Jump to content

chasfh

The 2020 Presidential Race

Recommended Posts

24 minutes ago, chasfh said:

Which parrots Daily Wire, which parrots Daily Caller, which parrots Gateway Pundit, which parrots The Blaze, which parrots WorldNetDaily, which parrots InfoWars, which parrots RT, which is the propaganda arm of the Kremlin.

 

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, tiger337 said:

Happy Holidays to Stan.  Merry Christmas to everyone else that celebrates it.      

06clintontrump1-articleLarge.jpg?quality

There they are again, that loathsome, repulsive quartet.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Charles Liston said:

There they are again, that loathsome, repulsive quartet.

They've got more in common with each other than they do with any of their followers.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Motown Bombers said:

Clinton is charismatic and intelligent. Trump is just a belligerent fat oaf. 

Trump is also charismatic to many people.  I have always found him to be extremely shallow and douchey, but people have always been drawn to him.  

What I meant though is that the lifestyles of the Trumps, Clintons, etc.  are more similar to each other than to those of the masses.  These kinds of people pretend to hate each other, but I think politics is largely a game.  They get each other and don't give a **** about us.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, tiger337 said:

Trump is also charismatic to many people.  I have always found him to be extremely shallow and douchey, but people have always been drawn to him.  

What I meant though is that the lifestyles of the Trumps, Clintons, etc.  are more similar to each other than to those of the masses.  These kinds of people pretend to hate each other, but I think politics is largely a game.  They get each other and don't give a **** about us.  

They are both rich.

Only one got rich off politics, however. 

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I just get a funny feeling about Bernie Sanders. Let's not forget Tulsi was one of his first supporters and Sanders worked well as a foil to Hillary. We also know Jill Stein is a Russian asset and a lot of the Bernie or bust people were pushing that loonspud on us over Hillary.

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/24/2019 at 9:57 AM, pfife said:

This sounds cool.   

For any Democrat running for any federal elected office, it is political malpractice not to hammer this any time their words can be heard by constituents.

Same with the 845b in cuts.

 

I have a difficult time understanding why the US Government needs to reduce the deficit only by raising taxes. The government doesn't make or manufacture anything. One would think given what the government does do, it should be able to do so with a lot less employees given the technological advances with computers and such. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Motown Bombers said:

I just get a funny feeling about Bernie Sanders. Let's not forget Tulsi was one of his first supporters and Sanders worked well as a foil to Hillary. We also know Jill Stein is a Russian asset and a lot of the Bernie or bust people were pushing that loonspud on us over Hillary.

Sanders has had the exact same message since the 80s.  Like him or not, he has been very consistent which is something you can't say about most politicians.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I came across this observation made a couple of weeks ago by Paul Waldman in WaPo in a story about Slotkin and Van Drew that goes to the question of how he Dems will or won't win in the 2020 election.

Quote

Slotkin decided to vote yes on the two articles of impeachment and is now explaining to her constituents why she made that decision. Slotkin is smart enough to realize that doing so will preserve her support among Democrats in her district while probably not alienating any Republicans who weren’t already going to vote against her. Other vulnerable Democrats seem to see it the same way, which is why one after another is saying they’ll vote in favor of impeachment.

These Democrats likely understand that swing districts aren’t made up of moderate voters, they’re made up of roughly equal numbers of partisan Republicans and partisan Democrats. Whichever party you’re in, voting for the other side won’t get you much credit with them, but it will destroy your support among your own partisans.

Which means that the best thing for Democrats in swing districts (and states) isn’t finding some kind of middle way. It’s making sure that Trump is as discredited and damaged as possible.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, 68Tiger said:

I have a difficult time understanding why the US Government needs to reduce the deficit only by raising taxes. The government doesn't make or manufacture anything. One would think given what the government does do, it should be able to do so with a lot less employees given the technological advances with computers and such. 

I don't think I understand this.  Government provide services versus making things.  You could argue that they should provide fewer services and that is a fair argument, but why would service jobs necessarily cost less than manufacturing?  And why do technological advances reduce service costs more than manufacturing costs?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, tiger337 said:

I don't think I understand this.  Government provide services versus making things.  You could argue that they should provide fewer services and that is a fair argument, but why would service jobs necessarily cost less than manufacturing?  And why do technological advances reduce service costs more than manufacturing costs?

In agreeeance with you.  I'm not sure the VA is becoming less labor intensive.   For other things, we don't want a no man-in-the-loop for deciding kill chains for our predators against the baddies.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Gehringer_2 said:

I came across this observation made a couple of weeks ago by Paul Waldman in WaPo in a story about Slotkin and Van Drew that goes to the question of how he Dems will or won't win in the 2020 election.

This was my point months ago when the decision to go - no-go on impeachment was pending...

It doesn't matter if the Senate Pubs run a kangaroo court and let him off the hook. The impeachment itself put a spotlight on how corrupt Trump and his cronies are... it is showing the corruption of the Senate Republicans... There is a stain on all of them from this point forward.

Regardless of what happens in the Senate.

I wanted the spotlight on their rat and cockroach infested dirty corners.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, tiger337 said:

Sanders has had the exact same message since the 80s.  Like him or not, he has been very consistent which is something you can't say about most politicians.

 

The Russians have been playing the long game.

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In all seriousness, I'd say it is possible that troll farms were promoting Sanders hard in 2016 and shifted their support to Stein after Bernie lost the primary.

I tend to doubt Sanders has been knowingly / directly receiving support from Russia, though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, Mr. Bigglesworth said:

In all seriousness, I'd say it is possible that troll farms were promoting Sanders hard in 2016 and shifted their support to Stein after Bernie lost the primary.

I tend to doubt Sanders has been knowingly / directly receiving support from Russia, though.

Yes, this is my point. You don't need to be willingly or knowingly involved to be a Russian asset. I don't believe Sanders was involved with Russia, but it does seem like Russia was in support of Sanders. Tulsi was one of his first supporter and quit the DNC. The Russians also pushed the narrative of the DNC being rigged against Sanders in favor of Clinton. They also pushed Jill Stein as the third party alternative for Sanders supporters. It's also telling Trump has not attacked Sanders. Russia didn't necessarily want Trump more than they didn't want Clinton.

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, tiger337 said:

I don't think I understand this.  Government provide services versus making things.  You could argue that they should provide fewer services and that is a fair argument, but why would service jobs necessarily cost less than manufacturing?  And why do technological advances reduce service costs more than manufacturing costs?

Capital is always less efficient applied to services than manufacturing. The price of all services goes up proportionally to manufactured good as technology evolves. Elementary education is the easiest example. Young children need a skilled person supervising a classroom and all data show that the number of children that can effectively be managed by one teacher simply does not scale - it's was, its, probably forever will be about 20 give or take a few. In general there have been no economies of scale or technology yet discovered for human beings. So exactly because the government does not manufacture but provides primarily services, one should not expect its efficiency to be able to keep up with other sectors of the economy. That is just the nature of the beast.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Motown Bombers said:

Yes, this is my point. You don't need to be willingly or knowingly involved to be a Russian asset. I don't believe Sanders was involved with Russia, but it does seem like Russia was in support of Sanders. Tulsi was one of his first supporter and quit the DNC. The Russians also pushed the narrative of the DNC being rigged against Sanders in favor of Clinton. They also pushed Jill Stein as the third party alternative for Sanders supporters. It's also telling Trump has not attacked Sanders. Russia didn't necessarily want Trump more than they didn't want Clinton.

There is old footage of Bernie in Russia on his love fest tour of the country in the 70s. He has much more in common with Russia politically than he does with this country.  A better question is this- if Bernie was Donald Trump with Bernie's resume with respect to Russia, would you guys all be screaming "Russian asset" about Bernie then?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, stanpapi said:

There is old footage of Bernie in Russia on his love fest tour of the country in the 70s. He has much more in common with Russia politically than he does with this country.  A better question is this- if Bernie was Donald Trump with Bernie's resume with respect to Russia, would you guys all be screaming "Russian asset" about Bernie then?

You literally quoted a post where I inferred he is a Russian and asset and asked would we be screaming Russian asset. Again, you don't have to be involved directly with Putin to be a Russian asset. 

Also, everybody here believes Tulsi is a Russian asset and I don't know of anyone who supports her except for maybe one person. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Forum Statistics

    • Total Topics
      96,812
    • Total Posts
      2,951,014
  • Who's Online (See full list)

  • Upcoming Events

    No upcoming events found
×
×
  • Create New...