2020 US Election (Part Two)

[Berzerker]

Blah

Blah blah blah (jesus man move on, we have)

I do not recall much argument about banning travel from china temporarily or any following temporary bans other then they were too late to have the desired effect.

I was responding to someone who thinks Biden is the lesser evil, his track record is relevant and suggests otherwise. I dont know how anyone could vote for Biden after all the lives he ruined, much less do it in the name of voting for the lesser evil.

You mean besides you saying so? I mean, I understand that no one considers you a reliable source...

You said I change my opinions from forum to forum, not me. But if I'm unreliable it wouldn't matter what I said. So, where is your evidence? Your reliability is on trial, not mine.

 

[Kaitzilla]

I do not recall much argument about banning travel from china temporarily or any following temporary bans other then they were too late to have the desired effect.

Here is some argument:

January 31st after Trump's China travel ban.
https://www.statnews.com/2020/01/31...navirus-response-would-suffer/comment-page-3/

Public health experts have warned that travel bans are not effective at stemming the spread of a virus and can make responding to an outbreak more challenging.

“From a public health perspective, there is limited effectiveness. And then there are a host of other reasons why they can actually be counterproductive,” said Catherine Worsnop, who studies international cooperation during global health emergencies at the University of Maryland.

The World Health Organization, which declared the outbreak a global health emergency this week, has recommended against any travel or trade restrictions in response to the outbreak. Member countries, however, do not have to comply with that guidance.

And now, 6 weeks later an expert saying they ARE effective at stemming the spread..
https://cis.org/Arthur/Dr-Fauci-Trump-China-Restrictions-Slowed-Spread-Wuhan-Flu

On ABC News "This Week" on Sunday, Dr. Anthony Fauci, director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) at the National Institutes of Health, indicated that the Trump administration's early decision to ban most travel from China slowed the spread of the Wuhan flu in the United States.
...

Fauci also credited the other travel restrictions that the president has imposed:

"What we're doing now with the other travel restrictions — so you block infections from coming in. And then within is when you have containment and mitigation. And that's the reason why the kinds of things we're doing that may seem like an over-reaction will keep us away from that worst-case scenario."

Ugh, Wuhan flu is incorrect.
Hurts an article's credibility.

I guess it might come down to the definition of "effective".


The World Health Organization is still recommending against travel bans unless they are at the very start of an outbreak and should be temporary in nature.
https://www.who.int/news-room/artic...onal-traffic-in-relation-to-covid-19-outbreak

I understand their point, but without halting travel it is very hard to stamp out outbreaks.
Airplanes and airports seed infections everywhere.
It should be ok if we can get massive amounts of testing and screening I think.

 

[Kaitzilla]

By applications that means newly unemployed?

Huh, I stand corrected!
https://www.cnbc.com/2020/03/18/how-to-file-for-unemployment-due-to-coronavirus.html

The good news: The federal government is allowing states to expand eligibility for unemployment benefits because of the impact of COVID-19.
If your employer had to temporarily shut down operations because of coronavirus, you can file.
The same is true of employees who are currently being quarantined, but expect to return to work after.

“In this emergency, I would not discourage anyone from trying to apply for benefits, even if they wouldn’t have applied before,” Michele Evermore, senior policy analyst for the National Employment Law Project, tells CNBC Make It.

I'm spouting a lot of nonsense today.

 

[Timsup2nothin]

Your reliability is on trial, not mine.

LOL...you FBI now? If not, fair bet you've never been in a position to put me on trial.

Huh, I stand corrected!
https://www.cnbc.com/2020/03/18/how-to-file-for-unemployment-due-to-coronavirus.html



I'm spouting a lot of nonsense today.

You're doing okay. I was just trying to see if that number was like "all these people were working yesterday and now they aren't," or a weeks accumulation or for the month or what.

 

[Berzerker]

LOL...you FBI now? If not, fair bet you've never been in a position to put me on trial.

Not me, the other people here depending on your reliability. So far all you've done is accuse me of changing opinions from forum to forum but you've been avoiding posting any evidence. I know why, and I think you know why, but the jury is waiting for your evidence. If you dont post any they might not consider you reliable. Smart jury.

 

[Timsup2nothin]

Not me, the other people here depending on your reliability. So far all you've done is accuse me of changing opinions from forum to forum but you've been avoiding posting any evidence. I know why, and I think you know why, but the jury is waiting for your evidence. If you dont post any they might not consider you reliable. Smart jury.

LOL...sure man...you are so much more respected than I could ever aspire to be.

Meanwhile...

The issue apparently weighing on Sanders about getting out of the race is that when he does he becomes just a small state senator and not really positioned to be "the voice of the movement," and he is concerned about who will take on that position, if anyone.

Since there are definitely people more in touch with the progressive wing of the party, can anyone suggest possibilities there? They need to have a political future, which is why Sanders really has to be replaced since he has probably run his last campaign, and Warren has the same problem. As much as I like Ocasio-Cortez a first term representative isn't going to be effective. I know some people might want to argue about that and I'm willing, but I'd also like to see some other suggestions I can check out at the same time.

 

[Takhisis]

Where some see a crisis, others see opportunity.

The Trump administration is talking bailouts already for the airlines, hotels and others. What he can pass remains to be seen. Trump has no friends on the other side of the House and slim chance of making any. Even if he can get something approved, how effective will it be? The omens are ominous.

If you want to imagine what a Trump bailout will look like, look no further than his 2017 tax cuts.

“The rich will not be gaining at all with this plan,” Trump promised as he pushed through the $1.7tn cuts that the, then booming, US economy neither needed and which the future could ill afford.

The tax cuts were sold on a lie. “Our focus is on helping the folks who work in the mailrooms and the machine shops of America. The plumbers, the carpenters, the cops, the teachers, the truck drivers, the pipe-fitters, the people that like me best,” promised Trump.

In fact, more than 60% of the tax savings went to the most wealthy 20%, according to the non-partisan Tax Policy Center. Quite a number of them were in Congress.

Companies including AT&T, General Motors and Wells Fargo all promised to invest in new jobs. Instead they bought back their own shares and laid people off.

Sure, the tax cuts helped boost the 401k retirement savings plans most Americans now rely on in lieu of a pension. But the rises in share price disproportionately benefit the economic elite. The wealthiest 10% of Americans own 84% of all stocks and the top 1% of households own nearly 38% of all stock, according to research by the New York University economist Edward Wolff.

The tax cuts were such a dud that even Republican voters don’t like them. Bailouts for big business as the average American struggles with the Covid-19 crisis on top of healthcare costs, student debts and persistent low wages could be political suicide for Trump. Nevertheless he will have to do something – we can’t rely on the Fed any more.​

(full article)

 

[Zardnaar]

Petition to rename the War of Independence to the 1776 Great Tax Dodge (part 1).

 

[Ironsided]

If folks want to vote third party, great, they should do so and support their candidate. I'm all for people making a positive case for who they like. I am not in favor of constant negative posting. Truth in advertising: I do violate this by being negative about Trump because he has demonstrated his lack of respect for US law and the constitution and has brought criminal elements into his administration. I am for anyone but him to be president. If the Lincoln Project ran a candidate for president, they would be better than Trump. I'd be quite happy to discuss any third party candidates. Who are they? November is an important election; the stakes are high for US citizens. Who are you going to vote for?

By virtue of not being American I won’t have to vote for either of them. (I would likely at the polls lean on the side of anyone but Trump, but I’m conflicted.) All young and progressive Americans should take pride and comfort in the fact that Sanders and the movement is constantly winning ground in the background. Taking a step back to get a better view; the political dialogue now is ten times more nuanced than ten years ago. That’s the long-term, eye-opening and educational benefit of the movement.

As it looks right now Biden is not willing to compromise strongly enough to earn a progressive vote. He is stuck in a neoliberal 1990’s mindset together with his boomer supporters. That is his weakness and why I’m sure, unless he changes his ways, he will lose to Trump in the general election even though on paper that should be damn near impossible. Biden must make massive concessions to the Bernie supporters. Bernie should stay in the race to pile on that pressure. Biden still has time, but the token gestures he has extended so far are pathetic. It’s like he can’t believe people won’t buy his crap because Trump is worse. Biden needs the Bernie movement far more than they need his useless neoliberal arse - unless he significantly changed his tune on universal programs and ending the seemingly endless wars.

 

[Zkribbler]

Petition to rename the War of Independence to the 1776 Great Tax Dodge (part 1).

Except the taxes in question were contrary to Magna Carta and the colonies' charters. So it wasn't so much a dodge as a stand up and spit in King George's eye.

 

[IglooDame]

How do you get to the lesser of two evils with Biden? If you're an ornery libertarian then you must know the roles he played in the drug war and invasion of Iraq (just to name a couple). What has Trump done to deserve labeling him the greater evil?

Because ultimately Biden (and most other politicians) are making policy decisions roughly corresponding with their ideology, and admittedly to varying degrees, doing what they do to support their constituents, the United States, and humanity. Precious few of them would actually martyr themselves, but there's a certain understanding about it all. Trump's ideology is purely about supporting and furthering Donald Trump, period. But what makes him unusual is that he's got the combination of ambition (or maybe it's just greed), breathtaking narcissism, complete lack of ethics, and (freakishly enough) personal charisma to actually accomplish what he appears to me to be trying to do.

Would you rather he call Putin a liar while standing next to him?

One, he seems quite content to confront world leaders face-to-face when it suits him, and two, he's had plenty of opportunity to equivocate, walk it back, whatever. Instead we get him having a literally secret chat with Putin.

And the intelligence agencies were a few people from the CIA, NSA and FBI probably handpicked by John Brennan, James Clapper, Jim Comey, and Andy McCabe. Dont you think he should be wary of holdovers from the Obama administration after all the lies we were told about RussiaGate?

Ah, more deep-state-ism, lovely. No. He doesn't just distrust "Obama holdovers". He distrusts anyone that doesn't explicitly kowtow to him. McMaster, Kelly, Mattis, Tillerman, Bolton, hell even Sessions. He should thank the heavens that he picked well with Pence and Mnuchin. He regards apolitical people as opponents, which explains why he's getting along so famously with the rank and file of DoJ, State, the intel agencies, and now the CDC.

How do you feel about the Obama administration lying to a Fisa court to spy on Trump? Kinda explains his reluctance to trust the bureaucratic leadership he inherited. Should we still be in Syria arming terrorists to overthrow Assad? We would be if Hillary had won... and we might if Biden wins. Peace wont return to Syria if the deep state has its way.

He stuck a knife in the back of our Kurd allies - the ones whom the US could not have defeated ISIS without - and handed them over to Erdogan, Putin, and Assad, against the advice of all his advisors, including Hannity and FoxFriends. Or are they deep state people, too?

 

[hobbsyoyo]

By applications that means newly unemployed?

Yes

I didn't read his links but the Lt Gov. of Ohio was on NPR yesterday and they have a surge in newly unemployed people laid off because of the virus.

Instead we get him having a literally secret chat with Putin.

secret chats, plural
He just had another one, they seem to happen at least every 6 months. Got to check in with the boss I guess.

 

[hobbsyoyo]

I think Sanders should bow out of the campaign that he's losing to 'focus on the virus response'.

Then Biden and the rest of the party should unit around Sander's bills and efforts in the Senate and hold him up a speaker/champion for the people.

 

[Timsup2nothin]

As it looks right now Biden is not willing to compromise strongly enough to earn a progressive vote. He is stuck in a neoliberal 1990’s mindset together with his boomer supporters. That is his weakness and why I’m sure, unless he changes his ways, he will lose to Trump in the general election even though on paper that should be damn near impossible. Biden must make massive concessions to the Bernie supporters. Bernie should stay in the race to pile on that pressure. Biden still has time, but the token gestures he has extended so far are pathetic. It’s like he can’t believe people won’t buy his crap because Trump is worse. Biden needs the Bernie movement far more than they need his useless neoliberal arse - unless he significantly changed his tune on universal programs and ending the seemingly endless wars.

Staying in a lost race doesn't really "pile on pressure" though. Truth is, it's just bad for everyone. The evidence of that is that the progressive movement is actually not "gaining strength in the background." It is much less of a force now than it was four years ago, and in the absence of other possibilities I attribute that to Sanders having stayed in that race too long. One immutable rule of politics is that you don't build strength by losing. "I will not withdraw, you will have to beat me senseless and carry me out" may sound noble, but it really only resonates when it prefaces a victory. When you say it and follow through with getting beaten senseless and carried out you wind up laying in the street with a lot less friends than you thought you had.

 

[adcarrymaokai]

So Tulsi just endorsed Biden, mwahahahaha.

 

[Timsup2nothin]

So Tulsi just endorsed Biden, mwahahahaha.

What else was she supposed to do?

 

[Sommerswerd]

All young and progressive Americans should take pride and comfort in the fact that Sanders and the movement is constantly winning ground in the background. Taking a step back to get a better view; the political dialogue now is ten times more nuanced than ten years ago. That’s the long-term, eye-opening and educational benefit of the movement.

My sense is that this is indeed what has happened as a direct result of Sanders candidacy... I can't tell whether the effect was stronger in 2020 or 2016, but it was definitely there.

Bernie should stay in the race to pile on that pressure.

The risk that Bernie is taking right now, is that he actually has the opposite effect by staying in the race and ends up erasing all those gains you mentioned above.

What I mean is... let's say for sake of discussion that Bernie stays in, keep railing against Biden and "the establishment" and "neoliberals" and so on... but them Biden goes on to win. The argument will be that Biden won in spite of Bernie, and by extension his supporters. That's a worst case scenario for any progressive movement, because it bolsters the narrative that the Democrats don't need progressives to win.

But its a catch 22, because if Benie does all that, and Biden loses, then you know that the argument will be that its Bernie's/progressives' fault, for not supporting Biden.

On the other hand, if Bernie drops out and gets on Biden's wagon now, there is a good chance that he gets a platform to influence the message Biden is putting out, and maybe outright present his own platform as part of the Biden campaign, because Biden will be eager to have Bernie court his own supporters on his behalf. Also, if Biden wins, progressives will be able to claim a good share of the credit, for having come aboard early on and if Biden loses, they are innoculated against blame. So to me the strategy seems to be in favor of Bernie dropping and endorsing Biden, sooner rather than later.

 

[Sommerswerd]

"I will not withdraw, you will have to beat me senseless and carry me out" may sound noble, but it really only resonates when it prefaces a victory. When you say it and follow through with getting beaten senseless and carried out you wind up laying in the street with a lot less friends than you thought you had.

This is true, both in a figurative as well as a literal sense, and is incidentally one of the more useful lessons to learn in life, even if you have to learn it the literal hard way... as anyone who has experienced, or even witnessed it the hard way can attest.

 

[Timsup2nothin]

They will have to beat me senseless and carry me out! Who stands with me ?

Errrrr, no one?

I've said it before, and of course gotten panned, but it is still no less true. Many presidential campaigns are run for purposes other than getting elected president. Sanders started out in 2016 running a "build a movement/shift the party" campaign. Somewhere along the line he took it into that politician head that "hey, *I* could be president" and forgot what he was doing. That hurt the movement he appointed himself as spokesman for, and if he doesn't remember pretty quick it is going to really hurt it and potentially kill it.

 

[adcarrymaokai]

What else was she supposed to do?

You are a boomer, right? Ok, let me explain. It's not what she is supposed to do, it's what she did. Hillary called Tulsi a "Russian asset", and Neera Tanden said that Tulsi would run a third party campaign to tank Biden. And there were many other establishment Dems which speculated that she is staying in the race to hurt Biden. On the other side, there are the Tulsi stans who praised her as the progressive and anti-war and non-establishment candidate with integrity.

Then she turns around and endorses Biden, which, by Hillary's logic, makes Biden a Russian asset, and also makes all Tulsi stans look really dumb, because if Tulsi is an anti-war hero, then why is she endorsing the guy who voted for 7 wars? This isn't unexpected as much as it is plain cringe. I am just laughing.

By the way, I fully expect Bernie to endorse Biden if Bernie drops out, but that's because he said so. And when Bernie drops, there will not be any other candidate anyway, so it even look bad and dumb on his part not to endorse. But at the time when there is more than one choice and the nominee has not been declared?