Jump to content

Recommended Posts

14 minutes ago, Malcador said:

I think people are overstating how much the debates affect things.  Also considering they're not in a vacuum, not sure Trump will make Biden appear the same as him.

They do get soundbites from the debate for campaign ads and clips will likely be shown all over social media.

Is why people are criticizing Biden for saying that "Antifa is just an idea"

  • Hmmm 1
I'd say the answer to that question is kind of like the answer to "who's the sucker in this poker game?"*

 

*If you can't tell, it's you. ;)

village_idiot.gif

Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, Malcador said:

I think people are overstating how much the debates affect things.  Also considering they're not in a vacuum, not sure Trump will make Biden appear the same as him.

debates don't change much. as we noted, undecideds is, as always, looking for a sign on their road to damascus; they expect an epiphany. they are unlikely to get such a sign. there is far fewer undecideds this cycle, so debates is even less impactful. that said, am not sure who is overstating. trump is behind and beyond margin o' error is multiple battleground states. trump needs help. trump is pushing voter suppression 'cause he needs help. trump is pushing hard for a pre election Justice appointment 'cause he believes he may need the Court's help... and he don't care if such results in a couple republican senators exiting on january 3. trump is fighting for fractions o' percentage points, and whatever knife-fighter's edge he can manage 'cause while such stuff individual is meaningless, it does add.

again, 2016 wisconsin were won with tens of thousands o' votes and far less than a percentage point. whatever else has changed from 2016, one thing which remains the same is that candidates should fight for every battleground vote 'cause with more than thirty days, is still no such thing as a sure bet.

debates don't mean much, but add a little voter suppression and an october surprise and...

@MedicineDan speaks o' existential threats and dooms and yet Gromnir is the one embracing a silly political reality?

...

am not certain if med dan is trying for irony.

HA! Good Fun!

ps is curious how the future threats and imagined monsters create such fear in trump voters who simultaneous ignore the real and current diminution o' the American democratic republic

 

Edited by Gromnir

"If there be time to expose through discussion the falsehood and fallacies, to avert the evil by the processes of education, the remedy to be applied is more speech, not enforced silence."Justice Louis Brandeis, Concurring, Whitney v. California, 274 U.S. 357 (1927)

"Im indifferent to almost any murder as long as it doesn't affect me or mine."--Gfted1 (September 30, 2019)

Link to post
Share on other sites

@Gromnir in all fairness my criticism of fear mongering that. Trump would not leave office came before Trump actually said he would not leave office. I don’t know if he realizes or not but if he loses then next January he is leaving. Either with dignity and his head held high or kicking and screaming the end result will be the same.

Get off my lawn!

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

I think people are overstating how much the debates affect things.  Also considering they're not in a vacuum, not sure Trump will make Biden appear the same as him.

If the figure bandied about here is true and 100 million people watched it would be an order of magnitude bigger than any other single thing- conventions, rallies, interviews- in terms of influence. A bit above 130 million americans voted in the last election so at least in theory they reached ~3/4 of the voting electorate in a single go.

I do agree on them not being in a vacuum, though that works both ways. Part of it not being a vacuum works in Trump's favour, those Trump wants not voting were those with pre-existing reasons for disliking Biden and who are voting for him more or less solely because he's "better than Trump". The debate was the biggest chance for Trump to target those voters with the idea that they're flip sides of the same coin.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Guard Dog said:

@Gromnir in all fairness my criticism of fear mongering that. Trump would not leave office came before Trump actually said he would not leave office.

that was part o' our point. what trump were doing with the post office and voter suppression and questioning the legitimacy o' elections in a covd-19 world were concerning to those willing to observe. you labeled such concerns as fear mongering.

at approx the same time you were accusing the press o' fear mongering regarding transfer o' power post election, we were identifying a you-must-be-kidding option for trump to be undermining the election. sure enough, ~couple months pass and trump is talking to the press and explaining the math o' what happens if he should be forced to use 3 u.s. code § 2.

is a weird kinda amnesia or selective memory being suffered by all too many americans. every time trump lowers the bar through flagrant Constitutional or character violations, some individuals forget how outraged they were by press fear mongering which preceded the most recent improbable. is nothing prophetic about Gromnir's prediction regarding  3 u.s. code § 2 or the press warnings 'bout trump's seeming willingness to reject a peaceful transfer o' power, not if you have been paying attention.

am genuine curious to see how many times cassandra is mocked and ridiculed before certain persons is willing to heed what has been near four years o' warnings.

HA! Good Fun!

 

"If there be time to expose through discussion the falsehood and fallacies, to avert the evil by the processes of education, the remedy to be applied is more speech, not enforced silence."Justice Louis Brandeis, Concurring, Whitney v. California, 274 U.S. 357 (1927)

"Im indifferent to almost any murder as long as it doesn't affect me or mine."--Gfted1 (September 30, 2019)

Link to post
Share on other sites

120530607_1638950799601117_3389598711032

 

:lol: About 10 months worth in my case!

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
  • Gasp! 1

Get off my lawn!

Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, MedicineDan said:

Fair enough, but the suggestion Biden is a better candidate is rubbish.  He's not even a candidate.  He's a self-proclaimed placeholder.  I never used to feel true animosity over politics until President Obama.  I prayed for his good health every day, but he, not Trump, was the real enemy of the press.  Seriously, look at the number of counter-espionage investigations during the Obama presidency.  He trained the IRS and FBI on his political opponents whom he described, on at least one occasions, as "enemies."  Trump says mean things about the press and people say he's the enemy.  Why hasn't that sunk him?  Because people believe it.  I might get a nonsensical, personal, and mentally dishonest attack for saying the truth, but people should at least recognize the truth.  The press is not trusted.  This is the all-in election.  This is not like the other "most important election."  This election, 2020, is the most important American election of our lifetimes.  If we win, we bring the press down.  Chaos will ensure, but that might be the door through which we might arrive at order.  Probably not.  We're probably screwed.

I dont know  much about him to comment on this  but this is what is true about him. He was a loyal and important VP to Obama which was a time of both success and overreach but I cant recall him doing anything significant 

He espouses the moderate view of Democrats ......you dont want Warren or Saunders becoming president, I like them on a personal level as they mean well but you cannot have people running the USA who believe in punishing global US companies who get  unfairly  blamed for 2008, are happy for mass tax increases on everyone and are happy to suggest sweeping social changes like enforced gun control irrespective what reasonable gun owners think

But I am worried about his mental state...he worried me during the interview and allowed himself to get provoked by Trump with comments about his son. What if he cannot finish the term and Harris becomes president .....now I  am concerned about her trying to implement polices that are suppose to address " inequality " and how unintentionally this weakens and erodes  the economy in different ways

And its unhelpful to suggest  " she wont implement polices that could hurt the US economy " because there are many countries that have destroyed there economies and livelihoods  through bad polices or decisions 

 

Edited by BruceVC
  • Like 1

"We don't stop playing because we grow old; we grow old because we stop playing.” -  George Bernard Shaw

 

"What counts in life is not the mere fact that we have lived. It is what difference we have made to the lives of others that will determine the significance of the life we lead" - Nelson Mandela

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, BruceVC said:

He espouses the moderate view of Democrats ......you dont want Warren or Saunders becoming president, I like them on a personal level as they mean well but you cannot have people running the USA who believe in punishing global US companies who get  unfairly  blamed for 2008, are happy for mass tax increases on everyone and are happy to suggest sweeping social changes like enforced gun control irrespective what reasonable gun owners think

Don't worry Bruce, there's no indication at all that politicians will ever come for you (you as in bankers, scourge of the earth ever since the Iron Curtain fell). If that happens it'll be torches and pitchforks from a mob. :)

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, majestic said:

Don't worry Bruce, there's no indication at all that politicians will ever come for you (you as in bankers, scourge of the earth ever since the Iron Curtain fell). If that happens it'll be torches and pitchforks from a mob. :)

majestic why you pulling a Zora on me :lol: And why you being so nasty, well  you never  mentioned my race so there is that :p .....have you forgotten the honest and important endorsement I gave Austria..and it was true..

But seriously my views on these topics are  not based on my links to economic systems or real fears of an utter collapse of our societies. I have seen and worked in countries that have attempted and failed to change the proven, quantifiable metrics of the free market so we must never underestimate the risk of badly implemented economic polices 

You will be surprised but  " bank bashing" can sometimes be fair .....but why dwell on some illegal, mistake or greedy endeavor some people in finance end up doing. If people have broken the law they should be prosecuted ...I have an uncle who was incarnated in the USA for links to complicated, normally acceptable but still illegal changes to some finance statements in 2008/2009 . Himself and 3 Americans  were charged for various financial crimes and SEC got involved , they pleaded quilt   and received real sentences in a  real Federal prison but this prison  is apparently used for people like them who  are not real criminals so you cant put them with murderers and gangbanger shot callers and murderous right wingers 

Its the same prison I am sure Bernie Madoff is in or was in. My uncle has spent about 6 years in jail but he is being released early  and they are deporting him back to SA and he can never return to the USA and he can never work in the financial sector ever again. He must be 68 now so I suppose he should be able to retire but he wants to work and somehow make amends ....not sure how but he should be able to try to work and make amends 

 

 

Edited by BruceVC

"We don't stop playing because we grow old; we grow old because we stop playing.” -  George Bernard Shaw

 

"What counts in life is not the mere fact that we have lived. It is what difference we have made to the lives of others that will determine the significance of the life we lead" - Nelson Mandela

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
58 minutes ago, Darkpriest said:

https://www.bostonglobe.com/2020/09/29/metro/massachusetts-rejected-nearly-18000-primary-ballots-amid-surge-mail-in-voting/

 

Is this a big number? How does it compare to previous elections? 

Is the number impactful enough, that this could turn a highly contested election? 

Well, in 2016  Trump won Michigan by 12k votes, Wisconsin by 27k and Pennsylvania by 68k. These three states are literally why Trump won the election. These are all margins of less than 2% by the way.

  • Thanks 1

"My hovercraft is full of eels!" - Hungarian tourist
I am Dan Quayle of the Romans.
I want to tattoo a map of the Netherlands on my nether lands.
Heja Sverige!!
Everyone should cuffawkle more.
The wrench is your friend. :bat:

Link to post
Share on other sites

The problem with voter fraud is it must be planned in advance. And you never know which states will be in play. Michigan was close so suppose the Dems actually did have a scheme to "find" 12k votes. It still would not have won the election for Hillary because Trump would have had 291 rather than 301. Pennsylvania they would have needed to "find" 34k votes. Even then Trump still wins with 271. This is why worries over voter fraud in Presidential elections are unfounded. These are both Democrat run states and to "steal" them they would need some 47k fraudulent votes and even THEN you don't win the election. The 47k votes alone is a tall order without it being obvious. And remember all of this must be set in motion BEFORE the election never happens by people who won't rat the process out to the media for money. It's near impossible to steal a national election. Even a statewide election is a tall order.

Now, local and congressional elections are much more vulnerable to these kinds of shenanigans. And that is definitely a concern because the make up of state houses and Congress might not seem important to the untrained eye. But it is actually very, VERY important.

  • Like 1

Get off my lawn!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Political power in the United States has always been like a pendulum. It swings one way and then the other. Usually the farther it goes in one direction the farther it will go in the opposite direction on the next swing. But for the majority of our history there’s been a pretty even equilibrium. The fear has always been that one side or the other will seize the pendulum. Now it seems the (probably) irrational fear of one side doing it is making the other side actually try to do it. The outcome of an individual election is not something you really should worry about. It could easily be undone in two years. In fact that has been the trend over the last 30 years. Of course a lot of damage can be done in those two years. it is extremely likely that Biden will win this election and the Democrats will have full control of Congress. Obviously that is not a good situation. But it is a virtual certainty that they will make the common mistake of assuming their victory is total and the new normal. If you were recall when Obama won in 2008 and the Democrats had full control of Congress they were triumphantly crowing that “conservatism is dead“. And “we are all socialist now“. Two years later they lost the house. Four years after that they lost the Senate. No electoral outcome is forever.

The people who are so concerned about the outcome of this election they are willing to stand by and watch, or even worse assist, the breaking of our political system really need to have a drink and relax. Maybe even read a history book or two while they are at it.

Get off my lawn!

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

https://www.bostonglobe.com/2020/09/29/metro/massachusetts-rejected-nearly-18000-primary-ballots-amid-surge-mail-in-voting/

 

Is this a big number? How does it compare to previous elections? 

Is the number impactful enough, that this could turn a highly contested election? 

It's a big number.

It is unlikely that it has any impact though. Those contested ballots will likely reflect the same results as the contested ballots. Unless you find evidence that those ballots are being pulled based on WHO the voters where voting for, this is just a random sample of ballots. Which, as GD pointed out, is super hard to pull off.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Trump is getting very criticized for not  " calling out white supremacy " .....and there is this analysis of this as if it matters on CNN

Firstly he called it out before, why must anyone have to call out something that we know is a extreme form of  racism and its like white people  need to keep pointing out something obvious 

I would refuse to comment and say this is just disingenuous question  and ask the moderator  to move on. If people are not happy with me not getting involved in theater then I dont want there vote ...

Unless someone can tell me what possible reason Trump needs to respond to that type of question? Is that what Americans need to hear from Trump.......

"We don't stop playing because we grow old; we grow old because we stop playing.” -  George Bernard Shaw

 

"What counts in life is not the mere fact that we have lived. It is what difference we have made to the lives of others that will determine the significance of the life we lead" - Nelson Mandela

 

 

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

Well, in 2016  Trump won Michigan by 12k votes, Wisconsin by 27k and Pennsylvania by 68k. These three states are literally why Trump won the election. These are all margins of less than 2% by the way.

this is in fact an exaggeration. margin were less than 1% in all three states.

nevertheless, some kinda planned voter fraud is prohibitive unlikely. almost 1000 examples in 40 years? please.

as for accidental error and blunders? sure that is gonna happen. what doesn't help is when it is the President purposeful and unapologetically attempting to handicap the post office in an attempt to make the situation worse. the tragedy is that increases in mail-in voting during a pandemic were predictable, but just like almost every other covid-19 issue faced by the US, the President and senate have been dangerously torpid. nevertheless, the accidental stuff, as is untargeted and decided not fraud, tends to result in there being little impact on national elections. just too random.

it also don't take a genius to figure out that the thousands o' likely rejected ballots (in person voting also results in rejection and mistake btw, but typical at a rate 1/3 better than mail-in) is nevertheless gonna result in fewer total "lost" votes than if you ask americans, many o' whom have comorbidities, to stand in potential long lines and vote in-person. 

wisconsin primary:

wisconsin-voters-line.jpg?fit=789,460&ss

more than 200K americans has died from covid-19. the flu season is just beginning to start (we recommend any and all to get their flu shots asap btw) and many/most reputable epidemiologists is predicting a fall resurgence o' covid-19. shouldn't need force folks to weigh their health and their vote.

oh, and @Pidesco were referencing the alternative reality expressed by one o' the boardies earlier and we were reminded o' an npr bit from relative recent. is worth a listen. you can hear echoes from med dan and gd and others in the those interviewed by the npr reporters in the following:

https://www.npr.org/podcasts/510356/no-compromise

am knowing it is literal hours of material but am gonna suggest giving it a shot. each segment is 35-45 minutes long. "facebook flock" is the offering which focuses on the audience o' the dorr brothers. 

one o' the reasons trump is so embraced by his base is that he has legitimized the alternative reality narrative. those who embrace an alternative reality narrative has not just been emboldened, but thanks to social media and alt-right news, the alternative reality narrative is now legit mainstream. it's not just ok to spout pizzagate and seth rich nonsense, but such stuff gets national media coverage and Presidential support via retweets. what pidesco and Gromnir think o' as alternative reality is embraced not just by the lunatic fringe, but by a frightening large percentage o' the US population, with fox, breitbart and an army o' social media warriors (including POTUS) pushing the narrative towards mainstream every hour of every day.

HA! Good Fun!

"If there be time to expose through discussion the falsehood and fallacies, to avert the evil by the processes of education, the remedy to be applied is more speech, not enforced silence."Justice Louis Brandeis, Concurring, Whitney v. California, 274 U.S. 357 (1927)

"Im indifferent to almost any murder as long as it doesn't affect me or mine."--Gfted1 (September 30, 2019)

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Darkpriest said:

https://www.forbes.com/sites/alisondurkee/2020/09/21/pennsylvania-mail-in-ballot-ruling-could-cause-100000-ballots-to-be-rejected-official-warns/

 

I'm telling you, no matter who wins this election, the other side will point to irregularities in the mail-ins, call for investigations etc. 

 

https://apnews.com/article/a45421048cd89938df7c882891a97db5

There were 33.4 million votes cast through mail in 2016 election

That second link absolutely tells how you can't trust mail-in-voting

"The California secretary of state’s election data obtained by the AP showed 102,428 mail-in ballots were disqualified in the state’s 58 counties, about 1.5% of the nearly 7 million mail-in ballots returned. "

"The most common problem, by far, in California was missing the deadline for the ballot to be mailed and arrive. To count in the election, ballots must be postmarked on or before Election Day and received within three days afterward. Statewide, 70,330 ballots missed those marks."

"Another 27,525 either didn’t have a signature, or the signature didn’t match the one on record for the voter."

 

So almost all the ballots were rejected because they didn't fill two basic rules of voting 🤔

Link to post
Share on other sites
43 minutes ago, BruceVC said:

 

Firstly he called it out before, why must anyone have to call out something that we know is a extreme form of  racism and its like white people  need to keep pointing out something obvious 

 

mayhap 'cause as often as not he vacillates or equivocates when is asked 'bout white supremacy. for fun, do a search on trump being questioned 'bout david duke. don't just read first headline neither.

the white supremacy question is not difficult bruce. is not even an aleppo kinda thing where a person perhaps becomes confused in the moment.  

...

the weird part is that the question from wallace were an uncontested layup opportunity. am suspecting it were not intended to be difficult. wallace gives trump a chance to undermine the left's argument that trump supports white supremacists. sure, just 'cause trump rejected white supremacists during a national debate would not make folks who dislike him forget all his previous equivocation, but for those undecideds, many of whom agree with trump policies but nevertheless fear he is racist, condemning white supremacy public, national and unequivocal woulda' been a boon. 

on tuesday, trump managed to solidify one portion o' his base. 

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/stand-back-and-stand-by-proud-boys-merchandise-amazon/

call it a win?

easiest question ever faced by a Presidential candidate in a debate: are you willing to condemn white supremacists?

how is it possible to screw the pooch on that question?

HA! Good Fun!

"If there be time to expose through discussion the falsehood and fallacies, to avert the evil by the processes of education, the remedy to be applied is more speech, not enforced silence."Justice Louis Brandeis, Concurring, Whitney v. California, 274 U.S. 357 (1927)

"Im indifferent to almost any murder as long as it doesn't affect me or mine."--Gfted1 (September 30, 2019)

Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, Gromnir said:

t

one o' the reasons trump is so embraced by his base is that he has legitimized the alternative reality narrative. those who embrace an alternative reality narrative has not just been emboldened, but thanks to social media and alt-right news, the alternative reality narrative is now legit mainstream. it's not just ok to spout pizzagate and seth rich nonsense, but such stuff gets national media coverage and Presidential support via retweets. what pidesco and Gromnir think o' as alternative reality is embraced not just by the lunatic fringe, but by a frightening large percentage o' the US population, with fox, breitbart and an army o' social media warriors (including POTUS) pushing the narrative towards mainstream every hour of every day.

HA! Good Fun!

Gromnir I can understand your concern about the nature of what defines normal and real  news and yes  some Trump supporters believe the worst forms of misinformation I have ever encountered in my life in any first world country 

But the good news is this doesnt represent the views of most normal Republicans, for example there are a few credible Republican supporters on CNN like Scott Jennings and Rick Santorum who make very reasonable comments about Trump but do call out the theatre and populism and where he is out of line 

"We don't stop playing because we grow old; we grow old because we stop playing.” -  George Bernard Shaw

 

"What counts in life is not the mere fact that we have lived. It is what difference we have made to the lives of others that will determine the significance of the life we lead" - Nelson Mandela

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Gromnir said:

easiest question ever faced by a Presidential candidate in a debate: are you willing to condemn white supremacists?

how is it possible to screw the pooch on that question?

Because there is no answer to that question that will ever satisfy  the radical left. You can do and say whatever you want but if radical left declares you are racist/sexist/homophobic/etc. there is nothing that will make them change their minds. To many examples of people pandering to them in hope they will leave them be and being attacked at the slightness transgression of their crazy beliefs. 

In your mind what would happen if Trump would say "Yes, I condemn white supremacy in all shape and form with all my mind, heart and soul". Would anyone on the left say "It's great he said those words"? BS there would be "Trump "says" he condemns, but...", "If he truly condemns white supremacy then he must do...". 

There is no end to that with radical left, so at some point you have to just say "I will not participate in this s**tshow, enough i enough". And they will screech and they will yell, because they cannot control you anymore.

  • Like 1

166215__front.jpg.45518d58bdab611f0e3a026d3b8c6489.jpg

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Skarpen said:

Because there is no answer to that question that will ever satisfy  the radical left.

Yeah, but regular folks would be happy with a "yes, I condemn white supremecy."

Not "Be on standby, and let me condemn a completely different group that was not asked about."

:shrugz:

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...