2020 US Election (Part Two)

[Timsup2nothin]

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?

LOL...that's what I thought. You are pretending there is more than one choice. Sanders is saying "They'll have to beat me senseless and drag me out, who stands with me?" and you think Gabbard should have said "I will."

 

[adcarrymaokai]

As to anecdotes, my gf is a republican and is surrounded by republicans at work. They were pretty universal in their "give him a chance" vs "we hate Hillary with blinding unreasoned passion" stance four years ago. She and most of her co-workers will be voting for Biden. She wouldn't have wanted to vote for Sanders and I suspect many of her co-workers wouldn't either. Faced with a Trump/Sanders choice I can't guess what they would have done.

Perhaps, that just proves that Biden is Republican-lite. And perhaps it will help him. Or maybe not. Just like Hillary was Republican-lite, but people still chose Trump. And by Republican I mean economically. Culturally, Hillary was the "first woman president".

Also, I don't know where the post about registered Democrats went, but I was one until a couple of weeks ago, and I am never going back. I don't think I am ever going to degenerate into the "DemoncRATs are Muslim-loving America-hating gay Jews" state of mind, but if anything, I am now seeing just how corrupt the party is, and how little they care about regular people like me. All they are doing right now is "let's elect a woman! a woman VP! a black president!", while moving jobs to China and giving corporations and banks huge bailouts. No thanks. At least the Republicans aren't pretending to be morally superior and own up to their nastiness.

 

[Timsup2nothin]

Perhaps, that just proves that Biden is Republican-lite. And perhaps it will help him. Or maybe not. Just like Hillary was Republican-lite, but people still chose Trump. And by Republican I mean economically. Culturally, Hillary was the "first woman president".

Also, I don't know where the post about registered Democrats went, but I was one until a couple of weeks ago, and I am never going back. I don't think I am ever going to degenerate into the "DemoncRATs are Muslim-loving America-hating gay Jews" state of mind, but if anything, I am now seeing just how corrupt the party is, and how little they care about regular people like me. All they are doing right now is "let's elect a woman! a woman VP! a black president!", while moving jobs to China and giving corporations and banks huge bailouts. No thanks. At least the Republicans aren't pretending to be morally superior and own up to their nastiness.

LOL...sure man. Open honest GOP all the way. Have fun.

 

[adcarrymaokai]

LOL...that's what I thought. You are pretending there is more than one choice. Sanders is saying "They'll have to beat me senseless and drag me out, who stands with me?" and you think Gabbard should have said "I will."

There is officially more than one choice on the ballot.

 

[Patine]

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

And the French Revolution to the 1789 Great Tax Dodge (that was the initial incident there too).

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.

Ah, yes, Lyndon LaRouche and the paranoid, conspiracy-theory, tin-foil-hat term "Deep State," he coined may end up being his biggest legacy.

One immutable rule of politics is that you don't build strength by losing.

Not an "immutable law of politics," by far, or even a law at all. Just a shallow, one-dimensional motif you've been taught by someone in your life whose done you no favours by telling you such. If you look at the breadth of political (especially globally, but it can definitely be found, of you look carefully, and outside the typically troped "box," of perspective, in American political history too) there are many instances where a defeat at one point, even multiple such defeats, are the foundations for future great political victories down the line.

"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.

It doesn't sound like the line of a victory speech OR someone admitting defeat. It sounds like a situation that many of your past quotes show you just comprehend or accept as parts of reality, despite the fact they very much are.

 

[Timsup2nothin]

There is officially more than one choice on the ballot.

There were actually three, but Gabbard could recognize that she wasn't going to win the nomination. She also could recognize that Sanders is not. So there's only one potential nominee.

 

[adcarrymaokai]

Meanwhile, Republicans are trying to pass a stimulus package to help American workers, but Nancy Pelosi is blocking it.

Fun fact: Pelosi represents my district, and for the first time in thirty years, a Democratic challenger was able to gain enough support to go against her in the November elections. Might as well campaign for him and try to get this senile boomer out of the House. She is too out of touch with her own constituency, though sadly rich people and corporations will pour millions in donations to preserve their interests. Well, at least she is going to die at some point, and I will at least celebrate that. Ding dong, the boomer witch is dead.

 

[Patine]

There were actually three, but Gabbard could recognize that she wasn't going to win the nomination. She also could recognize that Sanders is not. So there's only one potential nominee.

Of course, whether Biden now defeats at Trump or not, EVERYONE loses. Like in 2004 and 2016 when the major party nominations had become obvious. Another robbed and cheated election. Another ballot box fiasco. Another pick-your-poison of the worst sort, with no candidate who will WIN for the people, nation, or any worthwhile goals of governance. Tack on another such horrid election to 1852, 1920, 1968, 2004, and 2016. HAVE FUN losing, even if you win! Because that, like building victory from defeat, is also possible!

 

[adcarrymaokai]

There were actually three, but Gabbard could recognize that she wasn't going to win the nomination. She also could recognize that Sanders is not. So there's only one potential nominee.

You are missing the point again. It's not what she could but what, when, and how she did it. It just showed once again how all these establishment politicians are sellouts, and many people feel betrayed by this endorsement, just like the Yang Gang was in complete disarray after Yang endorsed Biden. Mind you, Tulsi and Yang supporters were largely not Democrats, and now these non-Democrats are even more disappointed at Democrats.

Like I said, I voted for Hillary because I thought the Dems would do better next time, but I am no longer a registered Democrat, and I will not be voting for Biden.

 

[Timsup2nothin]

Not an "immutable law of politics," by far, or even a law at all. Just a shallow, one-dimensional motif you've been taught by someone in your life whose done you no favours by telling you such. If you look at the breadth of political (especially globally, but it can definitely be found, of you look carefully, and outside the typically troped "box," of perspective, in American political history too) there are many instances where a defeat at one point, even multiple such defeats, are the foundations for future great political victories down the line.

Instead of vaguely alluding to your vast trove of knowledge and saying I'm just wrong, how about coughing up at least one of this myriad of examples, specifically one that is applicable to the current situation, ie two party USian politics.

 

[adcarrymaokai]

Of course, whether Biden now defeats at Trump or not, EVERYONE loses. Like in 2004 and 2016 when the major party nominations had become obvious. Another robbed and cheated election. Another ballot box fiasco. Another pick-your-poison of the worst sort, with no candidate who will WIN for the people, nation, or any worthwhile goals of governance. Tack on another such horrid election to 1852, 1920, 1968, 2004, and 2016. HAVE FUN losing, even if you win! Because that, like building victory from defeat, is also possible!

Exactly. This might only feel like a victory for boomers who are a step away from the grave, but everyone under 40 is ready to burn everything down, starting with the Democratic party.

 

[Timsup2nothin]

You are missing the point again. It's not what she could but what, when, and how she did it. It just showed once again how all these establishment politicians are sellouts, and many people feel betrayed by this endorsement, just like the Yang Gang was in complete disarray after Yang endorsed Biden. Mind you, Tulsi and Yang supporters were largely not Democrats, and now these non-Democrats are even more disappointed at Democrats.

Like I said, I voted for Hillary because I thought the Dems would do better next time, but I am no longer a registered Democrat, and I will not be voting for Biden.

Sometimes I treat the embittered youth with kid gloves rather than in kind. But since your vote is totally irrelevant I will say again...good on you, go support that open and honest GOP you fantasize about.

Now, as to the point you claim I "missed." Do tell what, when, and how she should have done whatever she was doing that would have made a stubborn, infantile, anti political crusader happy? Those people are lost and aren't going to vote in a significant block until they grow up, and history indicates they will grow up into opposing blocks anyway no matter what anyone does.

Exactly. This might only feel like a victory for boomers who are a step away from the grave, but everyone under 40 is ready to burn everything down, starting with the Democratic party.

Just so you know, by the time you no longer have to deal with those "step away from the grave" forty-five year olds you are most likely going to be eligible for social security.

 

[Farm Boy]

Hey, the sooner you both stop assing us about all the extra stuff and admit you're both voting naked economic interest (preferrably) at each other's expense like warring tribes with a massive new player moving in, the better.

 

[Patine]

Hey, the sooner you both stop assing us about all the extra stuff and admit you're both voting naked economic interest (preferrably) at each other's expense like warring tribes with a massive new player moving in, the better.

Well, at heart, I know this, and you know, but a lot of people, including many here, believe "legions of Fascists," and "unprecedented era oppression and hate of minorities," (people who have no clue and 50's and before were like), and an Imperialistic President Hellbent on conquest (that was an early one - before he proved to be the least military interventionist since Hoover left office), and "every single voter who voted Republican could only have done so for the promotion of bigotry alone, and must be held accountable for their vote," and that the Democratic Party is like a last gasp "Rebel Alliance," before a growing Republican "Evil Empire," where unity at all costs is essential, and other sensationalist claptrap "battle of good vs. evil" feel to it. It's utterly ludicrous, these undertones. And, you are absolutely correct - at the heart of it, it's all economics. Every thing is window dressing and hyperbole. But I, myself, far prefer Sanders' brand of economics - actually spending money on the people who need it...

 

[adcarrymaokai]

Well, at heart, I know this, and you know, but a lot of people, including many here, believe "legions of Fascists," and "unprecedented era oppression and hate of minorities," (people who have no clue and 50's and before were like), and an Imperialistic President Hellbent on conquest (that was an early one - before he proved to be the least military interventionist since Hoover left office), and "every single voter who voted Republican could only have done so for the promotion of bigotry alone, and must be held accountable for their vote," and that the Democratic Party is like a last gasp "Rebel Alliance," before a growing Republican "Evil Empire," where unity at all costs is essential, and other sensationalist claptrap "battle of good vs. evil" feel to it. It's utterly ludicrous, these undertones. And, you are absolutely correct - at the heart of it, it's all economics. Every thing is window dressing and hyperbole. But I, myself, far prefer Sanders' brand of economics - actually spending money on the people who need it...

Yup. Some people are completely oblivious to the fact that Trump won on economic ideas and a very simple message of making America great for the working people, whose lives have been ravaged by Obama's neoliberal policies. I mean yes, many of his supporters are also racist (hi, mom), but the main reason was still economic policies.

And with Republicans outflanking the Democrats on the left, we are witnessing a complete party realignment.

 

[hobbsyoyo]

Meanwhile, Republicans are trying to pass a stimulus package to help American workers, but Nancy Pelosi is blocking it.

You were really wrong about your claims regarding means testing, so I'm going to have to ask for some links or something substantiation to back this up.

To be clear, I'm not doubting that she'd block a bill. I do doubt that she'd block a good bill without cause. I half expect whatever link you come up with to point to abortion poison pills or similar GOP nonsense that she's moving to stop.

 

[Tristan_C]

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.

And with Republicans outflanking the Democrats on the left, we are witnessing a complete party realignment.

This all seems like a surreal, unforeseeable situation.

Trump and Tulsi's foreign policies are very similar. (There is an added plank of substituting armed competition with trade competition, so they are not identical.) Trump also just stole 1000 Yangbux this week. Secure/closed borders are anti-libertarian. Battling to the death with the Washington establishment, and in particular the FBI and CIA, but even against the elites in one's own party, is fundamentally liberal... or at least it should be. Before the 2016 election an essayist for one of the conservative think tanks remarked on these things. "On trade, globalization, and war, Trump is to the left (conventionally understood) not only of his own party, but of his Democratic opponent."

Just in case things started getting remotely predictable, coronachan hit the scene and I have no doubt it will change people further.

 

[Timsup2nothin]

Yup. Some people are completely oblivious to the fact that Trump won on economic ideas and a very simple message of making America great for the working people, whose lives have been ravaged by Obama's neoliberal policies. I mean yes, many of his supporters are also racist (hi, mom), but the main reason was still economic policies.

And with Republicans outflanking the Democrats on the left, we are witnessing a complete party realignment.

LOL...well, other than the fact that the whole "making America great for working people" was the same bald faced lie that it always is when the GOP says it, sure. By "outflanking on the left" you apparently mean "have found a new generation of naive people who believe them."

 

[Farm Boy]

He also cuts taxes for the rich and accelerates the concentration of real assets. The vacuum Left made room for a kleptocrat. Look south anytime over the last 50 years. I liked Bernie better too, but eh. That aint happening. The Progressives are Rich, and the censorship/propaganda is no longer about what you see, it's about what you never hear about.

 

[adcarrymaokai]

You were really wrong about your claims regarding means testing, so I'm going to have to ask for some links or something substantiation to back this up.

To be clear, I'm not doubting that she'd block a bill. I do doubt that she'd block a good bill without cause. I half expect whatever link you come up with to point to abortion poison pills or similar GOP nonsense that she's moving to stop.

Nah, this has nothing to do with abortion or whatever. She just wants to do it via refundable tax credits, expanded unemployment, and "possibly" direct cash payments, whereas Trump just wants to give cash to everyone. Do you think tax credits do that much to people who have no savings right now?