Politics 20/20

[Guard Dog]

9 hours ago, BruceVC said:

 

Is anybody else excited about this election?

 

Nope. Complete indifference. I am far more concerned about control of Congress. One party control is worrisome.

[BruceVC]

20 minutes ago, Guard Dog said:

Nope. Complete indifference. I am far more concerned about control of Congress. One party control is worrisome.

Yes I share your concerns around the dominance of 1 party in the House and Senate 

I know the Republicans in the Senate and I am use to there voting choices, I am not sure what a Democrat Senate would mean?

 

Edited October 24, 2020 by BruceVC

[Guard Dog]

6 minutes ago, BruceVC said:

Yes I share your concerns around the dominance of 1 party in the House and Senate 

I know the Republicans in the Senate and I am use to there voting choices, I am not sure what a Democrat Senate would mean?

 

 

It means the Democrats can do pretty much anything they want. The one thing that concerns me the most is adding court justices. That kind of naked power grab will break the country. The next time the GOP has power they will add more, then the Dems will add more. until the whole thing is a sad joke. I don't think Biden is going to do that. But I also don't think Biden is going to be able to control this angry leftist tiger he's trying to ride into power. 

There is an excellent chance the Dems will go hogwild like they did in 2009. And if they do they will lose one or both houses of Congress in 2022. But a lot of damage can be done in two years of united government. 

[Gfted1]

12 minutes ago, BruceVC said:

...I am not sure what a Democrat Senate would mean?

I am hoping it will open the floodgates to; UBI, UHC and UFE (Universal Free Education).

[BruceVC]

8 minutes ago, Gfted1 said:

I am hoping it will open the floodgates to; UBI, UHC and UFE (Universal Free Education).

But who would pay for that 

[Achilles]

Just now, BruceVC said:

But who would pay for that 

God willing, silicon valley

[Gromnir]

2 hours ago, Guard Dog said:

Don't remember if I shared this one or not:

image

 

OK, ya'll may resume serious discussion now. 

proving our point. gd pov is nothing more than a meme. for gd, facts, investigations and even reality is meaningless particularly if they involve what he thinks o' as "the government."  perhaps no presidential candidate in history has been subject to more investigations than has biden. obamagate. unmasking. multiple partisan Congressional investigations. fbi efforts. doj efforts. we even had trump calling on foreign powers o' ukraine and china to investigate, and lord knows the russians is still trying to cause problems... 

https://www.ic3.gov/Media/Y2020/PSA200924

https://us-cert.cisa.gov/ncas/alerts/aa20-296a

and yet all such effort proved useless and inconsequential as far as showing even a scintilla o' proof joe biden were involved in something illegal or even unethical.

gd is nevertheless swayed to label biden as the following:

"a shady, corrupted, disingenuous man of low character. his very presence in the office will further tarnish an institution that has long since lost its luster." 

based on what? giuliani and bannon's laptop evidence which were already in the possession o' the fbi since december 2019? nope, real reason is joe biden is part o' "the government." is all gd needs to know. worse, is all gd will genuine consider. laptop confirms what gd already knew and what from his pov should be obvious to everybody.

meme

2 hours ago, Hurlshot said:

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-54670269

So Biden said something surprisingly reasonable about oil and the environment, and now he has to backtrack or it will kill him politically. 

am hardly convinced. am knowing the trump supporters feel like they found a gotcha moment, but who is the voters the reveal convinces? old people and suburban housewives?  unless such folks is intimate entangled with the fossil fuel industry, their votes is not gonna shift... and such folks were already solid trump supporters before biden made his non-reveal reveal.  

trump is a guy hanging off the edge o' a cliff with nothing but handfuls o' dirt and perhaps a few blades o' sun-burnt grass separating him from a lethal fall. is nothing for trump to grab onto to pull himself back up onto solid ground save for loose dirt and a bit o' vegetation.

when the only thing between you and oblivion is a desperation grab, you grab.

democrats, converse, is so terrified by the potential o' another 2016 that they imagine biden onto the cliff face right along with trump. 

weird stuff may still happen 'tween now and the election, but we don't see the needle moved by any biden comment offered during the final debate.  

HA! Good Fun!

ps is ironic but trump mishandling o' covid-19 did more to hurt the fossil fuel industry than am believing biden would be able to accomplish in four years even if he becomes President. trump's ineptitude accelerated the telecommuting trend... the real warp speed initiative? americans is driving far less today than they were in 2019.

2021 won't be much different than were 2020 insofar as our covid behaviours is concerned. has taken over seven months to administer 129 million covid tests in the US? a significant % o' such tests is the somewhat suspect rapid variety.

converse, is gonna take something near 600 million doses o' vaccine, which needs be cold stored, to inoculate enough americans such that it ends the pandemic threat. 

telecommuting trends is here to stay... so, in a way, when trump brags 'bout what a fantastic environmentalist he has been, he ain't wrong. 'course his major environmental impact were due to his mishandling o' covid-19, mishandling which likely resulted in more than 100k unnecessary american deaths, so...

Edited October 24, 2020 by Gromnir

[Gfted1]

5 minutes ago, BruceVC said:

But who would pay for that 

Not me!  Take your pick, "the rich" are a good jumping off point and those corporate fat cats own me something too. Either way I fall into the tax brackets that would be receiving end, and brother, Im ready to kick up my heels and ride off into the sunset. :sombrero:

[Guard Dog]

@GromnirMemes are meant to be funny. They CAN be funny even if you don’t agree with the point. Like any comic strip or political cartoon. Hell I even found humor in Doonsbury some of the time and Bloom County most of the time. If you don’t find him funny don’t laugh at them. They’re posted for humor’s sake only as I have told you before. Not trying to make a point here. When I want to make a point I write what I think

As for “facts” I thought we covered that already. After the exchange on the previous page I know what you think, you know what I think. But, here it comes up again. But while we’re on the subject you never did answer my question. Would Biden be on your list of 50 honest men?

I also thought I made it clear I didn’t completely believe anything that comes out of the Trump campaign or inner circle. I believe my exact words were it was a lot of hooey. But then again I’m not looking for facts here. I’m not running an investigation and I’m not going to put them in on trial. The only question I’m asking myself is “is it more likely than not that this happened “. To which my answer is yes. And I made my reasoning plain. Agree or not with the conclusion I’m sure you would agree that it looks bad.

Edited October 24, 2020 by Guard Dog

[Gromnir]

46 minutes ago, Guard Dog said:

@GromnirMemes are meant to be funny.

you keep saying is a meme, but then you defend the point o' the meme as we describe.

*shrug*

have never met biden. you ask a lawyer to judge character o' a person with whom we has never interacted?  for reals? am not knowing biden personal well enough to make definitive comments 'bout his character.  we got impressions o' him compared to other folks we know only from tv and newspaper articles and from such admitted limited exposure, biden seems like a decent guy and better than far too many.

regardless, is absolute no reputable evidence which suggests biden is deserving to be described as,

"a shady, corrupted, disingenuous man of low character. his very presence in the office will further tarnish an institution that has long since lost its luster."

none... save fact he is a member o', "the government." 

am knowing is pointless, but am ever hopeful gd eventual admits to himself that evidence and facts regarding biden is inconsequential from your pov unless they confirm your already established and immutable opinions 'bout "the government." the laptop evidence would be thorough unconvincing to gd save for fact is biden or some similar "the government" personage being targeted.

on this point, you are the meme, but is not funny. is not at all funny.

HA! Good Fun!

 

Edited October 24, 2020 by Gromnir

[Hurlshort]

In terms of the Supreme Court, Biden has no chance of making the changes that Trump has managed in his 4-year term. You are looking at a 6-3 conservative split, with Breyer being the only one likely to need a replacement in the near future. Even if they manage to pass a term limit of 18 years, this is going to be a very conservative court for long stretch.

So yeah, I don't get all the conservatives bemoaning the future of the country. Everybody likes to cry wolf.

[Gorth]

8 hours ago, Guard Dog said:

It means the Democrats can do pretty much anything they want. The one thing that concerns me the most is adding court justices. That kind of naked power grab will break the country.

Who thought life time appointments were a good idea in the first place??? That's normally only seen in feudal systems.

[Gromnir]

7 minutes ago, Gorth said:

Who thought life time appointments were a good idea in the first place??? That's normally only seen in feudal systems.

lifetime appointments were actual kinda common in england in 1787 when the US were creating its Constitution. keep in mind Constitution don't say "lifetime" for Justices, but precise 'cause such were common, the language, "shall hold their offices during good behaviour," were read by all as to mean a Justice had a lifetime appointment save for impeachment or scire facias.

*shrug*

furthermore, hamilton in federalist 78 recognized how a lifetime appointment may result in a kinda arrogance:

 "men placed in this situation will generally soon feel themselves independent of heaven itself."

did not see such arrogance as a shortcoming but rather as necessary. hamilton clear believed the security o' a lifetime term were warranted as the judiciary, while s'posed a co-equal branch o' government, were powerless save for the willingness o' the legislature and executive to acquiesce to SCOTUS decisions. lifetime appointment, freeing Justices from not only the whims o' the mob but also the executive branch, would have a tendency to lead to greater judicial independence and the wherewithal to act in protection o' the Constitution.

such were the reasoning o' the founders in defense o' lifetime appointments for Justices, although hamilton's views were hardly the unanimous held belief o' the founders. the anti-federalists were more than a little unnerved by the notion o' lifetime appointments.

HA! Good Fun!

 

[Achilles]

5 hours ago, Hurlshot said:

In terms of the Supreme Court, Biden has no chance of making the changes that Trump has managed in his 4-year term. You are looking at a 6-3 conservative split, with Breyer being the only one likely to need a replacement in the near future. Even if they manage to pass a term limit of 18 years, this is going to be a very conservative court for long stretch.

So yeah, I don't get all the conservatives bemoaning the future of the country. Everybody likes to cry wolf.

Something I wish more voters had thought about in 2016. It's not like RBG hadn't been sick (or old) for a long time.

[HoonDing]

"Who thought life time appointments were a good idea in the first place??? That's normally only seen in feudal systems. "

that's where the 2nd amendment people come in

[Gromnir]

2 hours ago, Achilles said:

Something I wish more voters had thought about in 2016. It's not like RBG hadn't been sick (or old) for a long time.

obama, as tactful as possible, tried to discuss possible retirement o' rbg in a meeting with the Justice in earlyish 2014.  the meeting shoulda' come as no surprise as she were an octogenarian cancer survivor (multiple) at the time.  statistically, rbg were having a remaining life expectancy o' negative numbers o' weeks, months and years.

rbg made it clear she were not planning to retire and were reported she told obama something to the effect o', "who would you rather have on the Court than me?"

"men placed in this situation will generally soon feel themselves independent of heaven itself."

applies equal to women?

even extreme smart people may be a bit obtuse.

video is from march 2018.

in 2014, rbg believed in her own invincibility and at the time she were no doubt as certain as many others that democrats would retain control o' the wh. with scalia dying in february o' 2016 and mcconnell making clear there would be no senate consideration o' an obama nominee to the Court until after the election...

too many democrats didn't vote in 2016. they didn't like clinton but they didn't believe trump had any chance o' winning neither. perfect storm o' apathy. 

HA! Good Fun!

[Guard Dog]

On 10/24/2020 at 11:51 AM, Gromnir said:

 

 

"a shady, corrupted, disingenuous man of low character. his very presence in the office will further tarnish an institution that has long since lost its luster." 

based on what?

How about this? I'm guessing he won't be on your list of 50 honest men after all

 

Her's another:

At 1:26 he brags about withdrawing a $1B loan if they didn't do what he wanted converning an internal criminal investiagation. In other words, do what I want or no money for you. Hmmmm it seems another President got into some trouble doing something very similar.

But, whatever. You know it's ok to vote for a lesser evil. But it's wise to remember lesser or not, it IS an evil. 

 

Edited October 25, 2020 by Guard Dog

[Gromnir]

25 minutes ago, Guard Dog said:

How about this?

...

 

dear lord are you stretching. a politician echoing words o' past icons? is common. do they footnote every speech? you think guys such as trump and biden even write their own speeches? biden is a nice guy, but he is not particular erudite. you think he would recognize origin passages?  

we laughed our arse off when melania were vilified for plagiarizing michelle obama, and her speech writer did far more than lift individual passages. most o' these speeches is cookie cutter replications o' successful past speeches and the speeches is written by people you do not know and is likely to never know. oh noes!

tell us biden plagiarized multiple papers in college or his thesis, then we get ornery. heck, can do that for mlk and we still balk at questioning overall character w/o more.

as to the second video... you are bat crap crazy. did you listen to biden? he is repeating US policy, and standing up to the kremlin sounds exact like the kinda thing republicans would near universal support up until 2016. your characterization o' events flies in the face o' reality but does align with the alt right narrative, a narrative which makes no sense. biden were pushing US policy and had nothing to do with specific investigations.

for chrissakes, claims o' biden corruption nonsense with burisma woulda' been far more reasonable if biden did opposite o' what he did. IF in spite o' pressure from world leaders and his own administration, biden finds a way to keep a corrupt prosecutor in power, a prosecutor either dragging his feet or purposeful no longer investigating a company biden's son is involved with, then we would have the basis o' conspiracy. blame biden for following US policy crafted with near unanimous support o' european allies to remove a corrupt prosecutor who were NOT actual bothering to investigate burisma is...

you are a meme. you will fight to the death to prove what you believe in spite o' evidence. you see smoke from fire o' rudy's laptop reveal?  HA! you will buy into the alt right narrative regarding every ****amamie conspiracy theory 'cause the democrats are preparing to come and take your guns. you assume all politicians is corrupt and vile, regardless o' evidence, 'cause they is, "the government."

meme.

HA! Good Fun!

[Hurlshort]

25 minutes ago, Gromnir said:

dear lord are you stretching. a politician echoing words o' past icons? is common. do they footnote every speech? you think guys such as trump and biden even write their own speeches? biden is a nice guy, but he is not particular erudite. you think he would recognize origin passages?  

Yeah, that always cracks me up. I am sure someone on his team is to blame for plagiarism, but this guy has a team of people preparing all of this for him. Of course, this is the same reason the Alleppo incident was overblown for Gary Johnson. Gary Johnson was the governor of New Mexico. The only reason he would be well-versed on the situation in Syria is if he had a team telling him about it. Which he should have, given his bid for President. It is a failure of him not having a good enough team.

Trump stays out of this plagiarism stuff because he doesn't seem capable to stick to a script. Yay. Of course, people also drank bleach when he went off script back in March so... 

[PK htiw klaw eriF]

I got a letter from someone I've never heard of begging me to vote, complete with handwritten appeal. This is a first and it strikes me as weird, guess by my demographic they expect me to hate Trump but be unlikely to vote (both of which are true tbh). 

[Zoraptor]

Obviously sent by Vladimir Putin or the Ayatollah Khamenei. You should do the exact opposite of what it suggests, if you're a true patriot.

43 minutes ago, Hurlshot said:

Of course, this is the same reason the Alleppo incident was overblown for Gary Johnson. Gary Johnson was the governor of New Mexico. The only reason he would be well-versed on the situation in Syria is if he had a team telling him about it. Which he should have, given his bid for President. It is a failure of him not having a good enough team.

Thing is, the actual answer to the question once he got the clarification was fine. Not particularly enlightening or anything, but you don't go to US politicians for nuanced and balanced views of the ME anyway unless you're a raging neocon/ neolib. Ironically- or not- that is of course what philosophy most US media subscribe to, cue Trump only becoming a 'true President' after bombing Shayrat from otherwise noted Trump fan Bryan Williams...

The main reason the Johnson/ Aleppo incident happened was not because of ignorance- though inexperience with interviewer technique was definitely a factor- but because it was clearly intended as a gotcha question; supplied by the interviewer with no context out of the blue. Like asking a series of questions about car mechanics then asking someone what a 'microbe' is. Of course someone might be baffled by that question, the previous ones were about tire pressures and which oil grade to use in an older engine and they're naturally going to be thinking that a 'microbe' is something to do with a car. For Johnson the footage was also, consistently, edited maliciously to omit the (lack of) context to the question and his response after he got the clarification.

Edited October 25, 2020 by Zoraptor

[Achilles]

6 minutes ago, KaineParker said:

I got a letter from someone I've never heard of begging me to vote, complete with handwritten appeal. This is a first and it strikes me as weird, guess by my demographic they expect me to hate Trump but be unlikely to vote (both of which are true tbh). 

Yep. It's called a "get out the vote" campaign.

My guess is that you voted at least once, but maybe haven't in a while (or vote infrequently). While *how* you vote isn't public record, whether or not you *do* vote or *have* voted is. The fact that Texas seems to be in-play this election means that campaigns are probably pulling out all the stops to get every voter to the polls.

And unless they specifically mentioned Trump (which they shouldn't have), they're probably just taking a shot in the dark on your political leanings.

[Gromnir]

5 minutes ago, Zoraptor said:

 

The main reason the Johnson/ Aleppo incident happened was not because of ignorance- though inexperience with interviewer technique was definitely a factor- but because it was clearly intended as a gotcha question;

bs

GEIST: Joining us now, the Libertarian candidate for president, former Republican governor Gary Johnson of New Mexico. Governor, good to have you with us.

JOHNSON: Great to be with you. There was a — there was a super PAC that did an ad — Abe Lincoln ad, and it’s now had close to 20 million views —

BRZEZINSKI: My goodness.

JOHNSON: — in 12 days.

GEIST: Wow, which is really —

BRZEZINSKI: What does that tell you?

JOHNSON: Well, I think that there’s — I don’t know. Maybe a — maybe a little spice needs to get added to the two-person race that’s currently going on.

BRZEZINSKI: Maybe a little less —

GEIST: Right.

BRZEZINSKI: — by me.

GEIST: That’s a good place to start. For people who don’t know a lot about you and haven’t had a chance to hear and learn about where you stand on the issues, what is the lane for the Johnson-Weld ticket between Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton? What do you bring that’s different from those two?

JOHNSON: Well, I think there’s a big six-lane highway down the middle that encompasses 60 percent of Americans. And broadly speaking, fiscally conservative, socially inclusive, skeptical when it comes to our military intervention. Skeptical when it comes to our going in and supporting regime changes that have not resulted in a more safe world — free markets.

So I think that that encompasses about 60 percent of the electorate and I think that the two-party system has really, really got to the fringes on both sides.

BRZEZINSKI: Mike?

BARNICLE: Which of those candidates of the two-party system — Republican candidate, Democratic candidate — do you draw the most votes from?

JOHNSON: You know, in all of these polls it’s just, remarkably, 50-50. Amazingly, I think, though, that with the exception of just a few polls it’s more votes from Hillary.

BARNICLE: Do you —

JOHNSON: But I think — I think when it ends up it will really be 50-50.

BARNICLE: But do you worry about the Nader effect in 2000?

JOHNSON: I don’t worry one bit about it. I really do think that the two-party system is broken. I don’t think Democrats are able to balance a checkbook these days. That’s it’s all about bigger government and higher taxes. And then Republicans with, I think, the social agenda. Look, whatever your social inclinations are just don’t force it on me. And I think the Republican Party has gotten really extreme in that category.

BARNICLE: What would you do, if you were elected, about Aleppo?

JOHNSON: About?

BARNICLE: Aleppo.

JOHNSON: And what is Aleppo?

BARNICLE: You’re kidding.

JOHNSON: No.

BARNICLE: Aleppo is in Syria. It’s the — it’s the epicenter of the refugee crisis.

JOHNSON: OK, got it, got it.

BARNICLE: OK.

https://time.com/4483779/gary-johnson-aleppo-transcript/

were a question right near start o' interview and johnson had specific identified regime change stance moments earlier.

so, bs.

oh, and before obama and trump, most folks recognized the President's domestic influence were largely limited to shaping the national agenda. foreign affairs were the crux o' Presidential power and influence. fact gary johnson didn't recognize were meaningful. am disagreeing with @Hurlshot    conclusions precise 'cause we agree with him 'bout what were revealed by the flub. 

HA! Good Fun!

[ComradeYellow]

14 minutes ago, Achilles said:

The fact that Texas seems to be in-play this election

It is?

But yeah one luxury of living in a partisan state with miniscule electoral weight is that I'm in no danger of being accosted by partisan hacks telling me to vote a certain way.  All I see are a bunch of signs everywhere (Most of them for Biden).

Edited October 25, 2020 by ComradeMaster

[Achilles]

16 minutes ago, ComradeMaster said:

It is?

But yeah one luxury of living in a partisan state with miniscule electoral weight is that I'm in no danger of being accosted by partisan hacks telling me to vote a certain way.  All I see are a bunch of signs everywhere (Most of them for Biden).

2 point game might not seem like much to get worked up about until you remember that it's Texas we're talking about. Anything could happen.