Live Debate Discussion

  

Category:  News & Politics

By:  perrie-halpern  •  7 months ago  •  356 comments

Live Debate Discussion

This is for live discussion of the Democratic Debate. All discussion is to be civil and on topic. 


Tags

jrDiscussion - desc
smarty_function_ntUser_is_admin: user_id parameter required
[]
 
Perrie Halpern R.A.
1  author  Perrie Halpern R.A.    7 months ago

Remember civil discussion only. 

 
 
 
Perrie Halpern R.A.
1.1  author  Perrie Halpern R.A.  replied to  Perrie Halpern R.A. @1    7 months ago

Or not... hello?

 
 
 
JohnRussell
1.1.1  JohnRussell  replied to  Perrie Halpern R.A. @1.1    7 months ago

All I am going to say is that Bloomberg did not look ready for this. 

He has to do MUCH better.  If he can. 

The truth is ANY of these people can take Trump apart. Any of them. and they are proving that tonight. 

 
 
 
Perrie Halpern R.A.
1.1.2  author  Perrie Halpern R.A.  replied to  JohnRussell @1.1.1    7 months ago

Well, they are all very toothy for sure.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
1.1.3  JohnRussell  replied to  Perrie Halpern R.A. @1.1.2    7 months ago

I think they have all been sharp. Maybe your mayor brought out the best in them. 

He needs to help himself though. He is losing. 

 
 
 
MAGA
1.1.4  MAGA  replied to  Perrie Halpern R.A. @1.1    7 months ago

Many of us are watching the Trump rally in Phoenix on FNC instead.  

 
 
 
Perrie Halpern R.A.
1.1.5  author  Perrie Halpern R.A.  replied to  MAGA @1.1.4    7 months ago

Please stay on topic, which is the DNC debate.

 
 
 
CB
1.1.6  CB   replied to  JohnRussell @1.1.1    7 months ago

Bloomberg is the only one there who has ever started a business. And he got them all with that one. But then, Bernie is going after those rich billionaires. . .

Uh-oh now Bloomberg and Bernie finally knocked sparks together!

 
 
 
Perrie Halpern R.A.
1.1.7  author  Perrie Halpern R.A.  replied to  JohnRussell @1.1.3    7 months ago

He just did a fine job with Redling. 

 
 
 
MAGA
1.1.8  MAGA  replied to  Perrie Halpern R.A. @1.1.5    7 months ago

[Deleted.  Further derailing will result in points toward suspension.]

 
 
 
user image
1.1.10    replied to  MAGA @1.1.4    7 months ago

 
 
 
sixpick
1.1.12  sixpick  replied to  JohnRussell @1.1.1    7 months ago
The truth is ANY of these people can take Trump apart. Any of them. and they are proving that tonight. 

Which makes me wonder why so much concern about Bloomberg?  If you already have a crew and any one of them can take Trump apart, Bloomberg should be no more important than Hank Johnson running in his place.

The impression I get from this debate is the difference between Republican voters and Democrat voters is the obvious opinion of the candidates.  The Democrat candidates seem to think their voters want to hear what they can get out of the deal, I mean how many goodies and free stuff. 

Now that doesn't include that group of Democrat voters who work hard, have accomplishments behind them and still think the Democrat Party represents them.  They vote because they want to believe these people really care about them and others.  A problem I think they're oblivious to is they don't recognize the danger the current Democrat Party and their growing voter base is to this country, which includes them.

And the Republican voters like to hear what opportunities will become available if their candidate gets elected.  There aren't many Republicans voters who are just deadbeats, waiting in line for their piece of bread. 

And Republicans aren't so obsessed with race.  The Democrat Candidates are sickening with all the racial pandering all the time.  If you took conversations about race, gender and sexual preference out of their conversations, I'm not sure they would have anything to say.  Oh, I forgot Climate change.

Bloomberg is a capitalist and believes he can move mountains with his money.  And to be honest, I believe he can, but only if he has the support of the media and I don't think he has their support. 

Maybe a lot of people aren't becoming aware how it is becoming unacceptable to criticize Bernie Sanders.  They will before it is over.  The seeds of Socialism have been planted in our elementary schools, high schools and colleges for so long the left has moved much further left, so the center is where the left was when socialism wasn't cool.  Problem is, too many are too smart to see this.

 
 
 
CB
1.1.13  CB   replied to  sixpick @1.1.12    7 months ago
And Republicans aren't so obsessed with race.  The Democrat Candidates are sickening with all the racial pandering all the time.  If you took conversations about race, gender and sexual preference out of their conversations,

Race pandering? Just how massively one race is the republican and conservative party? How can it pander to race? Has it even crossed your consciousness that the reason more diverse people are not in the republican party is attempts to considers itself 'post-racial,' when if you look at the Trump cabinet the diversity is weak at best? Trump is surrounding himself with "yes men and women" —apparently certain elements in society are not so pliable. Some White men and women and other race/ethnic groups, included in the latter.

As for gender and sexual preference let's not take it out of the conversation. Because culture wars are still out there. At this instance, conservatives are feeling pretty comfortable that they have "those others" right where they think they ought to be, but are ever vigilant to strike! The Democratic Party remains a logical alternative to conservative takeover and republican bull-shit.

We democrats will not drop our guard, until you drop yours!

Let me piggyback on that remark: Democrats it is time to think about Winning! "Revolutions" be damned if they can't happen cause you lost the Electoral College. Focus on what comes first - Victory!

 
 
 
Ed-NavDoc
1.2  Ed-NavDoc  replied to  Perrie Halpern R.A. @1    7 months ago

I watched said debate and it seemed like most of the folks involved spent more time ripping into each other and Bloomberg than they did talking about what needs to be done fixing the country. I was not really impressed with any of them.

 
 
 
sandy-2021492
2  sandy-2021492    7 months ago

Buttigieg got under Bernie's skin.

 
 
 
Perrie Halpern R.A.
2.1  author  Perrie Halpern R.A.  replied to  sandy-2021492 @2    7 months ago

Bernie took a cheap shot at Buttigieg and he gave back in kind. 

 
 
 
sandy-2021492
2.1.1  sandy-2021492  replied to  Perrie Halpern R.A. @2.1    7 months ago

Agreed.

The moderators seem to be allowing Bernie and Buttigieg to do all the talking.  Klobuchar opened her mouth and was shushed.

 
 
 
Perrie Halpern R.A.
2.1.2  author  Perrie Halpern R.A.  replied to  sandy-2021492 @2.1.1    7 months ago

So true. She's really a nice lady and I think the moderators abuse that.

Whoa.. Warren again. She's in a freakishly bad mood

 
 
 
sandy-2021492
2.1.3  sandy-2021492  replied to  Perrie Halpern R.A. @2.1.2    7 months ago

Did Warren take something before walking on stage?

 
 
 
Kathleen
2.1.4  Kathleen  replied to  sandy-2021492 @2.1.1    7 months ago

They should be more fair with the time limits. 

 
 
 
sandy-2021492
2.1.5  sandy-2021492  replied to  Kathleen @2.1.4    7 months ago

Yes, and not go for so long without addressing a question to a candidate.  The attitude seems to be "wait your turn.  We'll get to you if we have time.  If not, well, life's not fair."

 
 
 
sandy-2021492
2.1.6  sandy-2021492  replied to  sandy-2021492 @2.1.5    7 months ago

Chuck Todd just shushed her again.  I knew there was a reason I didn't like him!

 
 
 
sandy-2021492
2.1.7  sandy-2021492  replied to  sandy-2021492 @2.1.6    7 months ago

But he lets Bernie ramble on and on.

 
 
 
Perrie Halpern R.A.
2.1.8  author  Perrie Halpern R.A.  replied to  sandy-2021492 @2.1.3    7 months ago

She seems to be acting that way.

 
 
 
Perrie Halpern R.A.
2.1.9  author  Perrie Halpern R.A.  replied to  Kathleen @2.1.4    7 months ago
They should be more fair with the time limits. 

agreed

 
 
 
Perrie Halpern R.A.
2.1.10  author  Perrie Halpern R.A.  replied to  sandy-2021492 @2.1.7    7 months ago
But he lets Bernie ramble on and on.

again, really annoying

 
 
 
KDMichigan
2.1.11  KDMichigan  replied to  Kathleen @2.1.4    7 months ago
They should be more fair with the time limits.

They finally gave Bloomberg some speaking time, they better, he paid a lot of money to get on that stage. 

Warren is the most annoying one up there. 

Go Bernie Go Bernie Go Go Go Go  He cracks me up.

256

 
 
 
Kathleen
2.1.12  Kathleen  replied to  KDMichigan @2.1.11    7 months ago

She is... I can’t wait for her to drop out. 

 
 
 
Kathleen
2.1.13  Kathleen  replied to  KDMichigan @2.1.11    7 months ago

I am not voting for him... lol

 
 
 
Perrie Halpern R.A.
2.1.14  author  Perrie Halpern R.A.  replied to  KDMichigan @2.1.11    7 months ago

Are you planning on voting for him?

 
 
 
JohnRussell
2.1.15  JohnRussell  replied to  Perrie Halpern R.A. @2.1.2    7 months ago

Perrie, Elizabeth Warren is making Bloomberg look like a little boy. 

Maybe there is life outside of New York City. 

 
 
 
Perrie Halpern R.A.
2.1.16  author  Perrie Halpern R.A.  replied to  JohnRussell @2.1.15    7 months ago

Warren has been up his ass since the bell rang. In fact, I think of all the people up there tonight, she is the most unlikeable. 

 
 
 
JohnRussell
2.1.17  JohnRussell  replied to  Perrie Halpern R.A. @2.1.16    7 months ago

She is taking out her frustrations. I think she has been fine. 

 
 
 
Kathleen
2.1.18  Kathleen  replied to  JohnRussell @2.1.15    7 months ago

No, I think she looks strident.

 
 
 
CB
2.1.19  CB   replied to  JohnRussell @2.1.15    7 months ago

John, you are a 'bad' 'bad' man. (Smile.)

 
 
 
MAGA
2.1.20  MAGA  replied to  Perrie Halpern R.A. @2.1.10    7 months ago

I love the way she ripped into Bloomberg comparing him unfavorably to Trump regarding women.  That was priceless 

 
 
 
KDMichigan
2.1.21  KDMichigan  replied to  Perrie Halpern R.A. @2.1.14    7 months ago

I voted for him before....

 
 
 
Perrie Halpern R.A.
2.1.22  author  Perrie Halpern R.A.  replied to  JohnRussell @2.1.17    7 months ago

I think she looks nasty and unhinged. 

 
 
 
Perrie Halpern R.A.
2.1.23  author  Perrie Halpern R.A.  replied to  KDMichigan @2.1.21    7 months ago

Would you vote for him now?

 
 
 
Kathleen
2.1.24  Kathleen  replied to  KDMichigan @2.1.21    7 months ago

Bernie, says what he means and means what he says. I don’t dislike him, but his ideas are too scary for me.

 
 
 
CB
2.1.25  CB   replied to  Perrie Halpern R.A. @2.1.16    7 months ago

Er, Perrie? Is that you? My word! Steady on!

 
 
 
Perrie Halpern R.A.
2.1.26  author  Perrie Halpern R.A.  replied to  CB @2.1.25    7 months ago

Trying...

Running this and the vigor on stage is making this debate not a snorefest. 

 
 
 
CB
2.1.27  CB   replied to  Perrie Halpern R.A. @2.1.26    7 months ago
original

Yee-haw! Almost done!

 
 
 
KDMichigan
2.1.28  KDMichigan  replied to  Perrie Halpern R.A. @2.1.23    7 months ago
Would you vote for him now?

Yes for the Michigan primaries, 

 
 
 
Perrie Halpern R.A.
2.1.29  author  Perrie Halpern R.A.  replied to  KDMichigan @2.1.28    7 months ago

But for the big seat?

 
 
 
Sister Mary Agnes Ample Bottom
2.1.30  Sister Mary Agnes Ample Bottom  replied to  KDMichigan @2.1.28    7 months ago
Yes for the Michigan primaries,

I think my hallucinogens just kicked in.  

 
 
 
sixpick
2.1.31  sixpick  replied to  Perrie Halpern R.A. @2.1.2    7 months ago

Warren always looks spastic, like every other frame has been removed from the camera's output.

 
 
 
sixpick
2.1.32  sixpick  replied to  sandy-2021492 @2.1.3    7 months ago
Did Warren take something before walking on stage?

Sandy, you see what I mean.  Warren just makes me feel jittery.

 
 
 
MUVA
2.1.33  MUVA  replied to  sixpick @2.1.31    7 months ago

That is funny a perfect way to describe her she reminds me on Kate Hepburn .

 
 
 
Ed-NavDoc
2.1.34  Ed-NavDoc  replied to  Perrie Halpern R.A. @2.1.2    7 months ago

Isn't Warren always?

 
 
 
bccrane
2.1.35  bccrane  replied to  Perrie Halpern R.A. @2.1.29    7 months ago

No not for the big seat, duh.  Michigan is an open primary,you go in and request which party ballot you want.  Trump is a guaranteed win for the republican side, so to do my duty I will vote the democrat ballot and vote for the easiest to beat, Bernie.  (Dirty little secret, how did Trump win the republican nomination is 2016, by democrats voting the republican ballot in the open primaries for the easiest one for Hillary to beat).

Went to the bank yesterday and a man at the counter was wearing a Trump 2020 hat, another older gent came in and the first said "I love your hat" and the older gent who was wearing the same hat said "Likewise", so the first said "I know who you are voting for" and the old gent said "Bernie" the man looked flabbergasted, "Why?", I looked at the old gent and smiled and turned to the other man and said "think about it" and the man lit up and said "Oh, ok".  So it looks like the wave has started and it maybe inevitable that Bernie will be the democrat nominee.

If you want proof Bernie is easy to beat, look at comment 32.1 that should scare everyone here. 

 
 
 
user image
2.1.36    replied to  sandy-2021492 @2.1.1    7 months ago

Ughh. Typical men. NBC really needs to be less misogynistic with their moderating. That's why I prefer Fox as they are fair and balanced.

 
 
 
Tessylo
2.1.37  Tessylo  replied to  @2.1.36    7 months ago
'That's why I prefer Fox as they are fair and balanced.'

jrSmiley_86_smiley_image.gif

 
 
 
MAGA
2.1.38  MAGA  replied to  Perrie Halpern R.A. @2.1.16    7 months ago

I loved watching Warrens comments last night.  She did two good things.  1. She absolutely destroyed Mike Bloomberg demolished him and that opening salvo about women and talking about Bloomberg, not Trump was priceless.  2.She kept herself alive so she’ll keep some votes and delegates away from Sanders.  That increases the odds of s convention going past the first ballot without a majority. 

 
 
 
MAGA
2.1.39  MAGA  replied to  sandy-2021492 @2.1.3    7 months ago

I didn’t watch the debate because I watched the counter programming by the opposition party but I did see highlights from Fox and I completely enjoyed what Warren had to say.  She was making up for past poor performances and sinking Polk numbers last night.  She seemed to have brought her A game last night.  

 
 
 
Ed-NavDoc
2.1.40  Ed-NavDoc  replied to  Perrie Halpern R.A. @2.1.22    7 months ago

Personally, I think she is nasty and unhinged...

 
 
 
MrFrost
2.1.41  MrFrost  replied to  Perrie Halpern R.A. @2.1.29    7 months ago

But for the big seat?

Trump thinks his best chance at reelection is if he faces off against Bernie, that's why many on the right will vote for Bernie in the primaries. That's what it boils down to. Same thing on Twitter, lots and lots of bots pushing for Bernie. Pretty easy to spot, but many don't know how to spot them. 

 
 
 
CB
2.1.42  CB   replied to  MrFrost @2.1.41    7 months ago

I'm not on Twitter. But that site has/is getting a sickening reputation, in my opinion. Not the least of which, Trump is there will his shenanigans!

 
 
 
Kathleen
4  Kathleen    7 months ago

Warren could not wait to pounce on Bloomberg. Wow...

 
 
 
Perrie Halpern R.A.
4.1  author  Perrie Halpern R.A.  replied to  Kathleen @4    7 months ago

Yeah, that was really nasty. Kind of shocking. I thought it would be a bit more diplomatic between them.

 
 
 
Kathleen
4.1.1  Kathleen  replied to  Perrie Halpern R.A. @4.1    7 months ago

My husband and I kept saying ‘put your damn hand down!’

 
 
 
Perrie Halpern R.A.
4.1.2  author  Perrie Halpern R.A.  replied to  Kathleen @4.1.1    7 months ago

It brought the teacher out in me, LOL!

 
 
 
Kathleen
4.1.3  Kathleen  replied to  Perrie Halpern R.A. @4.1.2    7 months ago

Ha!

 
 
 
MAGA
4.2  MAGA  replied to  Kathleen @4    7 months ago

That’s for sure.  Farmer Mike received her whipping hard on his backside.  She’s a woman clearly offended by his misogyny 

 
 
 
Raven Wing
5  Raven Wing    7 months ago

I have no worries about Bloomberg being able to hold his own in the debates, and do so with more class that most of the others. 

The man is very literate and worldly, and is more interested in discussing the issues that are important that slinging mud and false accusations at others. He does not have to rely on donors for his campaign dollars, so he does not have anyone to kow tow to. 

For those who sling cheezy innuendos chicken dung at others thinking it makes their rival look bad, they are too stupid to see that they are the only ones who are looking bad. 

As for what Warren says.....most people will take it with a grain of sand....as that is all she has going for her. 

Again....JMOO

 
 
 
Perrie Halpern R.A.
5.1  author  Perrie Halpern R.A.  replied to  Raven Wing @5    7 months ago

I agree with you Raven... and all of this is just opinion on what we are seeing. No worries.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
5.1.1  JohnRussell  replied to  Perrie Halpern R.A. @5.1    7 months ago

Bloomberg needs to do much better. 

Maybe the eventual candidate can get Bloomberg to donate anti-Trump videos and commercials, he has been good at that so far. 

 
 
 
Perrie Halpern R.A.
5.1.2  author  Perrie Halpern R.A.  replied to  JohnRussell @5.1.1    7 months ago

The moderators are not giving him time either.. that isn't helping.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
5.1.3  JohnRussell  replied to  Perrie Halpern R.A. @5.1.2    7 months ago

This debate is a disaster for Bloomberg. He neither knows how to talk like or think like a Democrat. 

 
 
 
Perrie Halpern R.A.
5.1.4  author  Perrie Halpern R.A.  replied to  JohnRussell @5.1.3    7 months ago
He neither knows how to talk like or think like a Democrat. 

I totally disagree.... 

 
 
 
CB
5.1.5  CB   replied to  Perrie Halpern R.A. @5.1.4    7 months ago

I like Bloomberg tonight! And I love that at this moment he has his hand UP @10:41 EST!

 
 
 
JohnRussell
5.1.6  JohnRussell  replied to  Perrie Halpern R.A. @5.1.4    7 months ago

Well, since I am a Democrat and you are not, I will take my understanding of Democrats over yours. 

You like Bloomberg, because he is from new York, and because he is an independent.  Unfortunately he is a fish out of water up there and has been run over by people who fight for their beliefs. 

If you looked at all these people and picked out , just from this debate, who could best stand up to trump, Bloomberg would be at the bottom. 

He'll get another chance, and maybe he will do better, but this was not encouraging at all. 

 
 
 
Kathleen
5.2  Kathleen  replied to  Raven Wing @5    7 months ago

I think she is desperate and coming on too strong. She is failing with her campaign.

Bloomberg is sticking to the issues and I like that he does not join with the slap fight like the others. He is showing class.

 
 
 
Perrie Halpern R.A.
5.2.1  author  Perrie Halpern R.A.  replied to  Kathleen @5.2    7 months ago
He is showing class.

I agree.

 
 
 
Raven Wing
5.2.2  Raven Wing  replied to  Kathleen @5.2    7 months ago
I think she is desperate and coming on too strong. She is failing with her campaign.

I agree. She is showing little or no class in her attacks, and all she is doing is trying to make him look bad, not trying to prove why she is better. And in my opinion, she isn't better.

Her desperation is sorely showing, and instead of meeting the important issues head on and showing why she is the better candidate, she is just acting like someone who is sinking fast and looking for a safety ring. Her behavior is truly 4 class for a Presidential candidate.

 
 
 
TᵢG
5.2.3  TᵢG  replied to  Raven Wing @5.2.2    7 months ago

Her attack on Bloomberg's taxes was very revealing.   Bloomberg explained the complexity and stated that he expects the taxes to be done in a few weeks and that he has a history of releasing his tax records and that his philanthropic record is already available.   She comes back with demanding he pay his people overtime to get his taxes done sooner.   Really?   You [Warren] are now complaining that a few weeks is too long??   She was attacking just to be nasty.

 
 
 
Raven Wing
5.2.4  Raven Wing  replied to  TᵢG @5.2.3    7 months ago
She was attacking just to be nasty.

Exactly. It appears that is all she was there for. As if that would win her any Blue Ribbons. It was clear that nothing he said would in any way please her. She was simply there to play attack dog and that's it.

When her boat sinks, as it surely will, she will have no one but herself to blame.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
5.2.5  JohnRussell  replied to  TᵢG @5.2.3    7 months ago

All of you people are missing the boat.  I looked at the "usual suspect" type people on twitter, the Democratic influencers, and they are way on board with the idea that Warren won this debate. 

Bloomberg is not a Democrat. He needs to make democrats think he is a Democrat, and he didnt come close to doing that to night. 

The only thing positive to come out of this for Bloomberg is that comparatively speaking not too many people watched this debate. His money may still rule the day. 

As far as convincing hard core Democrats that he is with them, this was a disaster for Bloomberg. Elizabeth Warren won this debate. 

 
 
 
Perrie Halpern R.A.
5.2.6  author  Perrie Halpern R.A.  replied to  JohnRussell @5.2.5    7 months ago

Not in my books. She was the worst of the night and I would vote for almost anyone else over her after this performance. 

 
 
 
JohnRussell
5.2.7  JohnRussell  replied to  Perrie Halpern R.A. @5.2.6    7 months ago

Well, I know you despise Trump, but you are not a Democrat and I have seen you sometimes say you are not a liberal. So you disapproving of warren is not a shock. This is a Democratic primary. 

She beat up on your guy, and I think most of what she said was factual.  He needed better answers. 

I want Trump the hell out of there. I actually wanted Bloomberg to come out there and be strong and act like a Democrat.  Instead he looked bored and was borderline condescending. That is not me saying that, that is what the media analysts have been saying. 

 
 
 
Raven Wing
5.2.8  Raven Wing  replied to  Perrie Halpern R.A. @5.2.6    7 months ago
She was the worst of the night a

She showed a side of her that seems to show her true self. Something she seemed to cover up in her prior debates. She showed she is really scared of Bloomberg. As she should be.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
5.2.9  JohnRussell  replied to  Perrie Halpern R.A. @5.2.6    7 months ago
She was the worst of the night and I would vote for almost anyone else over her after this performance. 

As long as its not Trump. jrSmiley_7_smiley_image.png

 
 
 
Kathleen
5.2.11  Kathleen  replied to  JohnRussell @5.2.5    7 months ago

Maybe for the people that hate Bloomberg and love Warren, but I will tell you that she came off as annoying, desperate and whinny. Her ‘stories’ were tiresome as well.  She is no hero.

 
 
 
TᵢG
5.2.12  TᵢG  replied to  Kathleen @5.2.11    7 months ago

She is likely desperate at this point and we are seeing her do whatever she thinks is required to get back into the race.   Her pandering was bad enough for me, but her ugly petty attacks (not issue-based) sealed the deal for me.

 
 
 
Kathleen
5.2.13  Kathleen  replied to  TᵢG @5.2.12    7 months ago

I agree...

 
 
 
sandy-2021492
5.3  sandy-2021492  replied to  Raven Wing @5    7 months ago

The moderators are abusing his politeness, just like they're doing to Klobuchar.  They keep cutting him off.

 
 
 
Perrie Halpern R.A.
5.3.1  author  Perrie Halpern R.A.  replied to  sandy-2021492 @5.3    7 months ago

I have noticed the same thing. 

 
 
 
Raven Wing
5.3.2  Raven Wing  replied to  sandy-2021492 @5.3    7 months ago
The moderators are abusing his politeness, just like they're doing to Klobuchar.

I agree, and it is totally unfair. However, and it's just my opinion, but, I don't think that Bloomberg nor Klobuchar are really that worried about their being cheated on air time during the debate. They show more as individuals in their own rights outside of the debate war. And the way the others were ganging up on the two shows that they really fear them, their own behavior makes them look much worse than anything they can throw at Bloomberg or Klobuchar.  Neither one needs a debate circus to try and show what they're made of. At least not in my book.

 
 
 
Perrie Halpern R.A.
6  author  Perrie Halpern R.A.    7 months ago

Biden finally is feisty tonight. 

 
 
 
TᵢG
6.1  TᵢG  replied to  Perrie Halpern R.A. @6    7 months ago

This is almost do or die for Biden.

 
 
 
Perrie Halpern R.A.
6.1.1  author  Perrie Halpern R.A.  replied to  TᵢG @6.1    7 months ago

True.

 
 
 
MAGA
6.1.2  MAGA  replied to  Perrie Halpern R.A. @6.1.1    7 months ago

[Deleted]

 
 
 
Kathleen
7  Kathleen    7 months ago

Hey.... it’s just us girls on here... lol

 
 
 
Ender
7.1  Ender  replied to  Kathleen @7    7 months ago

I was late. Had to watch Survivor.  

I am actually suffering through this because there is nothing else on.  Haha

 
 
 
CB
7.1.1  CB   replied to  Ender @7.1    7 months ago

I am having a 'ball,' Ender!  (Smile.) And I got here with OIP.ZsVNcJ1EqVHls0Anj0XG4QHaFp?w=282&h=204&c=7&o=5&pid=1.7 on!

 
 
 
MAGA
7.1.2  MAGA  replied to  Ender @7.1    7 months ago

[Deleted]

[No further off topic comments, please.]

 
 
 
Kavika
8  Kavika     7 months ago

Bloomberg should start showing some spunk. Sitting back and allowing others to dominate the conversation isn't doing him any good. He has been in politics long enough to know that.

 
 
 
sandy-2021492
8.1  sandy-2021492  replied to  Kavika @8    7 months ago

Agreed.  Bernie has shown himself perfectly willing to shout everybody down.  They're going to have to fight fire with fire.

 
 
 
Perrie Halpern R.A.
8.1.1  author  Perrie Halpern R.A.  replied to  sandy-2021492 @8.1    7 months ago

I agree with both of you.

 
 
 
CB
8.2  CB   replied to  Kavika @8    7 months ago

It is a good tactic. He has some strong hits against him and the rest are going to try to wear him out. As E. Warren is attempting to do about the NDA by Bloomberg. Elizabeth is in rare form (against Bloomberg) this evening.

 
 
 
Perrie Halpern R.A.
8.2.1  author  Perrie Halpern R.A.  replied to  CB @8.2    7 months ago

Quite so. 

 
 
 
JohnRussell
8.3  JohnRussell  replied to  Kavika @8    7 months ago

You know what Kavika, the country may be in real trouble,  because the Democratic Party will not unify around Michael Bloomberg.  There is no way. 

He neither talks like or thinks like a Democrat, and I doubt he ever will. 

Right now I would say unify around Klobuchar or Biden. 

I will support Bloomberg, of course if he is the nominee, but he is not the guy. 

 
 
 
Raven Wing
8.4  Raven Wing  replied to  Kavika @8    7 months ago
Bloomberg should start showing some spunk.

Why should an Eagle spar with the Crows? As you say...Bloomberg has been in politics for a long time, an attended many debates, so he is quite familiar with how the show plays out.

No sense in using all one's ammo in a juvenile circus, when the real show is yet to come. While the others were busy picking his apart instead of focusing on the real important discussions, there was no room to talk about their own views and opinions.

The list of viable candidates will soon whittle down and then he and Klobuchar can get down to the nitty gritty and make their own case how it really counts.

That is how I see it anyway.

 
 
 
Ender
9  Ender    7 months ago

Trying to watch it. They are getting on my nerves just attacking each other and Bloomberg.

So much for taking the high road and policy debate.

Very disappointing.

 
 
 
Perrie Halpern R.A.
9.1  author  Perrie Halpern R.A.  replied to  Ender @9    7 months ago
Only Buttigieg and Klobchar are being civil and woops spoke to soon. 

 
 
 
Ender
10  Ender    7 months ago

Warren has lost any luster for me. All she has done is attack others.

 
 
 
CB
10.1  CB   replied to  Ender @10    7 months ago

E. Warren is trying to stay afloat, and at best deliver a knock-out punch on several people. She is 'studied" and 'woke.'  This is politics at it best. Impeached President Donald Trump is going to need our best 'puncher' so let them sock it out tonight!

 
 
 
MAGA
10.1.1  MAGA  replied to  CB @10.1    7 months ago

Trump will win by a landslide over anyone at that clown car of a debate.  Maybe Biden will make a comeback based on having a decent night mostly above the fray.  

 
 
 
CB
10.1.2  CB   replied to  MAGA @10.1.1    7 months ago

Please. If there is any justice and fairness in this country and its constitution remaining to put faith in, Donald Trump will be put out to pasture where he can face his demons.

We just learned (Thursday evening) That Donald Trump is fully informed that Russia is helping Trump in this current 2020 election cycle, and with that knowledge he fired his Acting Director of National Intelligence for informing congress about it, and is placing a new acting DNI "puppet" in the position. All out in plain sight!

As apparently has been your norm, you will be happy to wrap your sense of right and wrong around Trump and his outlaw actions. But at the same time you do—forget about claiming any high ground or holding any high moral ground. The nation will see Trump, and we see his supporters for what they truly are.

 
 
 
Perrie Halpern R.A.
10.2  author  Perrie Halpern R.A.  replied to  Ender @10    7 months ago

Agreed.

 
 
 
Raven Wing
10.3  Raven Wing  replied to  Ender @10    7 months ago
Warren has lost any luster for me. All she has done is attack others.

Agree. She is running out of viable support and trying to save herself. However, she is only causing herself to sink faster now, as it is getting closer to the deadline. And while she is trying to sink everyone else she is only sinking herself.

 
 
 
Sean Treacy
11  Sean Treacy    7 months ago

Bloomberg is not ready for prime time. Looks like a high schooler called up to the majors (talking about skill not age).  Making this debate was the worst thing that could have happened to him.

 
 
 
Ender
11.1  Ender  replied to  Sean Treacy @11    7 months ago

Actually he is coming off to me as the one with dignity.

 
 
 
Sean Treacy
11.1.1  Sean Treacy  replied to  Ender @11.1    7 months ago

He's borderline incoherent. Warren's taken him to the woodshed and he has no response. The non disclosure exchange was brutal for him. He's done the worst of anyone on stage. 

Klobucher has probably handled herself the best. 

 
 
 
Perrie Halpern R.A.
11.1.2  author  Perrie Halpern R.A.  replied to  Sean Treacy @11.1.1    7 months ago

I would give it Klobucher, Buttigieg and Biden.

 
 
 
Ender
11.1.3  Ender  replied to  Sean Treacy @11.1.1    7 months ago

I don't think he was expecting the attacks on his business practice.

I agree he does seem to be needing to be more prepared but again, I don't think he was expecting the personal attacks. Though I guess he should have.

 
 
 
Sean Treacy
11.1.4  Sean Treacy  replied to  Perrie Halpern R.A. @11.1.2    7 months ago

I think Buttegig looked bad going after Klobucher. 

But this has been the best I've seen Biden looked in the debates. Although it's a bad sign for him no one is attacking him. 

 
 
 
Perrie Halpern R.A.
11.1.5  author  Perrie Halpern R.A.  replied to  Sean Treacy @11.1.4    7 months ago
But this has been the best I've seen Biden looked in the debates. Although it's a bad sign for him no one is attacking him. 

While I agree with what you said, I think in the long run, it might give him the breathing space that he needed. 

 
 
 
Kathleen
11.1.6  Kathleen  replied to  Sean Treacy @11.1.4    7 months ago

Biden does look more focused and alert.. 

 
 
 
CB
11.1.8  CB   replied to    7 months ago

Nope, I don't accept your description of Mr. Buttigieg. A 'woman-hating debater' designation would not get him this far into the season. And, once found out, he would have been drummed out by the group and the audience members. It is unfortunate that you went there, in my opinion. Moreover, have you noticed that some women commenters here like Mr. Buttigieg? And when I spoke on the phone locally to several women about the debate—they like him and is delivery despite its aggressiveness when he engages Mrs. Klobuchar during debates.

 
 
 
Tessylo
11.1.10  Tessylo  replied to    7 months ago

Why would he hate women?  Do you think all gay men hate women?

 
 
 
Paula Bartholomew
11.1.11  Paula Bartholomew  replied to  Tessylo @11.1.10    7 months ago

It would be like saying that all lesbians hate men.  It just isn't true in either case.

 
 
 
CB
11.1.12  CB   replied to    7 months ago

I repeat:

Nope, I don't accept your description of Mr. Buttigieg. A 'woman-hating debater' designation would not get him this far into the season. And, once found out, he would have been drummed out by the group and the audience members. It is unfortunate that you went there, in my opinion. Moreover, have you noticed that some women commenters here like Mr. Buttigieg? And when I spoke on the phone locally to several women about the debate—they like him and is delivery despite its aggressiveness when he engages Mrs. Klobuchar during debates.

 
 
 
Perrie Halpern R.A.
11.2  author  Perrie Halpern R.A.  replied to  Sean Treacy @11    7 months ago

He does seem a bit out of practice but this is the first debate that has been a free for all. That being said, he isn't being nasty either.

 
 
 
CB
11.2.1  CB   replied to  Perrie Halpern R.A. @11.2    7 months ago

He is attempting to remember his answers. That's okay. But I can see it in his eyes. He is remembering what was practiced. These are difficult hits on him and he has to navigate the path out carefully under (Warren's) pressure. Honestly, this is good.

We have to know who and what's up with these candidates!

 
 
 
TᵢG
11.2.2  TᵢG  replied to  Perrie Halpern R.A. @11.2    7 months ago

Yeah I much prefer a candidate who acts like an adult.   Bloomberg and Buttigieg are doing the best in that regard.

Best thing for Bloomberg, IMO, is to stay cool and make his points.   He is doing that.   But he does not seem to be getting much time from the moderators.

 
 
 
Perrie Halpern R.A.
11.2.3  author  Perrie Halpern R.A.  replied to  TᵢG @11.2.2    7 months ago

The moderators are not being fair with time.

 
 
 
CB
11.2.4  CB   replied to  Perrie Halpern R.A. @11.2.3    7 months ago

It's the rules. When a name is checked that have to have follow-up. It fails when they namecheck several people on the same question.

 
 
 
Perrie Halpern R.A.
11.2.5  author  Perrie Halpern R.A.  replied to  CB @11.2.4    7 months ago

But some of them are not paying attention to the time and are talking over each other

 
 
 
Ender
11.2.6  Ender  replied to  Perrie Halpern R.A. @11.2.5    7 months ago

Ooh Ooh pick me!

384

 
 
 
CB
11.2.7  CB   replied to  Perrie Halpern R.A. @11.2.5    7 months ago

That's old fogety and crotchety Bernie! That's how he rolls with that wagging finger going all the time!

 
 
 
JohnRussell
11.2.8  JohnRussell  replied to  TᵢG @11.2.2    7 months ago

Tig, I said elsewhere on this thread but I will say it to you.  Bloomberg will not be the nominee. He neither talks like or thinks like a Democrat. 

Democrats do not brag that they have made billions of dollars and then try to make that all ok by saying "i give a lot of it away". 

Democrats want higher wages for working people, and less of wealth making more wealth. 

 Sanders leaned over to Bloomberg and said some thing like "you said you earned all that money. i think the people who work for you had a lot to do with that." 

and bloomberg just looked sheepish.  what else could he do in a Democratic debate?

this has been a disaster for bloomberg. 

 
 
 
TᵢG
11.2.9  TᵢG  replied to  JohnRussell @11.2.8    7 months ago

I have seen your comments John.   After the first, the rest were predictable.   And, accordingly, your future comments are predictable.

 
 
 
Perrie Halpern R.A.
11.2.10  author  Perrie Halpern R.A.  replied to  Ender @11.2.6    7 months ago

LMAO!!!!!

 
 
 
Perrie Halpern R.A.
11.2.11  author  Perrie Halpern R.A.  replied to  JohnRussell @11.2.8    7 months ago

John,

I am sorry you don't like people with money, but it's not a dirty word. My family went from poor, and I do mean poor to wealth due to hard work and my dad is a life long Dem. So that is your problem, not theirs. 

 
 
 
Perrie Halpern R.A.
11.2.12  author  Perrie Halpern R.A.  replied to  CB @11.2.7    7 months ago

It feels like my grandfather yelling at me. No joke either.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
11.2.13  JohnRussell  replied to  Perrie Halpern R.A. @11.2.11    7 months ago

I am quite sure I represent Democrats much more than you do.  Like it or lump it.

I do not begrudge people with money. But Michael Bloomberg does not represent Democrats in the US. 

I wrote an article about all this today, and you did not see fit to comment on that article. 

Why is it up to Democrats to accept a Bloomberg in order to beat Trump? 

Why dont the Republicans reject trump?  Why dont ALL the independents reject Trump?  Why do you want liberals to be responsible for getting rid of trump, instead of all of us being responsible? 

 
 
 
Ender
11.2.14  Ender  replied to  JohnRussell @11.2.8    7 months ago

A  lot of Democrats have money. I don't disparage people that have done well for themselves. Hell, isn't that the American dream, to make something. To me it does mean something by 'giving a lot away', depending on what they have done with the wealth.

I don't think one can pigeon hole Democrats into one box.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
11.2.15  JohnRussell  replied to  TᵢG @11.2.9    7 months ago
I have seen your comments John.   After the first, the rest were predictable.   And, accordingly, your future comments are predictable.

and you think yours are not? lol. 

 
 
 
CB
11.2.16  CB   replied to  Perrie Halpern R.A. @11.2.12    7 months ago

Bernie's gestures and east coast accent are everywhere all the time.

 
 
 
TᵢG
11.2.17  TᵢG  replied to  JohnRussell @11.2.15    7 months ago

Don't troll me John.   

 
 
 
JohnRussell
11.2.18  JohnRussell  replied to  TᵢG @11.2.17    7 months ago

Troll you? I responded to your insulting comment to me. 

 
 
 
TᵢG
11.2.19  TᵢG  replied to  JohnRussell @11.2.18    7 months ago

I purposely did not reply to any of your comments because I saw your opinion and am not interested in encouraging you to reexplain your opinion to me.    

But you could not resist and had to explicitly repeat your opinion directly to me anyway.    Now you did that so we are done.

 
 
 
Raven Wing
11.2.20  Raven Wing  replied to  TᵢG @11.2.2    7 months ago
Yeah I much prefer a candidate who acts like an adult.

Agree. Not one that acts like a junk yard dog.

 
 
 
Raven Wing
11.2.21  Raven Wing  replied to  JohnRussell @11.2.8    7 months ago
He neither talks like or thinks like a Democrat. 

Maybe that is to his advantage. As well as the Democrats.

 
 
 
Raven Wing
11.2.22  Raven Wing  replied to  JohnRussell @11.2.13    7 months ago
I am quite sure I represent Democrats much more than you do. 

Not this Democrat you don't.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
11.2.23  JohnRussell  replied to  TᵢG @11.2.19    7 months ago

Well, you are on an open forum on a seed that pertains to the debate, and you openly take the part of Michael Bloomberg, not only on this seed but on a number of others, so I thought it was acceptable to address you on the topic of how Bloomberg did tonight.

I didnt know you were not accepting comments that didnt fit your preconceptions of how the debate should come out. 

 
 
 
JohnRussell
11.2.24  JohnRussell  replied to  Raven Wing @11.2.22    7 months ago
I am quite sure I represent Democrats much more than you do. 
Not this Democrat you don't.

I have seen you say you are an independent. Nice try. 

 
 
 
TᵢG
11.2.26  TᵢG  replied to  JohnRussell @11.2.23    7 months ago

You addressed me and I replied with the equivalent of 'not interested' because there is absolutely no point in me responding since you would simply repeat your opinion.   Not interested.   Instead of that being the end, now you persist with meta and presumption.    Move on John.

 
 
 
Raven Wing
11.2.27  Raven Wing  replied to  JohnRussell @11.2.24    7 months ago
I have seen you say you are an independent. Nice try. 

Nice try John. But, that is a lie. You have NEVER seen me say I am an Independent, because I am NOT an Independent, and I have NEVER said I was an Independent. So don't try to act like you know it all when you clearly do not have a clue.

 
 
 
KDMichigan
11.2.29  KDMichigan  replied to  Raven Wing @11.2.27    7 months ago

[removed]

 
 
 
JohnRussell
11.2.30  JohnRussell  replied to  Raven Wing @11.2.27    7 months ago

Someone has posted two links to comments where you say you are not a Democrat. 

https://thenewstalkers.com/vic-eldred/group_discuss/6853/trump-or-what-exactly#cm1146009

https://thenewstalkers.com/community/discussion/47301/donald-trump-accuses-jews-who-vote-democrat-of-a-total-lack-of-knowledge-or-great-disloyalty#cm1142235

Since you are not a Democrat or a Republican , you are an independent, no? 

I guess you could be a member of the Green Party or the Libertarian or Socialist Party, but havent seen you say that. 

I am not always right Raven , but I am right more often than not. 

I wasnt going to look back at this, but someone told me you had called me a liar on the forum. 

Now we know who was telling the truth. 

 
 
 
MAGA
11.2.31  MAGA  replied to  TᵢG @11.2.2    7 months ago

I liked warrens line about replacing one arrogant billionaire with another arrogant billionaire.  Seeing Bloomberg actually torched and lit up by the opposition made the highlights I did watch worthwhile.  

 
 
 
TᵢG
11.2.32  TᵢG  replied to  MAGA @11.2.31    7 months ago

Do you consider Trump to be an arrogant billionaire?

 
 
 
Raven Wing
11.2.33  Raven Wing  replied to  JohnRussell @11.2.30    7 months ago
Since you are not a Democrat or a Republican , you are an independent, no? 

No.....I am non-partisan by choice. However, I am voting Democrat in this election, as it will be a very close and important election.

I am not always right Raven ,

In this case you are not right, John.

Now we know who was telling the truth. 

Yes, I did tell the truth. Your accusation is false.

Plus, how, and for whom, I vote is NONE, I repeat, NONE, of YOUR business, nor that of anyone else. So don't try to play God with me.

Move along John, I will not play your game.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
11.2.34  JohnRussell  replied to  Raven Wing @11.2.33    7 months ago

If you want to look foolish by denying the obvious ( you said in this seed that you are a Democrat and in other seeds said you are not) I guess that is your affair. 

No.....I am non-partisan by choice. 

Voting for the Democrat now does not make you a Democrat.  Perrie has voted for multiple Democrats and she is proud to say she is not a Democrat. 

 
 
 
JohnRussell
11.2.35  JohnRussell  replied to  Raven Wing @11.2.33    7 months ago
Move along John, I will not play your game.

[deleted]

You should have just admitted you misspoke or whatever. 

 
 
 
TᵢG
11.2.36  TᵢG  replied to  JohnRussell @11.2.34    7 months ago

Raven understands her own political / ideological position better than anyone else (by definition, right?).   If she considers herself non-partisan then she is non-partisan.

 
 
 
XDm9mm
11.2.37  XDm9mm  replied to  JohnRussell @11.2.30    7 months ago
I am not always right Raven , but I am right more often than not.

Ok, I simply had to respond to that.

 jrSmiley_10_smiley_image.gifjrSmiley_86_smiley_image.gifjrSmiley_10_smiley_image.gifjrSmiley_86_smiley_image.gif

 
 
 
XDm9mm
11.2.38  XDm9mm  replied to  TᵢG @11.2.32    7 months ago
Do you consider Trump to be an arrogant billionaire?

Do you know of any billionaires that are not arrogant?   It kind of goes with the territory.   Some are simply better at hiding it than others.   Of course there ARE exceptions, possibly Buffet and or Gates but most others yeah.

 
 
 
XDm9mm
11.2.39  XDm9mm  replied to  TᵢG @11.2.36    7 months ago
Raven understands her own political / ideological position better than anyone else

Not if some say otherwise.  Their observations HAVE to be more relevant than the actual individual don't they? //S//

 
 
 
TᵢG
11.2.40  TᵢG  replied to  XDm9mm @11.2.38    7 months ago
Do you know of any billionaires that are not arrogant? 

I do not know any billionaire well enough to make that call, do you?   There might be.   Maybe Bill Gates?   Don't know.   Not the point either.   That question, given the context, can only be meaningfully answered by DTF1.

 
 
 
TᵢG
11.2.41  TᵢG  replied to  XDm9mm @11.2.39    7 months ago
Not if some say otherwise.  Their observations HAVE to be more relevant than the actual individual don't they? //S//

Amazing, right?

 
 
 
JohnRussell
11.2.42  JohnRussell  replied to  TᵢG @11.2.36    7 months ago

She may be, that was not the point of contention. 

[deleted]

She said in that comment that she is a Democrat.  Someone found other comments of hers where she says she is not a Democrat. 
So what I said to her was NOT "a lie "
Period. Game over. Thanks for playing Tig. 
 
 
 
JohnRussell
11.2.43  JohnRussell  replied to  XDm9mm @11.2.39    7 months ago

Why are you butting in with ignorance? Seriously. MYOB. 

You dont have any legitimate point here. 

 
 
 
TᵢG
11.2.44  TᵢG  replied to  JohnRussell @11.2.42    7 months ago

Do you know that people can be registered with a party and vote differently?   For example, there exist political independents registered as Ds and as Rs (and as Libertarians, etc.).

Keep that in mind.

The point (which you missed) is that Raven Wing is the sole authority on her position.   You arguing with her about the no doubt complex factors that comprise her political/ideological state and which exist only in her mind is absurd (and arrogant).  

She stated her position (in summary form).   Accept it and move on.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
11.2.45  JohnRussell  replied to  TᵢG @11.2.44    7 months ago

Tig, I will clear this up for you. You are over complicating this. 

I dont read her mind or enter her private reasoning, like you seem to . 

All I did was go by what she has publicly said. 

She criticized me on the basis of her saying she is a Democrat. I replied that I had seen her say otherwise on this forum. 

That is the sum total of my involvement with interpreting her political affiliation. What I had seen her say. 

I had forgotten about it until someone told me that Raven said I had lied about her. 

I didnt lie about her. She had said she was not a Democrat. 

 At that point I am innocent of having lied about her.  Period. 

I said I had seen her say otherwise , and I had. 

Why are you involving yourself in this? 

I dont care what she thinks privately. Thats her business. If she thinks she's a Democrat this year, thats fine with me. 

A couple months ago she said otherwise on this forum, which led to my comment to her. 

 
 
 
JohnRussell
11.2.46  JohnRussell  replied to  TᵢG @11.2.44    7 months ago
[removed]
 
 
 
TᵢG
11.2.47  TᵢG  replied to  JohnRussell @11.2.45    7 months ago

Nice and simple:

Raven Wing is the sole authority of her position.   She just told you her position.   You are arguing with her over that which she is the sole authority.

Leave her alone.

 
 
 
TᵢG
11.2.48  TᵢG  replied to  JohnRussell @11.2.46    7 months ago

Another simple answer.   Raven is a friend of mine.   You are attacking her.   I am defending her. 

 
 
 
JohnRussell
11.2.49  JohnRussell  replied to  TᵢG @11.2.48    7 months ago

I didnt attack her, she attacked me.  She said that I had lied about her. 

I had not. 

I have proof that I had not. Absolute proof. 

You have your word play. 

I have nothing against Raven Wing. She is a star contributor on this forum. I have been friends with her myself. 

My asumption is that, when she called me a liar, she had simply forgotten what she had said about the topic in question in earlier comments on other seeds. 

 
 
 
JohnRussell
11.2.50  JohnRussell  replied to  TᵢG @11.2.47    7 months ago

No , you are butting into something that was over.  Leave it alone. 

 
 
 
KDMichigan
11.2.51  KDMichigan  replied to  TᵢG @11.2.47    7 months ago
Raven Wing is the sole authority of her position.   She just told you her position.   You are arguing with her over that which she is the sole authority.

I wasn't going to comment on this [Deleted]

Raven Wing called herself a democrat to John and then called John a liar when he called her out on it. [Deleted] in the same thread she calls herself a Democrat then says she has no political affiliation, WTF, and you want to but in and defend that, what a freaking Joke. [Deleted]

 
 
 
TᵢG
11.2.52  TᵢG  replied to  KDMichigan @11.2.51    7 months ago
I wasn't going to comment on this but since you like to stick your nose in everyone elses  discussions, why not? right.

So you are commenting in this article to try to 'get at' me?   Interesting.

My point is that the individual knows his/her mind better than anyone else.   Raven Wing, like everyone else, is free to be non-partisan.   She can think independently if she wishes to.  She can also be registered as a D, R or otherwise.   Party and ideological labels are gross approximations to the complex factors in the mind of most voters.

Gotcha games with words is slimy.   Accusing someone of being a liar due to such games is ugly and petty.   

A far better approach is to accept a correction.   In this case, take Raven at her word when she states that she is non-partisan.   ( There are non-partisan Ds, Rs, Is, Libertarians, etc.)    ( There are also D, R, etc. independents )    

Since most people know that political / ideological positions are nuanced and complex, playing petty words games to attack someone is not admirable.


Note, by the way, how I made this point in my prior comment to you (which no doubt precipitated this comment from you).   I did not suggest you were a liar;  instead I explained why your words were misleading.  I explicitly stated that your correction was understood and noted.   That is, you know what you mean better than anyone else thus when you cleared up the ambiguity / poor word choice with a specific declaration of your position I accepted that.

Maybe extend the same courtesy to Raven?

 
 
 
KDMichigan
11.2.53  KDMichigan  replied to  TᵢG @11.2.52    7 months ago

https://thenewstalkers.com/community/discussion/49549/live-debate-discussion#cm1258490

She is the one who called John a liar after he said she always claimed she was a independent.

So I take it you are going to tell me now that a non partisan is not a Independent.

 
 
 
TᵢG
11.2.54  TᵢG  replied to  KDMichigan @11.2.53    7 months ago
So I take it you are going to tell me now that a non partisan is not a Independent.

Yes, a non-partisan can be a member of a party (e.g. D) or even routinely vote D (regardless of party affiliation).   Non-partisan does not necessarily mean registered or even informally Independent.

'Non-partisan', like most political labels, is fuzzy.   There are no sharp legal edges.   For me (and probably most people), partisanship means strong support for the success of a particular party.   True partisans, I submit, will support their party first;  they will defend its positions no matter what (even if they disagree deep down).   

That established, there are plenty of registered Ds (and Rs and ...) who are not partisan (non-partisan).   These are individuals who generally align with a particular party but do not let the party do their thinking.   They will disagree with the party as they see fit.   And they may not care about the partisan power struggles.   Partisans, in contrast, would tend to vote only for members of their party because their party having control is objective number 1 to them.

So, in short, one can identify as a D, R, etc. and be non-partisan.

Another area that might be confusing is the notion of Independent (affiliation) vs independent thinker.   One need not register as a political Independent to be an independent thinker.   There are plenty of independents who are registered with a particular party.

 
 
 
TᵢG
12  TᵢG    7 months ago

Trump is no doubt having a ball watching the Ds attack each other.    Not sure what is up with Warren.    Hail Mary?

 
 
 
Perrie Halpern R.A.
12.1  author  Perrie Halpern R.A.  replied to  TᵢG @12    7 months ago

I totally agree, Tig. Warren has been on a rampage. I've lost my taste for her totally.

 
 
 
TᵢG
12.1.1  TᵢG  replied to  Perrie Halpern R.A. @12.1    7 months ago

I was already sick of her pandering.   I will be happy when she suspends her campaign.

 
 
 
Raven Wing
12.1.2  Raven Wing  replied to  TᵢG @12.1.1    7 months ago
 I will be happy when she suspends her campaign.

Same here. After her very uncalled for, unprofessional and very inappropriate performance during the debate tonight, she proved to be a less than Presidential class candidate, and unworthy of my vote.

 
 
 
MAGA
12.1.3  MAGA  replied to  Perrie Halpern R.A. @12.1    7 months ago

I actually gained some respect for Pocahontas last night! 

 
 
 
Perrie Halpern R.A.
12.1.4  author  Perrie Halpern R.A.  replied to  MAGA @12.1.3    7 months ago

Listen up XX,

Your comment referring to Warren as Pocahontas to me, fully knowing that I am an actual Indian is offensive to me and other Indians on this site. Since you have done this repeatedly this is my only warning to you. I am sick of you poking at me. 

 
 
 
Raven Wing
12.1.5  Raven Wing  replied to  Perrie Halpern R.A. @12.1.4    7 months ago

As a member of the Cherokee Tribe, I totally agree! jrSmiley_81_smiley_image.gifjrSmiley_13_smiley_image.gif

 
 
 
dennis smith
12.1.6  dennis smith  replied to  TᵢG @12.1.1    7 months ago

IMO - Warren and Sanders talk down to the voters and rail on their opponents for the nomination. They do more of that than addressing the issues voters care about. I believe the final 4 will be Bloomberg,         ( electable), Biden, (electable), Buttigieg (not electable) and Klobuchar (electable if she responds to Buttigieg about his attack rhetoric) 

 
 
 
TᵢG
12.1.7  TᵢG  replied to  dennis smith @12.1.6    7 months ago
IMO - Warren and Sanders talk down to the voters and rail on their opponents for the nomination. They do more of that than addressing the issues voters care about.

Warren is a dishonest panderer and I am looking forward to the end of her campaign.   I think Sanders is genuine but horribly wrong about how to make things better presently in the USA.

I believe the final 4 will be Bloomberg,         ( electable), Biden, (electable), Buttigieg (not electable) and Klobuchar (electable if she responds to Buttigieg about his attack rhetoric) 

I hope Bloomberg prevails.   He is the most presidential, competent and rational of the pack.

Biden seems like he will survive to the convention.

Buttigieg is a bit too liberal but seems to be a solid guy.   His orientation probably will be the main reason for his demise;   the USA is not quite there.

Klobuchar has gone farther than I expected.   She might be a V.P. nominee.   She just does not seem to resonate well.   But, it is early.

 
 
 
Raven Wing
12.1.8  Raven Wing  replied to  TᵢG @12.1.7    7 months ago

I agree with most of your lineup. However, I am not sure about Buttigieg. There is a growing number of acceptance of the different sexual orientation, so while I agree he will likely not get the President nomination, he may be considered for VP.

 
 
 
TᵢG
12.1.9  TᵢG  replied to  Raven Wing @12.1.8    7 months ago

V.P. certainly seems possible.

 
 
 
Raven Wing
12.1.10  Raven Wing  replied to  TᵢG @12.1.9    7 months ago
V.P. certainly seems possible

I think Pete would make a very good option given the advanced age of the front runners.

 
 
 
TᵢG
12.1.11  TᵢG  replied to  Raven Wing @12.1.10    7 months ago

Yeah, they are even pre baby boomers — WWII babies — the silent generation.

 
 
 
Ender
12.2  Ender  replied to  TᵢG @12    7 months ago

She is coming off as bitter.

 
 
 
CB
12.2.1  CB   replied to  Ender @12.2    7 months ago

Warren is fighting like a candidate and we have to be careful about her because it sounds like somebody saying she is wrong to be that strong.

 
 
 
Ender
12.2.2  Ender  replied to  CB @12.2.1    7 months ago

My ideal candidate doesn't have to fight.

 
 
 
CB
12.2.3  CB   replied to  Ender @12.2.2    7 months ago

I see your point. And at the same time I love this fire in the belly. These men and women need to stand for something right here and right now, in my opinion.

 
 
 
CB
12.3  CB   replied to  TᵢG @12    7 months ago

Warren is going for #1 in the polls. Clearly she has studied up for this one!

 
 
 
TᵢG
12.3.1  TᵢG  replied to  CB @12.3    7 months ago

You think her behavior is going to increase her popularity with the voters?

 
 
 
CB
12.3.2  CB   replied to  TᵢG @12.3.1    7 months ago

I think it will shine an "after" spotlight on her tomorrow if she keeps it up; her intellect will increase her popularity over the long haul afterward.

 
 
 
Perrie Halpern R.A.
12.3.3  author  Perrie Halpern R.A.  replied to  CB @12.3.2    7 months ago

Gonna disagree. She has soured my taste.

 
 
 
Ender
12.3.4  Ender  replied to  Perrie Halpern R.A. @12.3.3    7 months ago

Me too. And I did like her.

 
 
 
CB
12.3.5  CB   replied to  Perrie Halpern R.A. @12.3.3    7 months ago

Okay. I probably won't vote for her. But fighting for 'yours' is what this is about! I love E. Warren's lightning bolts. It will make them all look up! Or get out of the way of the shot!

Get ready for old 'eat your lunch and dinner buddy' Trump.You know Trump will comment on it and check out the tv ratings!

Get on them E. Warren. You go girl! Make them come for ya!

 
 
 
Perrie Halpern R.A.
12.3.6  author  Perrie Halpern R.A.  replied to  CB @12.3.5    7 months ago

Your so cute, CB. Love you tude. 

 
 
 
CB
13  CB     7 months ago

Amy Klobuchar is angry really. Buttigieg is a 'cool.' I often listen to his answers while watching his eyes and hands: Are those nerves of steel for such a newbie around such heavyweights?

 
 
 
Perrie Halpern R.A.
13.1  author  Perrie Halpern R.A.  replied to  CB @13    7 months ago

True. 

 
 
 
sandy-2021492
14  sandy-2021492    7 months ago

Buttigieg has mastered the art of eliciting an emotional response from his debate partner while staying cool as a cucumber himself.

 
 
 
Perrie Halpern R.A.
14.1  author  Perrie Halpern R.A.  replied to  sandy-2021492 @14    7 months ago

I have noticed that. Must be the solider in him. Calmness under fire. 

 
 
 
CB
15  CB     7 months ago

Bloomberg is a data man, that's clear. I want to hear more from him on this stage. But good fire across the stands. Lively debate! Living up to 'billing.'

 
 
 
Sean Treacy
16  Sean Treacy    7 months ago

Sanders has to be happy. He's in the best posiiton to win the primary, by far, and Bloomberg has taken most of the hits. 

People keep talking about a brokered convention, but unless Sanders implodes before Super Tuesday , he's going to be almost impossible to catch by the convention.  

It's the same mistake the Republican candidates made in 2016, attakcing each other while ignoring Trump, the leader. By the team the field gets sorted out, it's too late. 

 
 
 
Perrie Halpern R.A.
16.1  author  Perrie Halpern R.A.  replied to  Sean Treacy @16    7 months ago

That maybe true. Hard to tell. Everyone has perfect 20/20 hindsight. 

 
 
 
CB
16.1.1  CB   replied to  Perrie Halpern R.A. @16.1    7 months ago

The contest is right where it needs to be focused. They will get fully orbed on Trump later. Not now! They are willowing themselves out and I think it is fair for now!

Why is Buttigieg always somewhere on stage near Klobuchar? Or, am I mistaken? He is always turning to his left to see her when I watch.

 
 
 
CB
17  CB     7 months ago

I like E.Warren now talking about people of color. . . .!  As the stage lacks this one thing now. No fault of anyone there by the way!

 
 
 
Sean Treacy
18  Sean Treacy    7 months ago

This made me laugh

If Bill Clinton was on stage, he'd be the second youngest guy on stage and right in the middle of the group as a whole.

 
 
 
Perrie Halpern R.A.
18.1  author  Perrie Halpern R.A.  replied to  Sean Treacy @18    7 months ago

Third youngest. 

 
 
 
CB
19  CB     7 months ago

Oh Bernie just took on the billionaire and demanded he give it all up! BTW, Steyer did not qualify? Dang. Is he imploding?

 
 
 
TᵢG
19.1  TᵢG  replied to  CB @19    7 months ago

Bloomberg is a serious philanthropist.

 
 
 
CB
19.1.1  CB   replied to  TᵢG @19.1    7 months ago

I agree, for what I know about him.

I do like that they are 'airing' all this. We are going to need another one of these debates.

 
 
 
Perrie Halpern R.A.
19.1.2  author  Perrie Halpern R.A.  replied to  TᵢG @19.1    7 months ago

Indeed he is. 

 
 
 
Split Personality
19.1.3  Split Personality  replied to  Perrie Halpern R.A. @19.1.2    7 months ago

I was waiting for someone to ask Bloomberg, what his actual tax rate was before charitable giving.

I don't think anyone wants to know that answer.

 
 
 
CB
20  CB     7 months ago

Bloomberg just shut Bernie down. Mike told him "Absolutely not" I ain't giving it up in the manner you suggest. Fo get abouty!

 
 
 
Perrie Halpern R.A.
20.1  author  Perrie Halpern R.A.  replied to  CB @20    7 months ago

He might be finding his footing. 

 
 
 
1stwarrior
20.1.1  1stwarrior  replied to  Perrie Halpern R.A. @20.1    7 months ago

Doubt it - 

256

 
 
 
TᵢG
21  TᵢG    7 months ago

Bernie is defining Democratic socialism as social democracy – big government statism.   It is his fault for not using the proper terminology in the first place.   He confused the issue and now has to constantly explain himself.

 
 
 
Ender
22  Ender    7 months ago

So far I am liking Buttigieg.

 
 
 
CB
22.1  CB   replied to  Ender @22    7 months ago

Buttigieg is quite interesting and he will be a force this, or one year in the future!

 
 
 
Split Personality
22.2  Split Personality  replied to  Ender @22    7 months ago

Pfffttt!

(did I spell that right? )

 
 
 
Ender
23  Ender    7 months ago

Doesn't seem like they are letting Klobuchar speak very much.

 
 
 
Kathleen
24  Kathleen    7 months ago

I liked when Buttigieg asked Bernie where are you going to get the money for the healthcare and do the math.  He is right.

 
 
 
Tacos!
25  Tacos!    7 months ago

I listened to about a half hour of it and I couldn't take anymore. So much nasty sniping at each other! Wild claims, unsupportable, unprovable. Moderators not moderating. Truly disingenuous attacks on other people's plans and policies.

They just seem like the most unpleasant people I can imagine. Perhaps none more so than Warren. Listening to her attack people just sucks the joy out of life. Bernie rants like he's drunk or has dementia. Someone distract him please.

I can see why people like Pete. He - and Klobuchar too, I suppose - are the only ones who didn't come off like jerks.

 
 
 
Split Personality
25.1  Split Personality  replied to  Tacos! @25    7 months ago
Moderators not moderating

Oh the irony. jrSmiley_91_smiley_image.gif

 
 
 
Raven Wing
25.1.1  Raven Wing  replied to  Split Personality @25.1    7 months ago
Oh the irony.

jrSmiley_10_smiley_image.gifjrSmiley_86_smiley_image.gif

 
 
 
MAGA
25.1.2  MAGA  replied to  Split Personality @25.1    7 months ago

Sounds like a great idea to me!  

 
 
 
CB
26  CB     7 months ago

Bloomberg's closing statement is interesting, because he speaks like the responsible and self-made man that he is. And with that, I want to see how he fairs the morning after.

 
 
 
Ender
27  Ender    7 months ago

I couldn't make out what the hecklers were yelling at Biden.

 
 
 
sandy-2021492
27.1  sandy-2021492  replied to  Ender @27    7 months ago

Me, neither.

 
 
 
KDMichigan
27.2  KDMichigan  replied to  Ender @27    7 months ago
I couldn't make out what the hecklers were yelling at Biden.

I thought I heard a corn pops wants a rematch? 

But seriously I couldn't make out nothing, I'm sure it will be in the press though.

 
 
 
Perrie Halpern R.A.
27.2.1  author  Perrie Halpern R.A.  replied to  KDMichigan @27.2    7 months ago

No one said anything in the news... 

What are they good for?

 
 
 
CB
28  CB     7 months ago

Now Bloomberg should needs to do some democratic retail politics. Stay in the room where the people are Mr. Bloomberg. Let the camera find you! Oh, is that *Mrs. Bloomberg?  See hanging out afterwards is informative and powerful!

*Someone says the lady is Bloomberg's partner?

 
 
 
CB
29  CB     7 months ago

Now Jason Johnson (talking head) a commentator is trashing Mr. Bloomberg debate performance. Really harsh. I think it is unrealistic of Mr. Jason Johnson.

 
 
 
Kathleen
30  Kathleen    7 months ago

My take is, 

Warren got on my nerves.

Sanders ideas were not realistic.

Biden was more aggressive, but not impressive.

Buttigieg was calm said some good things, but not my choice.

Klobachar ranted a little too much. She was a little all over the place. 

Bloomberg stayed classy, but I thought he was new and not use to a debate. He stayed on topic and tried to talk about the issues facing our country. 

 
 
 
Split Personality
30.1  Split Personality  replied to  Kathleen @30    7 months ago

hmmmm, generally agree but leaning towards sleepy Joe and Bloomberg....

 
 
 
Kavika
31  Kavika     7 months ago

IMO, Bloomberg's performance was horrible. Many of his answers were totally tone deaf. 

 
 
 
Kathleen
31.1  Kathleen  replied to  Kavika @31    7 months ago

He was not prepared.

 
 
 
Split Personality
31.2  Split Personality  replied to  Kavika @31    7 months ago

He knew the first debate would be all about the value of kevlar.

He weathered the storm in my opinion.

 
 
 
CB
31.2.1  CB   replied to  Split Personality @31.2    7 months ago

I agree with you. You get a chance to get back into the game at a pace. I understand there is another debate very soon!

 
 
 
JohnRussell
31.2.2  JohnRussell  replied to  Split Personality @31.2    7 months ago

Bloomberg actually wants to buy the nomination. 

Maybe that is all 78 year old billionaires can do.  He will never be accepted by the base of the Democratic Party.  He has to hope he can circumvent it. 

 
 
 
TᵢG
31.2.3  TᵢG  replied to  Split Personality @31.2    7 months ago

Weathering the storm and making a few points is all I expected him to do.   My concern was that he would let the predictable slimy gang bang get on his nerves.   He held his composure and when he had the opportunity, made some of his issue points.   

I am sure his campaign will now come up with tactics to deal with the slimy attacks from those who would seek to be PotUS.    

 
 
 
CB
31.2.4  CB   replied to  TᵢG @31.2.3    7 months ago

I look forward to Mr. Bloomberg doing better next debate. Because he needs to wade in and 'dig' with the rest of the contestants.  For example, Bloomberg deliberately hit a 'homer' when he asked all innocent like and yet point blank if any other debater ever owned a business: The silence could have doubled as a 'pregnant pause'! Bloomberg is a master of that lane and owns it in the next debate. He can match and outdo Trump in this lane.

Mr. Bloomberg can use that next time. Stick a pin in it for next week! Magnify his good points. Talk about what he knows and what he wishes to get across. Work himself into it. Many people are not personal with a multi-billionaire. He needs to be open and warm.

Finally, he has to sometimes speak faster and get his own ideas into the question window allotted. Rather he stays on topic or not! A little hustle there, Mr. Bloomberg. Just a bit of hustle.

I do not consider the other democrats as acting slimy. They are all fighting for the presidency and fire in the belly and 'heart' needs to be on full display!

 
 
 
Kavika
31.2.5  Kavika   replied to  Split Personality @31.2    7 months ago

He going to have to a lot more than ''weather the storm'' in the next debate. 

I was quite surprised that he wasn't more prepared for the attacks. Everyone in the world knew that they were coming. He simply wasn't prepared for them. 

I did like his response to Bernie about being and billionaire and giving much of his money away. In the 2016 cycle, he put his money behind a number of moderate Dems that won their elections. 

 
 
 
TᵢG
31.2.7  TᵢG  replied to  CB @31.2.4    7 months ago
I do not consider the other democrats as acting slimy. They are all fighting for the presidency and fire in the belly and 'heart' needs to be on full display!

Well to me it is slimy when people engage in intellectual dishonesty and/or exaggerate.   Warren is a fine example of this when she tried to paint Bloomberg as a non-transparent billionaire with a lot to hide when she asked him why he has not released his tax records.   Bloomberg gave a perfectly reasonable answer:  we are expecting to have them ready in a few weeks but my philanthropic activities are always public knowledge.   She rejected that and blamed him for not having his people work overtime to get it out sooner.    

I look forward to Mr. Bloomberg doing better next debate.

I think Bloomberg did fine.   Everyone knew that this debate was going to be an attack fest directed at Bloomberg.   So his time was going to be consumed defending himself.   My concern was that he would show this getting under his skin but he did fine;  he remained presidential and was able to make a few good issue related points along the way.   His campaign will take this empirical data and prepare a plan going forward.   That is what competent managers do.

I think Warren harmed herself (at least I hope so because this is not an individual I would want to see as PotUS).   Biden helped himself.   Sanders did great and so did Buttigieg.   Klobuchar struggled due to her bad interview prior to the debate;  it is amazing how a mental block or simply not knowing the name of Mexico's president can screw up a candidate.   Remember how Rick Perry's run ended?:   he forget the third department that he was going to shut down due to redundancy (it was the department of energy).   That 'oops' was the end of him.   

 
 
 
Ender
31.2.8  Ender  replied to  TᵢG @31.2.7    7 months ago

The tax thing, to me, came off as phony outrage. His answer was true yet they acted like they didn't want to hear it. It is early in the tax season and it is not like he can just do a 1040ez form. Plus he said he has released prior years.

I guess they were trying to act like he is an out of touch elite. I thought Pete put it well and put them in their place when he said he was the only one up there that was not a millionaire.

 
 
 
TᵢG
31.2.9  TᵢG  replied to  Ender @31.2.8    7 months ago

That is the what I dislike most – the dishonesty.   Warren, et. al. try to generate personal negatives rather than debate on issues.

 
 
 
CB
31.2.10  CB   replied to  TᵢG @31.2.7    7 months ago

Still I do not see the slime factor. I do see that E. Warren was 'shoving' with her 'git it done' tax papers retort. After all, nobody has seen any of Trump's returns (and won't since asking won't 'git it done' there either) and she did not request Bernie cough up the rest of his 'transparent' medical records short or long-term.

The remainder of your comment. Yes, I agree with.

 
 
 
Raven Wing
31.2.11  Raven Wing  replied to  TᵢG @31.2.3    7 months ago
I am sure his campaign will now come up with tactics to deal with the slimy attacks from those who would seek to be PotUS. 

It seemed to me that those who were so viciously attacking Bloomberg were trying out for a vicious street gang member rather than for the position of President of the US. They showed no class at all, certainly no Presidential demeanor, and showed the world an even more vicious individual than Trump.

And they want people to think of them as being a better choice for the highest position of our Country? They better think again. From the comments here in these threads, they lost a lot of votes just in this debate alone by showing their true colors.

 
 
 
CB
32  CB     7 months ago

A word about Bernie! Bernie exposed a near fatal flaw tonight that touches on his strongest point: A consistent message.

Bernie was asked something along the lines of 'should billionaires exist' (paraphrase) and he let it hang in the air that possibly there should be no billionaire class. Or, that class should be a diminished class.

That is wrong. It takes away from Bernie's message of equality for all. Emphasis on all. Billionaires are citizens and people too. Trump will crucify Bernie with anything along that line of talk. If I heard that part right, that is.

 
 
 
CB
32.1  CB   replied to  CB @32    7 months ago
9ddg5F6v_normal.png
Bernie Sanders
@BernieSanders

There should be no billionaires. We are going to tax their extreme wealth and invest in working people. Read the plan: https:// berniesanders.com/issues/tax-ext reme-wealth/ 

jtt_OrV0?format=jpg&name=600x314

Tax on Extreme Wealth

We are taking on powerful interests who will do and spend whatever it takes to stop us. Change never happens from the top down. Chip in to join the political revolution today.

berniesanders.com 7,873

9ddg5F6v_normal.png
Bernie Sanders
@BernieSanders

Billionaires should not exist. https:// twitter.com/nytpolitics/st atus/1176459557473804297 

NYT Politics
@nytpolitics

Bernie Sanders is unveiling a proposal for a new wealth tax on the richest Americans, including a steep tax on billionaires that could greatly diminish their fortunes https:// nyti.ms/2mm9QB9  

Yeah, Bernie said it. Oh boy.
 
 
 
Dean Moriarty
32.1.1  Dean Moriarty  replied to  CB @32.1    7 months ago

What a terrible thing for Bernie to say. The government didn't built that but they want to steal it and give it to the lazy. I find it absolutely appalling that anyone would be proud of his socialist theft and redistribution policies. 

 
 
 
TᵢG
32.1.2  TᵢG  replied to  Dean Moriarty @32.1.1    7 months ago

There are many millions of people who are entirely content with having the government serve as an agent for redistributing wealth to them.    They apparently see nothing wrong with it.   Many probably think they are 'owed' it.  Such a system would only exacerbate generational dependence on the government and is probably the most effective way to transform the USA from a nation based on liberty to authoritarian rule.   Bottom line, people always must have skin in the game ... people need to be contributing.

( BTW, what I wrote has nothing whatsoever to do with socialism and everything to do with big government statism.   Sanders is a social democrat – he is pro big benevolent government redistributing wealth to the masses via highly regulated and taxed capitalism and aggressive taxation of the wealthy.   Very little of what he promotes has anything to do with distributed, democratic control over the economy.   Closest he gets is promoting worker cooperatives. )

 
 
 
CB
32.1.3  CB   replied to  TᵢG @32.1.2    7 months ago

Bernie Sanders is going to-needs to be exposed on this point. Credit to MSNBC's moderator Chuck Todd for bringing this up in the debate @ 11:19 I believe in the second hour. Time check me on the first or second hour I used my DVR recorder time module.

Trump is going to mop the floor with Sanders as the nominee with this one point alone. Trump is a "stand in the stirrups" "All lips firing" and repeat-repeat-repeat kind of brawler! Bernie Sanders doesn't want billionaires to exist. What a political target he has put on his back with that set of tweets!

Moreover, Bernie was wildly animated when it came to explaining why he wants billionaires to 'go away.' I accept his passionate reasoning for the poor and middle class needing more help. His solution to heavily tax billionaires nearly or all the way out of existence, I can not support that.

 
 
 
TᵢG
32.1.4  TᵢG  replied to  CB @32.1.3    7 months ago

Taxing billionaires (at the level Sanders would want) will never, ever happen.   It is irrational and would be highly destructive to our nation if it would happen (and it will not happen).   The only way billionaires will cease to exist is over a very long gradual evolution of society.

Sanders view is okay if talking about the distant future where society has evolved to the point where profound disparities in wealth have been smoothed out.   But to talk about this now when the socio-economic/political and cultural makeup of the USA rejects this notion is simply dumb.   I am truly surprised that Sanders is doing so well.   I suspect he is going to hit a brick wall soon.

If Sanders gets the nomination, Trump wins.

 
 
 
zuksam
32.1.5  zuksam  replied to  TᵢG @32.1.4    7 months ago

I really don't know how Sanders would go about taxing Billionaires to the point that there would be none. Most of the money value Billionaires have is in a business they built or investments they've made. If it's investments they never pay taxes as long as the money stays invested they roll it over again and again and accumulate wealth without paying any tax. If it's a business they bought they may have paid for it with money that was taxed but they are not taxed on value that's added to the business through growth. Sure they pay corporate income taxes, and property taxes but the actual value of the business never gets taxed. Mark Zuckerberg is worth billions but he has never paid tax on most of that wealth because most of his wealth is Facebook stock and he didn't buy it, that stock represents the portion of Facebook he owns. Since he built Facebook from nothing all those billions in stock value have never been taxed.

 
 
 
Tessylo
32.1.6  Tessylo  replied to  zuksam @32.1.5    7 months ago
'I really don't know how Sanders would go about taxing Billionaires to the point that there would be none.

Because he wouldn't, couldn't do that.  A fair tax on the uber rich wouldn't make them poor, it wouldn't even make them even slightly less uber rich.  

 
 
 
CB
32.1.7  CB   replied to  TᵢG @32.1.4    7 months ago
I suspect he is going to hit a brick wall soon. If Sanders gets the nomination, Trump wins.

If Sanders get the nomination. . . that 'loud mouth' of Donald Trump's will be his brick wall. SMASH!!!! Remember how Trump racked Hillary Clinton and her server over the 'pit' day after day after day ad nauseaum? Blah!

Sanders has opened 'tweet' and inserted [his head]! Trump will not let him live this one down.

 
 
 
TᵢG
32.1.8  TᵢG  replied to  zuksam @32.1.5    7 months ago
I really don't know how Sanders would go about taxing Billionaires to the point that there would be none. 

Agreed.   He could not do that.   It is systemically impossible to do that without destroying our economy.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
32.1.9  JohnRussell  replied to  CB @32.1.3    7 months ago
Trump is going to mop the floor with Sanders as the nominee with this one point alone. Trump is a "stand in the stirrups" "All lips firing" and repeat-repeat-repeat kind of brawler! Bernie Sanders doesn't want billionaires to exist. What a political target he has put on his back with that set of tweets!

Sanders should not be the nominee simply because he doesnt have half of American voters agreeing with him. His only chance of winning would be if he was able to bring many millions more new voters into the election, ready to vote for him, than Trump could do. That seems like an extremely risky proposition. 

But you badly underestimate Sanders if you think trump would destroy Sanders in a debate. I actually think the exact opposite would happen. Bernie Sanders has been doing this for decades (debating as the underdog) and he would attack Trump and his money and his corruption with a vigor if not viciousness never seen before in a presidential election (at least not in living memory).  I have no doubt whatsoever Sanders would bloody Trump immensely in a debate. 

 
 
 
zuksam
32.1.10  zuksam  replied to  TᵢG @32.1.8    7 months ago
Agreed.   He could not do that.   It is systemically impossible to do that without destroying our economy.

The only way to tax those billions would be a Corporate and Capital Growth Tax which wouldn't put Big Businesses out of business but it would prevent every business from growing. Given the pace of growth in value Facebook experienced verses their actual income even 1/2 a percent tax on growth would have bankrupted them early on. Even now a bad week erodes 10% of a companies value. Is the government going to refund your money? When the value rebounds do you have to pay the tax again? In Zuckerberg's case most of the value of Facebook hinges on people going to that site daily but if a better site comes along he could lose 80% of his wealth in a year, just ask Myspace valued at 12Bn in 2007 then sold 4 years later in 2011 for 35 million. That's the kind of thing that can happen to any company if the competition comes up with a better product or service.

 
 
 
TᵢG
32.1.11  TᵢG  replied to  zuksam @32.1.10    7 months ago

There are plenty of ways to tax high incomes without harming the economy.   But Sanders is not looking at incremental measures;  he wants to 'fix' things while he is still alive to see the results.   Not possible.

 
 
 
MUVA
32.1.12  MUVA  replied to  TᵢG @32.1.11    7 months ago

What do you consider a high income?

 
 
 
TᵢG
32.1.13  TᵢG  replied to  MUVA @32.1.12    7 months ago

Roughly the upper 1%.   Note that there is no easy way to effectively tax here because taxing ordinary income is not going to cut it.   There would need to be a method to tax realized income.   And even then, with the complexity of our tax code, there remain all sorts of methods to mitigate that.    

This, by the way, is the immediate problem with Sanders' approach.

What do you consider to be high income (in this context)?

 
 
 
zuksam
32.1.14  zuksam  replied to  TᵢG @32.1.11    7 months ago
There are plenty of ways to tax high incomes without harming the economy.

But that has little effect on Billionaires. Take Warren Buffett his wealth grows at an astronomical rate yet his actual income is quite small he earned 100k in 2017 as "income" from his Berkshire Hathaway salary. "Maybe" he sold some stock (probably not) and he's authored a bunch of books but his taxable income doesn't come close to reflecting his yearly increases in wealth, probably not even .1%.

 
 
 
TᵢG
32.1.15  TᵢG  replied to  zuksam @32.1.14    7 months ago
But that has little effect on Billionaires.

I noted that @32.1.13

 
 
 
CB
32.1.16  CB   replied to  JohnRussell @32.1.9    7 months ago
I have no doubt whatsoever Sanders would bloody Trump immensely in a debate

Sanders just might. But Trump is not simply going to trash Sanders in a debate 'frame' will he. Trump excruciatingly takes his 'round face' and mugs it in television cameras and lies, lies, lies. By the time Trump gets done with repeating the words,

"Socialism!"

"No more billionaires under  Bernie Sanders folks!"

"They're going to be all gone-folks. Sanders is going to 'kill' all the billionaires!"

Or words to this effect. And then some.

Trump made the words, "Hillary Clinton" a sing-song in 2016 everywhere he appeared. Can you still here Trump's voice going on an on about the 'bleached Hillary server' in your ears? Ad nauseam.

Bernie tweeted twice a 'disaster.' It is a fatal error. And if you look again at the debate footage @ 11:19 in the second hour, you can almost feel people having mixed emotions about Bernie 'attacking' Bloomberg over his wealth and class status.

 
 
 
TᵢG
32.1.17  TᵢG  replied to  CB @32.1.16    7 months ago

I am confident that Trump's strategy against Sanders would involve repeatedly claiming that with Trump the good times will continue and with Sanders the good times will end immediately.

That will work.   Sanders will lose.

 
 
 
CB
32.1.18  CB   replied to  TᵢG @32.1.17    7 months ago

There is outrageous Trump news breaking today about Russia helping Trump rig the 2020 election. There is a grab-bag of new problems for Trump being exposed right this minute. And, Bernie has to tweet that he wants to redistribute the wealth of billionaires. Clearly Bernie needs to be aware that one of the driving forces in nature is survival. Billionaires are not going to simply 'lay down and die' or disperse their wealth to welfare! Hey, they may even give in thew words of E. Warren, "a chunk" of that wealth to you know who!

 
 
 
TᵢG
32.1.19  TᵢG  replied to  CB @32.1.18    7 months ago
Stop with the silly argument that you are being logical and I am not, will you? 

Is there a week that has gone by without outrageous breaking news regarding Trump?    I am afraid the electorate is largely desensitized to it by now.   That is normally how our electorate rolls.

 
 
 
MUVA
32.1.20  MUVA  replied to  TᵢG @32.1.13    7 months ago

How much 300,00 a year or higher?I think high income is the eye of the beholder when I made 30 grand a year I though 50 was a lot.I have wealthy in laws and parents they worked hard both are in the 1%.My father served 35 years in the military and ran Atlantic research on board ship inspection.He is 88 and in  the top percent when does he get a break? 

 
 
 
MUVA
32.1.21  MUVA  replied to  zuksam @32.1.14    7 months ago

He takes stock instead of a salary and basically hides his income most CEO would take large salaries he works the system.

 
 
 
CB
32.1.22  CB   replied to  TᵢG @32.1.19    7 months ago

I know that there quote was not for me.

As for Trump, I won't normalize his outrageous behavior. I, we, are not desensitized to a thief's thefts. If we have principles, these are the days for demonstrating their "superpower."

 
 
 
TᵢG
32.1.23  TᵢG  replied to  MUVA @32.1.20    7 months ago
How much 300,00 a year or higher?

Not sure I understand your answer.   Are you saying that you consider $300,000 a year to be the threshold for high income?   If so I think that is too low.

I have wealthy in laws and parents they worked hard both are in the 1%.

The upper 1% starts at about $450,000 per year income.   If that is what they are pulling in then my congratulations.   Are you, with this, suggesting that 1% is too low?

My father served 35 years in the military and ran Atlantic research on board ship inspection.He is 88 and in  the top percent when does he get a break? 

Your dad is still earning an income at 88 and at the top 1% level? 


As you can tell, I am not following.   You asked me what I considered high income and I stated that it would likely be somewhere around the upper 1%.   Are you suggesting that is too low or too high?

 
 
 
MUVA
32.1.24  MUVA  replied to  TᵢG @32.1.23    7 months ago

I was asking your opinion of a high income.If only the democrats agreed with your example most of the their tax policies start closer to 150,000 a year.For example free college and  college debt forgiveness would  not be available  to someone making as little as 150,000 a year.Yes my father and my father in law still make over threshold to be considered a 1%er I'm a 5%er. I think everyone should pay some tax so they have skin in the game.

 
 
 
TᵢG
32.1.25  TᵢG  replied to  MUVA @32.1.24    7 months ago
I was asking your opinion of a high income.

I know and I answered with about 1%.   I then asked you what you considered to be high income.   I did not understand your answer.

If only the democrats agreed with your example most of the their tax policies start closer to 150,000 a year.   For example free college and  college debt forgiveness would  not be available  to someone making as little as 150,000 a year.Yes my father and my father in law still make over threshold to be considered a 1%er I'm a 5%er. I think everyone should pay some tax so they have skin in the game.

I still do not know what you consider high income per this context. 

I agree that everyone should pay taxes, but the context was the point where the income is very high – in a territory where more aggressive taxation (per Sanders, by the way) becomes plausible without harming the economy.

 
 
 
dennis smith
32.1.26  dennis smith  replied to  TᵢG @32.1.8    7 months ago

Sanders doesn't care about destroying our economy.

 
 
 
TᵢG
32.1.27  TᵢG  replied to  dennis smith @32.1.26    7 months ago

I suspect Sanders thinks that his measures would not destroy the economy.   I think he is misguided, not malicious.

 
 
 
Kathleen
32.1.28  Kathleen  replied to  TᵢG @32.1.27    7 months ago

That’s my biggest fear about him. 

 
 
 
CB
32.1.29  CB   replied to  TᵢG @32.1.27    7 months ago

I think Sanders thinks his measures will not destroy the economy, but reorient it. However, the shift would take this country down before it can built it up. Can this economy bear it. Time could tell. The BIGGER issue is this: Bernie Sanders is becoming a dangerous political figure, because there are already incredible numbers of dissenters massing together against his political "revolution." To get to the point. What slavery was to the civil war; the right's new cries of liberty protectors can be to another civil war.

We have to consider just how invested we are in having democratic socialism maligned and pushed back against by this time next year! Bernie's policies carry an element and level of danger not seen in a long time.

 
 
 
dennis smith
32.1.30  dennis smith  replied to  zuksam @32.1.10    7 months ago

Bernie will be waving his finger and hand in the air and his hair will stand on end all while he rants on about the Federal Government magically be able to run things efficiently which it has failed miserably to do in the past.

 
 
 
dennis smith
32.1.31  dennis smith  replied to  TᵢG @32.1.27    7 months ago

I disagree, Sanders is delusional 

 
 
 
Texan1211
33  Texan1211    7 months ago

If Bernie wins the most delegates and isn't the party's nominee, it might be a catalyst for a major third party. I don't think the Bernie supporters would stand for what they will consider as getting screwed twice. This election may divide the Democratic Party, and if it doesn't, and Bernie is the nominee, I believe Democrats will lose the House, Senate, and WH.

I did like how Bloomberg handled Warren on his taxes, and I like how Bernie responded about his health. Those are personal, and should remain so if they choose to keep it that way.

 
 
 
katrix
33.1  katrix  replied to  Texan1211 @33    7 months ago
I like how Bernie responded about his health

If a man as old as Bernie - or Trump, or Biden - wants my vote, they need to convince me that their age isn't a huge liability. Especially since Sanders recently had a heart attack. And I don't want to see some bullshit fake letter like that which Trump pretended his doctor wrote.  I think it's a valid concern for voters.

 
 
 
Texan1211
33.1.1  Texan1211  replied to  katrix @33.1    7 months ago

looks like Bernie appears pretty healthy to me.

Anyone can drop dead tomorrow for all we know, so I believe worrying about that kind of stuff is merely a waste of time.

 
 
 
zuksam
33.1.2  zuksam  replied to  Texan1211 @33.1.1    7 months ago

Sanders is to old ! I think most people vote for a candidate they hope will serve two terms and that would make Bernie 87 on his last day as president. Reagan was 69 on his first day and 77 on his last and that makes him the oldest president to hold office. Trump was 70 on his first and would be 78 on his last day of a second term and he would take Reagan's title. Bernie would take the title and be the oldest president to ever hold office on his very first day in office at 79 years old.

 
 
 
zuksam
33.1.3  zuksam  replied to  zuksam @33.1.2    7 months ago

If Biden were elected he also would break the record on his first day in office at 78 years old.

 
 
 
TᵢG
35  TᵢG    7 months ago

Just like the R debates, the D debates are consumed with cheap shots and lies.   Politicians disgust me.   

I wish we could devise a system that rewarded honesty and accomplishment rather than what we have where someone can make up a slimy lie and people just presume it to be the truth.

  jrSmiley_104_smiley_image.jpg

 
 
 
Dean Moriarty
35.1  Dean Moriarty  replied to  TᵢG @35    7 months ago

Yes that was disgusting. I watched about forty minutes of it and came away more confident Trump can win a second term. 

 
 
 
CB
35.1.1  CB   replied to  Dean Moriarty @35.1    7 months ago

Really Dean? Really? Impeached President Donald J. Trump is well-balanced to your palate, with all his tossing of 'salad' in the air, onto the floor, and into an 'On' fan?

I wish to know if we are talking about the same Donald Trump that intents to show up any day now talking like a loud-mouth, cursing, accuser-victim, pulling down stuff from the walls and basically gaslighting everybody who dares to get in his way?

 
 
 
TᵢG
35.1.2  TᵢG  replied to  Dean Moriarty @35.1    7 months ago
I watched about forty minutes of it and came away more confident Trump can win a second term. 

My position is that a second term is Trump's to lose.   He has incumbency, a great economy and people are content.   Those are three mega factors and I do not see his behavior being enough to mitigate those advantages.

The question to me, really, is which of the D candidates offer the voters a reason to change what is working.   Not being Trump is likely not going to be enough.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
35.1.3  JohnRussell  replied to  TᵢG @35.1.2    7 months ago
I do not see his behavior being enough to mitigate those advantages.

So we should RE-ELECT  ( not just elect, but RE-ELECT) a pathological liar who disgraces this country every single day? 

Unbelievable. 

 
 
 
katrix
35.1.4  katrix  replied to  JohnRussell @35.1.3    7 months ago

That's not what TiG said. He's talking about how voters are likely to behave. He did not say we should re-elect Trump.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
35.1.5  JohnRussell  replied to  TᵢG @35.1.2    7 months ago
and people are content.

Donald Trump has NEVER had the approval of half of the people in any election he has ever been in, unless you count the last few primaries in 2016 where he ran unopposed. 

He has never reached 50% in approval as president and the averages of approval ratings from the various sites that do that have hovered about 43% for three years now. 

People may be content somewhat with their material comfort, but they are not content with the way the presidency has unfolded. 

 
 
 
TᵢG
35.1.6  TᵢG  replied to  katrix @35.1.4    7 months ago
That's not what TiG said. He's talking about how voters are likely to behave. He did not say we should re-elect Trump.

And you are absolutely correct katrix.   You read the same words as John yet somehow (and as usual) John responds with an absurd misrepresentation of what I wrote.   Worse, he knows damn well that I am no fan of Trump.

If one is going to spend one's life complaining about the dishonesty of Trump, one should at least strive to be honest in one's own life.   

 
 
 
TᵢG
35.1.7  TᵢG  replied to  JohnRussell @35.1.5    7 months ago

People are likely to vote as they always do … the most important issue to voters historically have been local concerns.    That, generally, is how most human beings roll.   If the voters are generally content in their personal lives they will not want to do anything to change that.   

Ergo, unless something serious happens to the economy, Trump has history on his side.    

 
 
 
JohnRussell
35.1.8  JohnRussell  replied to  TᵢG @35.1.7    7 months ago
People are likely to vote as they always do

Did they vote in 2016 like they always do? 

It was KNOWN in 2016, prior to the election, that Trump is a liar crook bigot moron and cheat.  I have already gone over this in particular and wont do it again now.  People didnt vote then like they 'always do.' If they did that Clinton would have won easily. 

We dont have a "normal" circumstance now either.  Over half of Americans wanted the president impeached and about half wanted him impeached and removed. That group right there would be a sufficient number to deny him re-election.  Do you think large numbers of people who thought he should have been impeached AND removed a month ago are going to vote for him to be re-elected? 

Why are you always painting a rosy picture for Trump?  Is Bernie Sanders bugging you that much?

 
 
 
1stwarrior
35.1.9  1stwarrior  replied to  JohnRussell @35.1.3    7 months ago

Rahm Emanuel, Richard Daley

 
 
 
TᵢG
35.1.10  TᵢG  replied to  JohnRussell @35.1.8    7 months ago
Did they vote in 2016 like they always do? 

I think so.   People voted first for their own self-interests.    Hard to analyze since the vote was Trump or Clinton.    Maybe people felt things would be best if the PotUS were to shake things up in DC.    We could analyze forever.   Note also that in 2016 we were going to change PotUS no matter what.   What I have been telling you is that we are now in a second term election.   Incumbency, state of economy, current comfort are now the key factors that come into play.    

Why are you always painting a rosy picture for Trump? 

I am simply stating facts.   The difference between you and me (in this context) is that I have the ability to be objective and unemotional about the facts.   It does not matter how I feel about Trump.   What matters are the electoral dynamics.   You cannot comprehend the advantages Trump has in pure analytical terms.   Based on comment history, nobody will be able to explain this to you either.   That is why I have little interest discussing this with you.   My logic and your emotional reaction to Trump do not mix.

Is Bernie Sanders bugging you that much?

I do not follow how Sanders got into this.   I will assume it is just more snark.

Sanders will not beat Trump.   The electorate will not elect an extreme statist proposing utter nonsense.  Sanders is a good person and I think he genuinely wants to help people.   But what he proposes is absolutely crazy and the electorate will not turn the presidency over to him.    Also, Sanders is the absolute worst candidate of the Ds for continuing the good times.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
35.1.11  JohnRussell  replied to  TᵢG @35.1.10    7 months ago
I am simply stating facts. 

No you're not, you're pontificating an opinion. There are no "facts" that state that a president who was just impeached is the favorite to win re-election. There are no "facts" that state that a president who has been cataloged for lying to the tune of 15,000 times, while in office, is the favorite for re-election. There are no "facts" that indicate that an incumbent president who has been shown to have committed obstruction of justice (Mueller report) by a government investigative agency  is the favorite to be re-elected. 

You are giving your opinion, and you ignore everything not in line with your opinion. 

Trump has never had a majority approval in any survey or election taken across the entire adult population. Never. How is he the favorite? 

 
 
 
TᵢG
35.1.12  TᵢG  replied to  JohnRussell @35.1.11    7 months ago
No you're not, you're pontificating an opinion.

Pay attention John.    I have stated this several times and this is the last time.  These are historical facts:

  1. Incumbency is an advantage
  2. Presidents presiding over a good economy have a substantial advantage
  3. When people are content they tend to not seek changes
There are no "facts" that state that a president who was just impeached is the favorite to win re-election.   ...

I did not claim that;  I claimed nothing in your list.   Are you able to engage me honestly or must you always hide behind strawman arguments and misrepresentations?

You are giving your opinion, and you ignore everything not in line with your opinion. 

Absolutely ironic;  pure projection.

How is he the favorite? 

I did not claim he is the favorite.   Pay attention.   I stated that he has the advantage;  indeed a substantial advantage.   My list (above) has nothing to do with favoritism.  I am not suggesting Trump would win due to popularity.   Rather, due to the core (selfish) interests of the voters.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
35.1.13  JohnRussell  replied to  TᵢG @35.1.12    7 months ago

Go talk in circles to people who are mesmerized by it. I am not that person. 

You list what you call advantages and say "I don't see trump losing" because of these advantages. 

Of course you totally leave out of that analysis the "fact" that Trump has just been impeached, there is a daily running list of the thousands of times he has lied to the American voter, and a list was given of 11 times he may have committed felony obstruction of justice by the Mueller report.  The advantages you list are highly subject to mitigation by Trump's phenomenal and unprecedented negatives. 

You don't even take the negatives into account. Maybe you just forgot to , who knows? But they do tend to disqualify the reliability of your analysis, although you seem to be reluctant to admit it. 

Stop with the silly argument that you are being logical and I am not, will you? 

 
 
 
TᵢG
35.1.14  TᵢG  replied to  JohnRussell @35.1.13    7 months ago
Go talk in circles to people who are mesmerized by it. I am not that person. 

You thinking what I described is talking in circles proves that you are not paying attention.

Of course you totally leave out of that analysis the "fact" that Trump has just been impeached, …

As I noted (and you of course ignored), none of that is going to make a difference against the big 3 I listed.

Stop with the silly argument that you are being logical and I am not, will you? 

Demonstrate unemotional logic and I will have no need to mention emotional 'reasoning'.

 
 
 
dennis smith
35.1.15  dennis smith  replied to  TᵢG @35.1.14    7 months ago

[deleted]

 
 
 
TᵢG
35.1.16  TᵢG  replied to  dennis smith @35.1.15    7 months ago

Usually.   Sometimes it is appropriate to roll up one's sleeves and duke it out.   Without sufficient challenges the kind of claims that started this will flow more freely.

 
 
 
dennis smith
35.1.17  dennis smith  replied to  TᵢG @35.1.16    7 months ago

[deleted]

 
 
 
MUVA
35.2  MUVA  replied to  TᵢG @35    7 months ago

Then my father would be president.

 
 
 
Buzz of the Orient
36  Buzz of the Orient    7 months ago

I can't watch the debates but I read the report on this last one and from what I read I simply can't understand how shooting at each other the way they do will get them support or eventual votes in November.

 
 
 
TᵢG
36.1  TᵢG  replied to  Buzz of the Orient @36    7 months ago

I agree, how stupid is it to try to discredit each other at a personal level?   They should be debating policy differences rather than this high-school level attacking.    This reminds me of the 2016 R debates.   Same thing.   Politicians, as a rule, are disgusting and the electorate encourages this by rewarding bad behavior.   Case in point:  Trump.

 
 
 
Perrie Halpern R.A.
36.1.1  author  Perrie Halpern R.A.  replied to  TᵢG @36.1    7 months ago

Perfect example Tig. Maybe it was smart of Bloomberg to remain quiet. That's what Trump did till they all slaughtered each other and he was last man standing.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
36.1.2  JohnRussell  replied to  Perrie Halpern R.A. @36.1.1    7 months ago

Perrie, does Bloomberg have a need to appeal to Democrats, or should the party just hand him the nomination?

I hope he does better next time, I really do, but no matter how confident he sounds he still isnt a Democrat.  I did not hear a single word from him last night that showed me he understands he needs to appeal to Democrats. 

If he doesnt do better in public I guess we will find out if it really is possible to simply buy an election. 

 
 
 
Perrie Halpern R.A.
36.1.3  author  Perrie Halpern R.A.  replied to  JohnRussell @36.1.2    7 months ago

Bloomberg, like any other candidate up on that stage, has to appeal to the party members. No one implied otherwise, so I don't understand you saying:

should the party just hand him the nomination? I hope he does better next time, I really do, but no matter how confident he sounds he still isnt a Democrat. 

John, there are loads of Democrats that like him. You might not like him, and that is your prerogative. But please don't tell me you hope he does better when you obviously don't like the guy.

If he doesnt do better in public I guess we will find out if it really is possible to simply buy an election. 

A totally crappy comment. 

 
 
 
TᵢG
36.1.4  TᵢG  replied to  Perrie Halpern R.A. @36.1.3    7 months ago

 Bloomberg has the best chance to defeat Trump.   How ironic to see the most extreme anti-Trumper on the site routinely trash the best chance for taking Trump out. 

9g7uq7awmyr01.jpg

 
 
 
JohnRussell
36.1.5  JohnRussell  replied to  TᵢG @36.1.4    7 months ago

Tig, Bloomberg is not going to get the nomination.  He's not going to be a good enough impersonator of a Democrat to get that spot.

Any one of the Democrats on stage last night could beat Trump. It would be very hard for Sanders. 

You ALWAYS take the point of view that is the most favorable for Trump, considering he was just impeached, is a habitual liar, and barely escaped being indicted for a felony obstruction of justice charge in the Mueller report (on a technicality). 

It is inexplicable. 

 
 
 
TᵢG
36.1.6  TᵢG  replied to  JohnRussell @36.1.5    7 months ago
Tig, Bloomberg is not going to get the nomination.  He's not going to be a good enough impersonator of a Democrat to get that spot.

I hope you are wrong.   Too soon to tell.

Any one of the Democrats on stage last night could beat Trump. It would be very hard for Sanders. 

I think you are kidding yourself.   

You ALWAYS take the point of view that is the most favorable for Trump, ...

That is what rational analysis looks like John.   The problem lies with you.   You are so extreme in your view of Trump that your gauge is skewed.   This is evidenced by the fact that you actually attack anti-Trumpers if they are not sufficiently extreme in their rhetoric.   Get a grip.

... considering he was just impeached, is a habitual liar, and barely escaped being indicted for a felony obstruction of justice charge in the Mueller report (on a technicality). 

None of those are going to make much of a difference in the general.   You are kidding yourself.   Basically, John, Trump's reelection is directly tied to the economy.   So if we have a recession between now and election day we can revisit.   Unless that or something really nasty happens, I do not see anyone beating Trump other than Bloomberg (and he would have a tough go too).

 
 
 
JohnRussell
36.1.7  JohnRussell  replied to  TᵢG @36.1.6    7 months ago

Have your opinion. Good for you.

Stop calling your highly debatable opinion "fact."

 
 
 
TᵢG
36.1.8  TᵢG  replied to  JohnRussell @36.1.7    7 months ago

That you do not understand the facts I enumerated explains much about your political views.

Better get on board with Bloomberg because short of a recession, etc. he is the only thing that stands in the way of a second Trump term.

 
 
 
Buzz of the Orient
36.1.9  Buzz of the Orient  replied to  TᵢG @36.1.6    7 months ago

With that opinion I'm surprised you've not been called a trumpster yet.  Maybe he's afraid of you.  LOL

 
 
 
TᵢG
36.1.10  TᵢG  replied to  Buzz of the Orient @36.1.9    7 months ago

Came close to calling me a Trumpster.    That would be offensive and I would most definitely strike back.

 
 
 
Ed-NavDoc
37  Ed-NavDoc    7 months ago

Personally, I think she is nasty and unhinged...

 
 
 
igknorantzrulz
37.1  igknorantzrulz  replied to  Ed-NavDoc @37    7 months ago

Personally, I think she is nasty and unhinged...

Who , Perrie ?

me neither

 
 
 
Perrie Halpern R.A.
37.1.1  author  Perrie Halpern R.A.  replied to  igknorantzrulz @37.1    7 months ago

LOL!

 
 
 
igknorantzrulz
37.1.2  igknorantzrulz  replied to  Perrie Halpern R.A. @37.1.1    7 months ago

Know what's not laugh out loud, The New York Times siting Russia as backing Trump's reelection in 2020, Trump appointing a supporter with NO INTELLIGENCE

experience to head our Intelligence collaborative ...?

.

It's obviously another against Trumpy conspiracy,

i guess...

 
 
 
Ed-NavDoc
37.1.3  Ed-NavDoc  replied to  igknorantzrulz @37.1    7 months ago

Whereas Perrie is unhinged in a good way, I can't say the same for Warren! And also Perrie certainly is not even close to being nasty!

 
 
 
igknorantzrulz
37.1.4  igknorantzrulz  replied to  Ed-NavDoc @37.1.3    7 months ago

obviously just a joke that Perrie obviously got, and in no way meant as derogatory towards yourself. I poked fun of your statement as it was not specific, and that's all.

n joy a light hearted moment if you would

 
 
 
Ed-NavDoc
37.1.5  Ed-NavDoc  replied to  igknorantzrulz @37.1.4    7 months ago

Understood. My thanks, and you as well.

 
 
 
Dean Moriarty
38  Dean Moriarty    7 months ago

I got a laugh today when Bloomberg said the winner from last nights debate was Trump. 

https://www.politico.com/video/2020/02/20/bloomberg-the-real-winner-of-the-debate-last-night-was-donald-trump-069694

 
 
 
TᵢG
38.1  TᵢG  replied to  Dean Moriarty @38    7 months ago

That is what I was saying too.   They are supposed to be auditioning for PotUS, not cage fighters.   Pretty ugly display.

 
 
 
Sister Mary Agnes Ample Bottom
38.2  Sister Mary Agnes Ample Bottom  replied to  Dean Moriarty @38    7 months ago
Bloomberg said the winner from last nights debate was Trump.

I would vote for him based on that comment alone.  

On the other hand, I decided to vote for Bill Clinton after seeing him play the saxophone on Arsenio Hall. 

 
 
 
MrFrost
38.3  MrFrost  replied to  Dean Moriarty @38    7 months ago
Bloomberg said the winner from last nights debate was Trump. 

He wasn't wrong either. Dems need to drop the infighting and focus on the real problem... Trump and his lawless admin. 

 
 
 
MrFrost
39  MrFrost    7 months ago

I like Klobuchar because she is a moderate, not a far left winger. But she did take a big hit at the end when she invited people to go to her website and immediately after Bloomberg said, "You can go to my site too, and I am not asking for you to give money". 

Doesn't matter anyway. No matter who on the left gets the nomination, I am voting for, even if I have to hold my nose and vote for Bernie. 

 
 
 
MUVA
39.1  MUVA  replied to  MrFrost @39    7 months ago

Your view is warped Klobuchar is leftist light she is so far left she can't see the middle.

 
 
 
MrFrost
39.1.1  MrFrost  replied to  MUVA @39.1    7 months ago

Your view is warped Klobuchar is leftist light she is so far left she can't see the middle.

Wrong. 

 
 
 
It Is ME
41  It Is ME    7 months ago

Another Democrat Debate in the Books. Why I watch them, I really don't know. jrSmiley_103_smiley_image.jpg

I, along with many others, actually learned NOTHING more than they are STILL money hungry misogynist communist looney tired dumb babbling no detail freebie promising Presidential Wannabe's"  !

 
 
 
CB
41.1  CB   replied to  It Is ME @41    7 months ago

Ad hominem attacks? Is that all you have? I mean if half of that was true, Trump would not need to be out trolling under the Democrat campaign map. What does Trump see that you are missing about democrats? After all, Trump is smarter than your average republican, because in 2015—he said republicans needed him to get anything done.

 
 
 
XDm9mm
41.1.1  XDm9mm  replied to  CB @41.1    7 months ago
because in 2015—he said republicans needed him to get anything done.

And he has exceeded their wildest dreams.

That's why over 95% of the Republican base supports him.  He's keeping his campaign promises.

 
 
 
CB
41.1.2  CB   replied to  XDm9mm @41.1.1    7 months ago

I don't know about the percentages, however good for Trump for sticking it to the democrats by cutting them out of governing. History will look at Trump and this republican party and determine how sensible it was to allow Trump to steal, lie, and cheat two thirds thererabouts of the citizens of this country out of their rights and privileges to honor the fever dreams of conservatives in the short-term.

Now back to the question:

  1.   What does Trump see that you are missing about democrats? After all, Trump is smarter than your average republican. . . . ?
 
 
 
It Is ME
41.1.3  It Is ME  replied to  CB @41.1    7 months ago
I mean if half of that was true

You don't know ?

 
 
 
CB
41.1.4  CB   replied to  It Is ME @41.1.3    7 months ago

@41.1.2.

CBS News Democratic Primary Debate tonight! Be there or be square, everybody!

 
 
 
It Is ME
41.1.5  It Is ME  replied to  CB @41.1.4    7 months ago

????

 
 
 
CB
41.1.6  CB   replied to  It Is ME @41.1.5    7 months ago

????????

 
 
 
It Is ME
41.1.7  It Is ME  replied to  CB @41.1.6    7 months ago
????????

You confused yourself ?

 
 
Loading...
Loading...

Who is online


Thrawn 31
Dulay
Tacos!
GregTx
Sunshine
CB
MrFrost


39 visitors