if you actually want Trump to lose, stop 'normalizing' him on this forum. 

This is why I consider your comments irrational.   To claim that I 'normalize' Trump when my comments are net critical shows that your analysis is predominantly emotional.

Apparently you did not read my comments about how Trump (and all PotUS') have little to do with a good economy (but can cause damage to an economy).

How about some reasons he doesnt deserve to win despite the "good" economy?  Ever thought of that approach? 

Read this:

TiG @5.1.53 Well, I personally dislike Trump.   Always have.   I find him to be entirely unsuitable to represent our nation as PotUS - a national embarrassment IMO.   And personally I find him to be a lying sack of shit who will throw anyone under the bus and not have a moment's concern about it. His pro-business stance is good for the psychology (encourages investment) which is in turn good for the economy.   His lack of control in spending is helping the economy too at the expense of fiscal responsibility.   So, sure, is Trump good for the economy?  Looks that way.   And that is unfortunately what will likely keep him in office.

Get a grip.   If you want to accuse someone of 'normalizing' Trump I suggest you focus on his supporters rather than his critics.   Alienating his critics is just plain dumb; you shoot yourself in the foot.   It is irrational and counter-productive.

 
 
 
loki12
5.1.65  loki12  replied to  TᵢG @5.1.64    2 months ago

I'm curious, which of the posters here does John think that you will be able to change their vote?  I don't know what the average traffic is here a day, but it stretch's the imagination to think votes are changed here.  Other than I'm thinking of writing in Badfish, what we need back collectively is a sense of humor.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
5.1.66  JohnRussell  replied to  TᵢG @5.1.64    2 months ago
my comments are net critical

LOL. Yeah, that is sure to do the trick. 

 
 
 
TᵢG
5.1.67  TᵢG  replied to  loki12 @5.1.65    2 months ago

You will have to ask John.   IMO, likely nobody is going to change their position based on what is discussed here.    When you see people seeding everyday trying to push their positions (and not just the political ones) one wonders if they have the delusion that they are writing for CBS News or something.   How many people do the seeders think they are reaching (much less convincing)?    

 
 
 
TᵢG
5.1.68  TᵢG  replied to  JohnRussell @5.1.66    2 months ago
LOL. Yeah, that is sure to do the trick

What is the trick you are referring to?   My comments are an expression of my position.   Do you have some notion that your emotionally driven, over-the-top, irrational attacks on other members is going to change their positions (or others)?    What is the trick that you are trying to accomplish?

My recommendation is to tone down on the emotion and just deliver objective analysis.  You are not going to make any difference whatsoever in the election by posting on a social forum so there is no point in getting all worked up and certainly no value in alienating those of us who are critical of Trump.   I mean, after all, here I am debating you (the opposite side).   Instead of you debating a Trump supporter, you have caused a Trump critic to challenge you.   Shooting yourself in the foot, again and again.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
5.1.69  JohnRussell  replied to  TᵢG @5.1.68    2 months ago

The only way that Trump will win is if he is seen as normal on election day. 

Every "objective" comment , in the context of weighing whether or not he is worthy of the office, which gives him good points , is a movement towards normalizing him. 

I understand that the economy is relatively good. It also would have been relatively good if Hillary Clinton were president, or Ted Cruz or Jeb Bush, or Bernie Sanders for that matter. 

You don't see the Never Trumpers among the Republicans giving Trump credit much, and when they do they immediately say that Trump is not acceptable, good economy or no. 

They dont say that on the whole they are critical of Trump (which is what "net critical" means), they say he shouldnt be in office. 

If you want to take my comments to you as an attack, that is your choice.  I dont consider them an attack, I am making observations. 

 
 
 
TᵢG
5.1.70  TᵢG  replied to  JohnRussell @5.1.69    2 months ago
I understand that the economy is relatively good. It also would have been relatively good if Hillary Clinton were president, or Ted Cruz or Jeb Bush, or Bernie Sanders for that matter. 

I agree.  (Although not with Sanders: he would likely change the psychology.)

If you want to take my comments to you as an attack, that is your choice.

I do not consider yours to be a personal attack.   But they are (inexplicably) opposing my comments.   I am critical of Trump and you are criticizing me for not being critical enough.   That is what you did on your first comment to me on NT years ago.   I made a negative comment about Trump and you complained that I was not sufficiently extreme in my position.   That truly stupid approach has continued (by you) and thus you have seen me debate you on this issue instead of being in support.

Criticizing fellow critics for not rising to your level of emotional, over-the-top rhetoric is a truly stupid tactic.    Much smarter to accept Trump critics and spend your time (if you must) debating Trump supporters.

 
 
 
loki12
5.1.71  loki12  replied to  TᵢG @5.1.67    2 months ago

I know some of Badfish's more entertaining articles have trended on google, but that wasn't politics as much as irreverent entertainment, that still pissed some posters off. We have collectively lost our sense of humor, or at least the ability to laugh at ourselves.

 
 
 
bugsy
5.1.72  bugsy  replied to  JohnRussell @5.1.38    2 months ago

So you wouldn't vote for Biden then, correct

 
 
 
JohnRussell
5.1.73  JohnRussell  replied to  TᵢG @5.1.67    2 months ago

We have a member here who seeded fake news  (negative) about Hillary Clinton at least a dozen times during the 2016 election.  We know that all the negative news (some of which were fake news)  stories about Clinton cost her many votes , and may have cost her the election . Sure any one forum is not going to effect more than a handful of votes, if even that, but multiply that by tens of thousands of similar social media sites and it is possible that what people see, in aggregate, does make a difference. 

 
 
 
The People's Fish
5.1.74  seeder  The People's Fish  replied to  JohnRussell @5.1.73    2 months ago

I'm glad you've finally decided to take responsibility for your seeding behavior.

 
 
 
TᵢG
5.1.75  TᵢG  replied to  JohnRussell @5.1.73    2 months ago

I wonder if Trump critics on those other sites alienate (make opponents of) other Trump critics by claiming they are not sufficiently extreme in their criticisms?

 
 
 
JohnRussell
5.1.76  JohnRussell  replied to  The People's Fish @5.1.74    2 months ago

ever the bamboozler, eh? 

 
 
 
Buzz of the Orient
5.1.77  Buzz of the Orient  replied to  Perrie Halpern R.A. @5.1.18    2 months ago

I really have to laugh at people who are afraid of Communists.

OIP.fs2tELdaRy1nA__yhfBQKAHaC4?pid=Api&r

 
 
 
Buzz of the Orient
5.1.78  Buzz of the Orient  replied to  TᵢG @5.1.30    2 months ago
Depends on the specific meaning of 'it'.  

Didn't Bill Clinton argue about the meaning of the word "is"?

 
 
 
TᵢG
5.1.79  TᵢG  replied to  Buzz of the Orient @5.1.78    2 months ago

Yup.   Even the ambiguity in a single word can have a profound effect on meaning.

 
 
 
Buzz of the Orient
5.1.80  Buzz of the Orient  replied to  TᵢG @5.1.48    2 months ago
 "Your language gets rather emotive at times."

And unbelievably repetative. 

 
 
 
bugsy
5.1.81  bugsy  replied to  JohnRussell @5.1.73    2 months ago
We have a member here who seeded fake news  (negative) about Hillary Clinton at least a dozen times during the 2016 election.

While that may be true, you really don't know, it is nothing compared to the hundreds, if not thousands of fake stories, none of which you have ever proven true, about President Trump.

 
 
 
al Jizzerror
5.1.82  al Jizzerror  replied to  The People's Fish @5.1.20    2 months ago
Last time we had a socialist in the white house they had internment camps

Yes that was horrible even though we were attacked by the Japanese.

Butt Trump puts children in camps (if they're brown).

Laura Bush pens scathing column on child separation as part of immigration policy

By Kate Bennett , CNN

(CNN) Former first lady Laura Bush spoke out Sunday night about the separation of families on the US border , writing a harsh criticism of the current zero-tolerance immigration policy being enforced under the Trump administration.

Bush, whose opinion piece ran in The Washington Post, decries the separation of children from parents entering the United States illegally as "cruel" and "immoral."
It's a rare public admonishment of current administration policy from Bush, who has seldom weighed in on politics since her husband left office.
"I live in a border state. I appreciate the need to enforce and protect our international boundaries, but this zero-tolerance policy is cruel. It is immoral. And it breaks my heart," Bush writes.
"Our government should not be in the business of warehousing children in converted box stores or making plans to place them in tent cities in the desert outside of El Paso," she continues. "These images are eerily reminiscent of the Japanese American internment camps of World War II, now considered to have been one of the most shameful episodes in U.S. history."
800
800
 
 
 
Sparty On
5.1.83  Sparty On  replied to  al Jizzerror @5.1.82    2 months ago
Butt Trump puts children in camps

True.   Butt he's just following the example set by the guy who was in office before him ..... who built many of the cages being used by the way.

SOSDD ... just more liberal hypocrisy on parade here or perhaps it's just TDS .... but its prolly copious amounts of both in this case.

 
 
 
al Jizzerror
5.1.84  al Jizzerror  replied to  Sparty On @5.1.83    2 months ago
True.   Butt he's just following the example set by the guy who was in office before him

Are you the spokesman for the †hε pε⊕pレε'š †hε pε⊕pレε'š ƒïšh  ?

800

 
 
 
JohnRussell
5.1.85  JohnRussell  replied to  bugsy @5.1.81    2 months ago
We have a member here who seeded fake news  (negative) about Hillary Clinton at least a dozen times during the 2016 election.
While that may be true, you really don't know, it is nothing compared to the hundreds, if not thousands of fake stories, none of which you have ever proven true, about President Trump.

Actually, I do know. 

The rest of your comment is nonsense. 

 
 
 
The Magic Eight Ball
5.1.86  The Magic Eight Ball  replied to  JohnRussell @5.1.85    2 months ago
is nonsense.

ya mean like the steele dossier kind of nonsense?

 
 
 
Sparty On
5.1.87  Sparty On  replied to  al Jizzerror @5.1.84    2 months ago

Nah, i'm the spokesman for Team Reality.  

You should try and join up some time

 
 
 
al Jizzerror
5.1.88  al Jizzerror  replied to  Sparty On @5.1.87    2 months ago
i'm the spokesman for Team Reality.

Really?

I've seen your team captain so I'm slightly skeptical.

512  

 
 
 
Sparty On
5.1.89  Sparty On  replied to  al Jizzerror @5.1.88    2 months ago

TDS is a terrible thing to waste.   You're doing a great job of not doing so.  

Another good thing is you'll be well practiced up for the next five years .......

 
 
 
JohnRussell
5.1.90  JohnRussell  replied to  Sparty On @5.1.89    2 months ago

There is no such things as TDS,  or do you mean Trump's Dumb Supporters ? 

 
 
 
katrix
5.1.91  katrix  replied to  JohnRussell @5.1.90    2 months ago

It stands for Trump Denial Syndrome - all the Trump supporters who refuse to accept facts, who believe all the lies and conspiracy theories that Trump spouts, just are in complete denial about what a POS he is and how little he cares about the country, the Constitution, and very single person who isn't him.

 
 
 
r.t..b...
5.1.92  r.t..b...  replied to  katrix @5.1.91    2 months ago
how little he cares about the country, the Constitution, and very single person who isn't him.

So easy to see, and yet for so many, so easy to ignore. A cultural phenomenon that will be dissected by sociologists and political scientists for years to come. A cautionary tale at the very least.

 
 
 
al Jizzerror
5.1.93  al Jizzerror  replied to  JohnRussell @5.1.90    2 months ago
There is no such things as TDS

TDS is a White-wing fallacy that they think is useful on sites like this.

800

 
 
 
Tacos!
5.1.94  Tacos!  replied to  JohnRussell @5.1.90    2 months ago
There is no such things as TDS

There actually is, but the psychologists call it Trump Anxiety Disorder .

In other words: He’s not crazy, but the rest of us are getting there fast.
 
 
 
KDMichigan
5.1.95  KDMichigan  replied to  al Jizzerror @5.1.93    2 months ago
TDS is a White-wing fallacy that they think is useful on sites like this.

Is that your new name for the racist Democrats, white-wing?

If you need any more proof of TDS peruse here,https://thenewstalkers.com/trout-giggles/group_discuss/7422/trump-names-whistleblower  there is one with a sever case of it that cry's when his comments get deleted...

256

 
 
 
Sparty On
5.1.96  Sparty On  replied to  JohnRussell @5.1.90    2 months ago
There is no such things as TDS

Lol, classic case of denial.   I feel sorry for all y'all.   Well ..... at least you have Shotgun Joe, Angry Grandpa and little miss can't be wrong Warren to help you stay the course.  

Beauty!

 
 
 
al Jizzerror
5.1.97  al Jizzerror  replied to  KDMichigan @5.1.95    2 months ago
If you need any more proof of TDS peruse here ,https://thenewstalkers.com/trout-giggles/group_discuss/7422/trump-names-whistleblower 

Are you trying to deny that Trump outed the whistleblower?

Is that your new name for the racist Democrats, white-wing?

That's hilarious.  I call the intellectually challenged Trumpsters "White-wing racist idiots".  I realize that touches a sensitive in many Republicans.

Here's a useful treatment:

800

 
 
 
al Jizzerror
5.1.98  al Jizzerror  replied to  KDMichigan @5.1.95    2 months ago
racist Democrats

Nice attempted deflection.

800

800

800

 
 
 
Buzz of the Orient
5.1.99  Buzz of the Orient  replied to  al Jizzerror @5.1.82    2 months ago

I have to save those immigrant camp photos for the next person who criticizes China's Uyghur re-education camps.

 
 
 
KDMichigan
5.1.100  KDMichigan  replied to  al Jizzerror @5.1.97    2 months ago
Are you trying to deny that Trump outed the whistleblower?

It's only the butt hurt proglibs that are claiming that President Trump outed the whistle blower, FFS I knew who it was during the joke of a impeachment hearing.

Here's a useful treatment:

Is this formula that was developed after experimenting on the triggered snowflakes after Hillaryious Hillary's loss?

original

 
 
 
JohnRussell
5.1.101  JohnRussell  replied to  KDMichigan @5.1.95    2 months ago

Do you need us to chip and buy you some new gifs and memes? These three or four you keep playing over and over again were too stupid the first time, let alone the fiftieth. 

 
 
 
The Magic Eight Ball
5.1.102  The Magic Eight Ball  replied to  Buzz of the Orient @5.1.99    2 months ago
I have to save those immigrant camp photos for the next person who criticizes China's Uyghur re-education camps.

so ya like and defend china's re-education camps?   ( very interesting. how long have you lived there again?  long enough huh?  )

just curious, how exactly is chinas "re-education camps" the same thing as the temporary detention of illegals?

please be specific if you have time :)

 
 
 
al Jizzerror
5.1.103  al Jizzerror  replied to  KDMichigan @5.1.100    2 months ago
It's only the butt hurt proglibs that are claiming that President Trump outed the whistle blower

You are defending the indefensible.  This was published before Trump named the whistleblower.  Now the whistle blower needs armed security.

TRUMP'S ALARMING ATTACKS THREATEN THE WHISTLEBLOWER—AND OUR FOUNDING VALUES

ANGUS KING , SENATOR OF MAINE

ON 11/8/19 AT 6:15 AM EST

From the moment news broke that President Donald Trump was accused of misusing his office for political gain, the president and elected officials who support him have sought to discredit the whistleblower as everything from a partisan hack peddling hearsay to a treasonous enemy of the state with an ax to grind.

To be sure, the president has every right to defend himself, but this is a misguided and dangerous approach that betrays his ignorance of America's history, threatens the whistleblower's safety and makes it less likely that future abuses of power by any federal official will be discovered and corrected. These statements cannot be allowed to continue in defiance of historical context or present facts. So, as the very idea of whistleblowing comes under attack, I think we would benefit from revisiting our nation's history of protecting those who speak truth to the highest levels of power—protections that date back to our nation's founding.

That's right. Whistleblower protections are not a recent creation; they were first put into place in 1778, as the ink of the Declaration of Independence was still drying and more than a decade before the Constitution would enshrine a healthy skepticism of concentrated power into our current system of government.

_______________

The most immediate concern must be the safety of the whistleblower. The president has roused his supporters into a furor over the identity of this anonymous official, which creates a serious danger to this person. In fact, press reports indicate that the FBI has already investigated death threats against the whistleblower, even though we do not know their name.

The entire situation raises the question: If this is how America treats whistleblowers, who will come forward next time? A chilling effect that prevents the next official who witnesses misconduct anywhere in the government from stepping forward could linger for generations, inflicting untold damage to our democracy.

Throughout our history, we have defended those patriots who call out corruption so that we may follow the light they shine toward a more perfect union. We believe that sunlight is the best disinfectant and salute those whose conscience guides them toward ethical behavior. If we are to continue to benefit from their courage, we must reassert, here and now, that centuries-old American value that speaking truth to power is not a right; it is a duty.

https://www.newsweek.com/trumps-alarming-attacks-threaten-whistleblower-our-founding-values-opinion-1470522
 
 
 
Texan1211
5.1.104  Texan1211  replied to  JohnRussell @5.1.101    2 months ago
Do you need us to chip and buy you some new gifs and memes? These three or four you keep playing over and over again were too stupid the first time, let alone the fiftieth. 

Kind of funny seeing that after being subjected to hundreds if not thousands of "Trump's not fit" posts over the last few months.

Fiftieth?  THAT would have been a blessing if only it were that few.

 
 
 
al Jizzerror
5.1.105  al Jizzerror  replied to  Texan1211 @5.1.104    2 months ago
Kind of funny seeing that after being subjected to hundreds if not thousands of "Trump's not fit" posts over the last few months.

At least I create NEW memes.

Here one I created this year:

800

 
 
 
Buzz of the Orient
5.1.106  Buzz of the Orient  replied to  The Magic Eight Ball @5.1.102    2 months ago

I never said I liked them, so don't put words in my mouth.  However, it's interesting that there hasn't been a terrorist attack in mainland China for three years, which is as long as the schools have been in operation.  How many terrorist attacks have there been in America in the past 3 years?  The people in China don't panic and run and hide when they hear a motorcycle backfire. 

"just curious, how exactly is chinas "re-education camps" the same thing as the temporary detention of illegals?"

Well, borrowing your language, they both keep people in them "long enough", as did the American internment camps for Japanese-Americans. 

 
 
 
Texan1211
5.1.107  Texan1211  replied to  al Jizzerror @5.1.105    2 months ago

jrSmiley_84_smiley_image.gif

I can think of better things to do with my time.

 
 
 
Buzz of the Orient
5.1.108  Buzz of the Orient  replied to  al Jizzerror @5.1.88    2 months ago

My three monkeys that sit on my desk:

800

See evil, Hear evil, Shout evil.

 
 
 
The Magic Eight Ball
5.1.109  The Magic Eight Ball  replied to  al Jizzerror @5.1.103    2 months ago
 Now the whistle blower needs armed security.

good. traitors should not feel safe walking on our streets.

by next summer lots of folks will feel safer in prison.

I won't shed a single tear for any of them.  

they will reap what they have sown.

 
 
 
al Jizzerror
5.1.110  al Jizzerror  replied to  The Magic Eight Ball @5.1.109    2 months ago
traitors should not feel safe walking on our streets.

Trump is the traitor.

The whistle blower is an American hero.

The whistleblower on the Trump/Ukraine call is (or should be) your hero

EJ Montini , Arizona Republic Published 11:51 a.m. MT Nov. 5, 2019

Opinion: The whistleblower took the information to Inspector General Michael Atkinson. The inspector general decided that the complaint was credible.

The president of the United States has called an intelligence officer performing his (or her) sworn duty “a spy,” when that person – anonymous for now but probably not for long – is a hero.

And yet the president and his minions in Congress have done nothing but attack the whistleblower.

We have laws meant to protect such individuals. There have been some versions of those laws going all the way back to the 1700s.

Whistleblower took the harder route

The whistleblower in this case said that he (or she) learned from officials with firsthand knowledge that there were some potentially criminal aspects of a conversation between Trump and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky, particularly the part where Trump tries to strongarm the Ukrainian president into investigating former Vice President Joe Biden.

The whistleblower did NOT hand over this information to one of my brothers and sisters in the media.

That would have been the easier route.

But it would have meant breaking the rules.

Instead, the whistleblower took the information to Intelligence Community Inspector General Michael Atkinson.

The inspector general decided that the complaint was credible.

Trump calls him (or her) a spy

Rep. Jackie Speier, a member of the House Intelligence Committee investigating the issue, told ABC News, “He (Atkinson) spent two weeks investigating the complaint and found it credible. We want to hear all of the evidence he was able to unearth.”

Why wouldn’t we ALL want such a thing?

Instead, we have a president who says, “This country has to find out who this person (the whistleblower) was, because that person’s a spy, in my opinion.”

By saying such a thing, Trump is putting a target on the back of a patriot.

And while whistleblower laws are meant to protect the identity of those who wish to remain anonymous, it appears the pressure being applied by Trump and Republicans in Congress eventually will force him (or her) to be identified.

The attorney for the whistleblower has offered to answer any questions Congress may have in writing. Not that such a thing is necessary since other witnesses, particularly those with direct knowledge of the president’s conversation with the Ukrainian president, have been interviewed.

Is it a 'death wish' or patriotism?

Trump and his apologists want to attack the whistleblower in an effort to divert attention from the issue of extortion, and are demanding the whistleblower offer testimony in person. Odd, since Trump refused to be interviewed by the special counsel during the Russia investigation and only agreed to written responses to questions.

The whistleblower had to know that coming forward would be a huge risk, but he (or she) did so anyway.

Tom Devine, legal director of the Government Accountability Project, said, “Too often, you have to have a death wish to go through ‘established channels’ in national se­curity.”

It’s not a “death wish.”

It’s patriotism.

https://www.azcentral.com/story/opinion/op-ed/ej-montini/2019/11/05/whistleblower-trump-inspector-general-hero-ukraine/4166291002/

 
 
 
JBB
5.1.111  JBB  replied to  The Magic Eight Ball @5.1.109    2 months ago

We don't imprison our political enemies like Putin... 

 
 
 
MUVA
5.1.112  MUVA  replied to  JBB @5.1.111    2 months ago

Not yet just give some of the democrats some time they will get around to it.

 
 
 
The Magic Eight Ball
5.1.113  The Magic Eight Ball  replied to  JBB @5.1.111    2 months ago
We don't imprison our political enemies like Putin

nope... we don't.

but we do imprison people who spied on a president and those involved in the coverup.

unlike mueller...

durhams criminal investigation into all things 2016, before during and after the election is not coming up empty handed.

 

 

 
 
 
Sparty On
5.1.114  Sparty On  replied to  Buzz of the Orient @5.1.106    2 months ago

A time and a place for everything Buzz but trading "liberty" for "security" is rarely a good option for me and a lot of Americans feel the same way.   I'm glad you appear to be happy with it but as far as freedoms afforded, China is near the bottom of my list.   Because when it comes to liberty offered, that is exactly where it is.   Near the bottom.

And most people in the US don't panic when they hear a backfire.   You really need to stop listening to people here and in the US mass media.   That is if you can get much of US mass media in China.

 
 
 
Buzz of the Orient
5.1.115  Buzz of the Orient  replied to  Sparty On @5.1.114    2 months ago

I don't get all the news media but I do get lots of them, from America, Canada, the UK, Israel, etc..  Was the Times Square motorcycle backfire story false news?  It was on more than one mainstream American source. How about my question about how many terrorist acts and mass shootings were there in the USA during the past 3 years?  Nobody wants to answer that one. 

I have all the liberty I need and want. I do everything I want to do.  Contrary to America's present "China hate-fest" China is NOT a country-wide prison.  

 
 
 
Sparty On
5.1.116  Sparty On  replied to  Buzz of the Orient @5.1.115    2 months ago

My post was not meant to criticize your choices Buzz.   They work for you, i think that's great.   I'm glad you're happy with it.   But one backfire story from Times Square does not make tasty soup.   That is one incident and not typical in most of the US.   Not even in Times Square actually.   People would be freaking out daily there if that were always true.

To each there own but i'll take the liberty offered in the US over the subjunctive style of governance offered by China.   Each clearly has their advantages and disadvantages.   I just prefer ours over yours.   Just like you with China.

 
 
 
igknorantzrulz
5.1.117  igknorantzrulz  replied to  Buzz of the Orient @5.1.115    2 months ago
How about my question about how many terrorist acts and mass shootings were there in the USA during the past 3 years?  Nobody wants to answer that one. 

too many for sure, but most were from idiot homegrown Americans, our own special terrorist organization. it appears Trumpp can take credit for inspiring some of these attacks and shootings.

Though one incident in Times Square certainly doesn't mean we all jump at a backfire.

I'll take all of this bullship over a China style rule.

Where if a basketball coach makes an observation, they close their country to a 'Sport', WTF is that all about ?

Can't even observe Youtube...

but if you are happy, that's fine, it's just not for me, and possibly a few others here, including many i don't agree with. At least we are permitted to openly disagree. I wouldn't recommend too much of that there in China, well, at least from what i've read. You may have a difference of opinion, as you have first hand experience.

I'll take my chances here in the jumpy paranoid US of A 

 
 
 
Buzz of the Orient
5.1.118  Buzz of the Orient  replied to  Sparty On @5.1.116    2 months ago
"But one backfire story from Times Square does not make tasty soup."

You can't deny that it is indicative of the present concerns of more than a handful of people, and It was just an example of that - another would be that I sure as hell wouldn't want to be an Orthodox Jew is Brooklyn these days.  

 
 
 
Sparty On
5.1.119  Sparty On  replied to  Buzz of the Orient @5.1.118    2 months ago

Most of us don’t fear for our lives where we live.   Not even close.     And if we do we have options to move to get away from it.

Yeah, the fear you speak of clearly does exist, more in places like Brooklyn I suppose than in most places in the US though. Orthodox Jews have little more to fear than my Christian ass where I live.    Which isn’t much really.

We both have a better chance of getting hit by a meteorite where I live than getting shot so overacting to a motorcycle backfire would simply be irrational.

Thats the connection many in the US media don’t want you to make.   How many motorcycle backfires DON’T get overreacted to each day.     Those don’t sell nearly as well

 
 
 
Buzz of the Orient
5.1.120  Buzz of the Orient  replied to  Sparty On @5.1.119    2 months ago

Do you own a gun?  If you do, is one of the reasons for having it to protect your home or yourself and/or your family?

I didn't respond to a couple of things you said.

Basketball is a major sport here - there are leagues, courts in almost constant use in every middle and high school and universities, and games are broadcast on all TV stations that show news, and stations dedicated to sports.

https://www.chinadaily.com.cn/a/201912/23/WS5e0019cda310cf3e3557fe7c.html

YouTube might be more comprehensive than the similar web sites that are here, like Tudou, bilibili, Yukou, etc. but they do give me free access to a lot of what YouTube shows. 

The life I live here is not really different than the life I lived and would live today in Canada, save that it is more of an adventure and there is quite a lot more historical things to see - after all, 5000 years of civilization has a lot to offer.

I do admit that Canada's universal free health care and free prescribed medications for senior citizens is something I miss, but that's something you don't have either.

Most important, I'm at least as happy and comfortable in my life here as you are in yours. I have no fear and I don't kowtow to anyone.  

 
 
 
Sparty On
5.1.121  Sparty On  replied to  Buzz of the Orient @5.1.120    2 months ago

Buzz, in the US we have liberties you can only dream of in China.    No debate about it.    And I’ll say hi to all the Canadians here in the US getting surgeries because the wait is too long in that fantastic Canadian health care system

Gotta fly for now.    Headed to the range today to shoot a little.

 
 
 
Buzz of the Orient
5.1.122  Buzz of the Orient  replied to  Sparty On @5.1.121    2 months ago

Yeah, I'm sure there are a lot of liberties in the USA I can only dream of, and some of them in my opinion are nightmares.  There are a lot of fish in the sea as well, but I can't eat them all, however, I eat as many as I want, and as I've said I enjoy all the liberties I need and want. 

I never had a problem with the Canadian health care system as long as I was in Canada, but that was more than 13 years ago and maybe it's overtaxed these days.  Trudeau is more concerned about admitting as many potential terrorists into Canada as the Democrats want to admit as many illegal immigrants as they can for the same reason.  Maybe he should focus his attention on the Health Care system instead. 

Enjoy your shooting range.  I enjoyed shooting at bullseye targets when I was the marksman champion of my school as well, but I never needed or wanted to own a gun, and other than a water pistol and cap gun when I was a kid, I never did. 

 
 
 
Split Personality
5.1.123  Split Personality  replied to  Buzz of the Orient @5.1.122    yesterday

 
 
 
Goodtime Charlie
5.1.124  Goodtime Charlie  replied to  Perrie Halpern R.A. @5.1    yesterday
There is nothing close to indicate that Bernie is going to win, or that we are going to go socialist. 

Here we are two months later, Biden is sinking faster than the Titanic, Warren is scrambling looking for the last lifeboat.

Sadly at this point, it looks like the Fish is right. The guy that put up a Soviet flag in his office, named the Burlington, Vt softball team the “The People’s Republic of Burlington” and the Town's minor league baseball team the “Vermont Reds." is now the Democratic front runner.

https://thenypost.files.wordpress.com/2016/01/17ps-sanders-web1.jpg?quality=90&strip=all&w=640 640w, https://thenypost.files.wordpress.com/2016/01/17ps-sanders-web1.jpg?quality=90&strip=all&w=1280 1280w, https://thenypost.files.wordpress.com/2016/01/17ps-sanders-web1.jpg?quality=90&strip=all&w=384 384w, https://thenypost.files.wordpress.com/2016/01/17ps-sanders-web1.jpg?quality=90&strip=all&w=768 768w" width="384" height="450" >

 
 
 
Perrie Halpern R.A.
5.1.125  Perrie Halpern R.A.  replied to  Goodtime Charlie @5.1.124    yesterday

For now. I am waiting till tonight. This will be the first debate that will keep me interested. Let's see where things go. 

 
 
 
KDMichigan
5.1.126  KDMichigan  replied to  Perrie Halpern R.A. @5.1.125    yesterday

How does a seed that has been locked for two months suddenly get opened when the seeder hasn't been here for two months?

 
 
 
Donald J. Trump fan 1
5.1.127  Donald J. Trump fan 1  replied to  KDMichigan @5.1.126    yesterday

I hope it’s because he re opened it and is back.  👍🤔🐠

 
 
 
Donald J. Trump fan 1
5.1.128  Donald J. Trump fan 1  replied to  Perrie Halpern R.A. @5.1.125    yesterday

I’m not.  I’ll be watching the Trump rally in Phoenix instead tonight.  Either on Fox News or C-SPAN.  

 
 
 
Goodtime Charlie
5.1.129  Goodtime Charlie  replied to  Donald J. Trump fan 1 @5.1.128    23 hours ago
I’m not.  I’ll be watching the Trump rally in Phoenix instead tonight.

Trump rallies are all the same with him spouting schoolboy insults and self back-patting. Why watch reruns don't you get tired of watching the same show every week?

 
 
 
Goodtime Charlie
5.1.130  Goodtime Charlie  replied to  Perrie Halpern R.A. @5.1.125    23 hours ago
For now. I am waiting till tonight. This will be the first debate that will keep me interested. Let's see where things go.
I think all the candidates will be slamming Bloomberg, that will be the bulk of tonights debate. There will be more picking on Bloomberg than actual debating.
 
 
 
Goodtime Charlie
5.1.131  Goodtime Charlie  replied to  Goodtime Charlie @5.1.130    22 hours ago

Warren the witch starts out slamming Bloomberg.

 
 
 
Perrie Halpern R.A.
5.1.132  Perrie Halpern R.A.  replied to  Goodtime Charlie @5.1.131    22 hours ago

Gotta agree with you. I am running a live article right now. Post your comments there, too

 
 
 
al Jizzerror
7  al Jizzerror    2 months ago

[deleted]

 
 
 
Sparty On
7.1  Sparty On  replied to  al Jizzerror @7    2 months ago

removed for context

 
 
 
Split Personality
8  Split Personality    2 months ago

Locked for all of the off topic, personal nonsense

 
 
 
Donald J. Trump fan 1
8.1  Donald J. Trump fan 1  replied to  Split Personality @8    yesterday

So you unlocked it?

 
 
 
KDMichigan
8.1.1  KDMichigan  replied to  Donald J. Trump fan 1 @8.1    yesterday

Instead of giving his buddy aljizzor a ticket 2 months ago he locked the seed. Since the seeder isn't here to monitor his seed I don't see how it can be unlocked. But i'm sure you know by now that certain people do as they please on NT. 

 
 
 
Perrie Halpern R.A.
8.1.2  Perrie Halpern R.A.  replied to  KDMichigan @8.1.1    yesterday

That is ridiculous. Neither BF or Al have been here in 2 months. I'll make you happy and give Al his ticket. 

 
 
 
KDMichigan
8.1.3  KDMichigan  replied to  Perrie Halpern R.A. @8.1.2    yesterday

Totally missed the point. 

SP locked the seed two months ago. He actually just erased his comment at 8 maybe a hour ago. I couldn't care about aljizzor, don't be petty Perrie

 
 
 
KDMichigan
8.1.4  KDMichigan  replied to  Perrie Halpern R.A. @8.1.2    yesterday
 
 
 
Perrie Halpern R.A.
8.1.5  Perrie Halpern R.A.  replied to  KDMichigan @8.1.3    yesterday

I'm not missing the point. There is no reason for any of this to have happened. Why would this article just appear from nowhere? I'll check the log to see if I can find the missing comment and any glitches. 

 
 
 
KDMichigan
8.1.6  KDMichigan  replied to  Perrie Halpern R.A. @8.1.5    yesterday

Well SP locked it two months ago a day after fish left and SP made the 1st comment today, I'm sure you can figure it out.

 
 
 
Perrie Halpern R.A.
8.1.7  Perrie Halpern R.A.  replied to  KDMichigan @8.1.6    23 hours ago

I checked the logs. First of all, an event from two months ago wouldn't be in there, so I have no idea who locked the article or even if it was locked. I looked through today's logs, and there is nothing showing that anyone unlocked this article. Third, the system does eat comments (people think that the comment has taken and it didn't) from time to time. The fact that there is nothing there (you can't delete the word delete), kind of tells me this was some sort of system error.

 
 
 
KDMichigan
8.1.8  KDMichigan  replied to  Perrie Halpern R.A. @8.1.7    23 hours ago
so I have no idea who locked the article or even if it was locked.

So you are saying I am a liar that SP said at 8 he was locking the article and his comment was still there after the seed was reopened. Gotcha.

 
 
 
Perrie Halpern R.A.
8.1.9  Perrie Halpern R.A.  replied to  KDMichigan @8.1.8    23 hours ago

I'm not saying anything of the sort. All I am saying is what I am seeing and I can't go on memories of the event. 

 
 
 
Jeremy Retired in NC
11  Jeremy Retired in NC    yesterday

While Sanders may get the nomination, I have to question whether he would survive a term as President.  Look at how it aged Bush, Clinton and Obama.  

He already looks (and sometimes acts) like the disheveled old geezer we all had in our neighborhoods rambling incoherently.

 
 
 
Perrie Halpern R.A.
11.1  Perrie Halpern R.A.  replied to  Jeremy Retired in NC @11    yesterday

I have to agree with you there. He is a bit frazzled now, but he is all spit and vinegar, so who knows? 

 
 
Loading...
Loading...

Who is online


Sister Mary Agnes Ample Bottom
Gordy327
Raven Wing
JohnRussell
zuksam
CB
Freefaller
Steve Ott
squiggy


40 visitors