December 12, 2019 Login  


politics
Last Post 12/03/2019 11:43 PM by Frederick Jones. 133 Replies.
Printer Friendly
Sort:
PrevPrev NextNext
You are not authorized to post a reply.
Page 2 of 9 << < 12345 > >>
Author Messages
Orange Crush

Posts:2649

--
10/18/2019 09:48 PM
Hmm are you still poor after you played NBA. Certainly the south Americans that have played in Euro league can just simply hang it up.

Now if you're a female cyclist on the other hand...
Orange Crush

Posts:2649

--
10/18/2019 10:04 PM
Fun stuff btw. The political posts is why I joined the original forum. There's a 1001 cycling forums but just talking about cycling is boring.

You have my input. I'll come back with the I told you so 13 months from now LOL.
smokey52

Posts:297

--
10/19/2019 07:26 AM
I think that turnout is the key for 2020, the same way it was in 2018 when the House flipped.
Cosmic Kid

Posts:2904

--
10/19/2019 07:56 AM
Nope. They couldn't swing those states with a middle ground candidate in 2016 and they won't swing them again in 2020 with one.


No, they couldn’t swing those states because the Dems ran a horrible candidate that was deeply polarizing, compounded with a horrible campaign strategy. It was not about policy, it was about the perception by many middle-ground voters and conservative voters that she was the very embodiment of the “Establishment”.

Look how many Obama voters then voted for Trump....it wasn’t out of policy it was out of frustration with the status quo, both times.

And nothing will make me happier than, if Warren is the nominee, that you come back here in 13 months and gloat that you were right and I was wrong.....but I deeply fear that it won’t happen.

It is staggering to me that the Dems can’t find a candidate that can make the 2020 election a lay-up.
Just say "NO!" to WCP!!!!
huckleberry

Posts:546

--
10/19/2019 10:18 AM
I like the idea of a Warren/Booker ticket.

Dale

Posts:1202

--
10/19/2019 10:47 AM
Posted By Cosmic Kid on 10/19/2019 07:56 AM
No, they couldn’t swing those states because the Dems ran a horrible candidate that was deeply polarizing, compounded with a horrible campaign strategy. It was not about policy, it was about the perception by many middle-ground voters and conservative voters that she was the very embodiment of the “Establishment”.


Exactly this. Hillary Clinton's own friends don't like her.

I can't believe the Dem's ended up stuck with her last time and that for 2020 such a weak and wounded field is who we get to choose from.

I'm also shocked by my conservative friends acceptance of Trump's abhorrent behavior, his pandering to dictators, his use of the office for personal gain, the nepotism, and his general incompetence. I think the only thing he could do that would turn them against him is to come out staunchly pro-choice.
That would be the tipping point for many of them.... that or if he came out in favor of gun control, but I suppose, since he flip/flopped on the latter so many times they would just blow it off as a momentary lapse of NRA donations which will soon be rectified.
Orange Crush

Posts:2649

--
10/19/2019 01:10 PM
I don't think the Democratic field is weak. In fact I'd rate it as strong. But policy wise they're all over the map. It's one of the problems with your primaries. Policy should be settled first. Then pick a candidate who can sell it.

The only weak item in the field is Biden. It's clear he has no energy or conviction to actually be in race. And he may have taken wind out of sails of better moderate candidates. Its another shoot yourself in foot moment by the Clinton arm of the party desperately trying to hang on to power.
huckleberry

Posts:546

--
10/19/2019 01:57 PM
I agree with you OC in regards to excitement - yes, I think priority number one is getting rid of the douchebag, and like you, I think the base needs to be excited - I do.

Even moreso today, I feel we would be in a much better political and cultural moment if, yes, I am going to say, if Bernie had been the Democratic nominee in 2016, and had won.

Where would would be morally - which is what I believe is most important in a nation - would be heads above where we are now, and on closer par with what "America" believes it is. No, we are not a moral nation - we like to believe that fantasy, but this last election and Trump's continued support has proven its falsehood. I want to believe in morality - that my fellow man also believes passionately. I'm not talking about religion, which has shown its true color the past three years with a new definition of Christianity - closer to the face I always believe it had underneath the mask which they have finally shirked now once again in power.

I need excitement. I need hope. And there's only two in the Democratic field that give me that - Warren and Sanders. But, yes, I will be voting for whoever is on the ballot opposing Trump.
longslowdistance

Posts:1905

--
10/19/2019 08:48 PM
At least there is no thumb on the scale for the Dems this time, quite a change from 2016. IMO, Bozo the clown would have beaten Trump, and Bernie surely would have beaten Trump. The only candidate on the planet he could have beaten was locked in by the Dems before the primaries began.
At least for the Dems now, Trump is the gift that keeps on giving. State houses and local elections are tilted against the Republicans due to Trump antipathy
The Parliamentary system used by the Brits and Canada combines legislative and executive power for the party in charge. Something unpleasant like the Watergate scandal would have been erased with a no confidence vote without the constitutional crisis we endured. OTOH, the US checks and balances model has, overall, served us rather well. An exception is now, when the President's party's congressmen are, as George Will states it so well, supine, rather than upholding their constitutional duties. Because Trump has hypnotized so much of the Repub base and they are afraid, kudos to the current occupant's persuasion and badgering skills for that. And a big thumbs down to the US electorate for tolerating this.
Orange Crush

Posts:2649

--
10/19/2019 09:09 PM
Posted By Frederick Jones on 10/19/2019 08:48 PM
The Parliamentary system used by the Brits and Canada combines legislative and executive power for the party in charge. Something unpleasant like the Watergate scandal would have been erased with a no confidence vote without the constitutional crisis we endured.


Our Monday vote is largely between the disappointing Trudeau liberals and the Conservatives who are neck and neck but both in solid minority government territory. The Conservatives last time when they were in power prorogued parliament on several occasions to avoid no confidence votes related to various scandals. This included corruption in PM office, muzzling of scientists, stirring up anti Muslim sentiment, trashing of environmental laws, etc.. Sound familiar? Harper was a mix of W and Trump with a smile and a demeanor of sensibility. The most dangerous kind of right wing nut. So this time around many will hold their nose and do whatever it takes to keep out the Cons. I'll be voting NDP a party that would make Sanders feel at home. Our town is a good old fashioned blue collar socialist stronghold. Good for us. Mine is the local strategic vote. Preferred vote might be Green but until we get proportional representation (one of several Trudeau broken promises) that doesn't make much sense. At least we have choices though with five major parties.
smokey52

Posts:297

--
10/20/2019 05:37 PM
Is Justin still red-faced over the black face?
Orange Crush

Posts:2649

--
10/20/2019 10:29 PM
The SNC affair will follow him a lot longer. Trying to influence the attorney general on a judicial outcome. Sound familiar?
longslowdistance

Posts:1905

--
10/21/2019 09:41 AM
That blackface incident seemed almost trivial. We folks in the middle disagree with equating Trudeau's costume with Nazi racists. Same thing has happened with Me Too - if you unintentionally made a woman uncomfortable, like Garrison Keillor, you're lumped in with serial rapists and erased from the public sphere. This intolerance moves reasonable people to Trump.
huckleberry

Posts:546

--
10/21/2019 10:44 AM
"This intolerance moves reasonable people to Trump"

I have no, yet so many responses to this comment and it's sensibility.

I too agree we go a bit too far with the PC, but often it needs to be pushed further as to maintain the intention as it eventually settles back down, but hopefully not so settled that it all remains the same as before that particular action was called out.

No responsible, moral, or ethical human being moves towards the ideology or presidency of Trump. I don't make or like absolutes, but I'll stick with that one.
longslowdistance

Posts:1905

--
10/21/2019 10:55 AM
Fair enough. I'd stick a hot poker in my eye before I'd vote for him. But I still see people voting with their feet. They aren't bothered by his narcissistic antics as much as others. Maybe deep down they are racists, but I see it as they are afraid due to cultural and economic uncertainty. Which Trump plays like a fiddle. And some are just gullible. Some of these folks voted for Obama, really. These swing and middle ground voters will pick the next pres.
You are not authorized to post a reply.
Page 2 of 9 << < 12345 > >>


Active Forums 4.1
NOT LICENSED FOR PRODUCTION USE
www.activemodules.com

Latest Forum Posts

Rohan Dennis is now a Skybot posted in Professional Racing

Tire width posted in Gear Advice

Yes this belong elsewhere posted in The Dark Side

SBT GRVL posted in The Ride Spot



No articles match criteria.
  Terms and Conditions | Privacy Policy  Copyright 2008-2013 by VeloNation LLC