LGR4GM Posted May 28, 2019 Report Posted May 28, 2019 56 minutes ago, LTS said: It's an interesting question. What qualifications does it take? Do you need to be indoctrinated into the major political systems before you can be qualified? At that point are you anything more than just a party stooge? What if the man is a leader who just happens to be trying to bypass something he'd breeze through anyway? I don't know the guy, but dismissing him outright seems rough. If he can manage the people under him and knows how to lead he could very well be a successful president. I agree. Dismissing him outright because he hasn't been a Senator or a Congress person seems short sighted. He at least has participated as a member of Government and that is more than Trump did so yet again, he is more qualified than Trump was.
Eleven Posted May 28, 2019 Report Posted May 28, 2019 2 hours ago, LGR4GM said: I agree. Dismissing him outright because he hasn't been a Senator or a Congress person seems short sighted. He at least has participated as a member of Government and that is more than Trump did so yet again, he is more qualified than Trump was. I'm not using Donald Trump as the baseline for qualification, ffs.
LTS Posted May 28, 2019 Report Posted May 28, 2019 25 minutes ago, Eleven said: I'm not using Donald Trump as the baseline for qualification, ffs. And neither am I, which brought me to my question. What is the qualification?
Eleven Posted May 28, 2019 Report Posted May 28, 2019 30 minutes ago, LTS said: And neither am I, which brought me to my question. What is the qualification? To paraphrase Potter Stewart: I shall not today attempt further to define the kinds of material I understand to be embraced within that shorthand description ["qualified"], and perhaps I could never succeed in intelligibly doing so. But I know it when I see it, and the mayor of South Bend is not that.
LGR4GM Posted May 28, 2019 Report Posted May 28, 2019 I have my top 5 currently and doubt it changes much.
Marvin Posted May 30, 2019 Report Posted May 30, 2019 On 5/28/2019 at 9:18 AM, LGR4GM said: Trump didn't win some of those places by a landslide in 2016, I can't see him increasing his votes in 2020. Part of the problem with the polling now is their methodology and I would be curious to review the methodology of the polls featured. Are they gathering enough from each age group and how do they get them specifically. Further, I know so many people who simply did not want to vote for Hillary. https://phys.org/news/2019-01-poll-majority-millennials-trump-twitter.html The bottom line is that this election is very much up in the air. Trump may sink his own ship with tariffs. He could also help sink it if his Supreme Court Justices are instrumental in over turning Row v. Wade. The real question is who comes out of the Democratic primaries. I don't agree with you on the statement that Democrats have to adopt a platform "hard right" of their caucus. Hard right would be what? Right now the entire government is barreling hard right. There seems to be a lot of people not too happy with that. Every Democratic platform will modulate somewhat closer to middle left once a candidate is declared because that is how it typically goes. Trump will never win in a "landslide" because he is too divisive. I should have been clearer: Electoral landslide. I can easily see him losing the election by more than last time and still win 385-180 in the Electoral College. In fact, if I were a betting man, I would bet on him losing the popular vote by a greater margin than last time. But if the economic sugar high from the big spending increase and tax cuts keeps the economy seemingly improving rather than living on borrowed time, I can't see him losing the electoral vote at all. As a (Bill) Clinton hater, I agree with a lot of the polling that Bill's and Hillary's baggage might have weighed her down too much. Also, his horrible character meant that Trump's character was never in question. "Hard Right" is what I think a Democrat nowadays would think of the Simpson-Bowles plan fiscally (revised because of the Trumped Up Deficits), because it kills of any shot at Medicaid for All and cuts back on overall social spending -- even though it cuts overall weapons spending and increases taxes on everyone, particularly the rich. In particular, ditch the bits about free college for all (unaffordable). Go pro-second amendment -- but by saying that you the voter are presumed to have the Constitutional right to bear arms and the Constitutional right to vote unless the government can prove otherwise in a court of law; the burden is not on the voter. I agree with Democrats trying to stop voter-suppression laws; but just substitute the right terms and you see that the same argument holds for guns. (Remember that the next time the fringes argue for gun confiscation.) I also would recommend a sharp increase in cyber-security spending and an increase in readiness for the troops and better technical training overall. I can get more specific, but this is broadly what I think would pull in different people who would not ordinarily vote for a Democrat. I beg of you all- please make it someone whom we never-Trumpers find palatable. https://www.politico.com/story/2019/04/08/dems-fopo-murphy-1259699 https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2019/05/trump-2020-second-term/585994/ https://www.mediaite.com/opinion/if-democrats-really-want-to-beat-trump-joe-biden-should-be-their-nominee-its-not-clear-they-do/ https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2019/05/anti-trump-republicans-could-help-democrats-2020/589933/ https://www.mcclatchydc.com/news/politics-government/election/campaigns/article225994695.html
Sabel79 Posted May 31, 2019 Report Posted May 31, 2019 Posting this article as food for thought. The number of people who effectively decided the 2106 presidential election could fit into the football stadium in Ann Arbor. The abject cowardice of the Dems is going to give us Trump again, because they steadfastly refuse to take bold or any other sort of action, when the goal is so clearly within reach if they'd just close ranks and get kids to the damn polls. Even with the candidate they chose last time and the shenanigans from (certain quarters of) DOJ, it was that close. Just put out a product people want to buy. Hillary, frankly, ran to the right of Nixon and I think that ultimately doomed her. I might be, in a moment of madness, hilariously optimistic about that, I dunno. Still. Trump's voters will vote for him, out of either rabid fanaticism or shrugging self-interest. Give us an alternative possessed of qualities other than being not Trump, and we'll see what happens. https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/politics/2016-election/swing-state-margins/
SABRES 0311 Posted May 31, 2019 Report Posted May 31, 2019 4 hours ago, Sabel79 said: Posting this article as food for thought. The number of people who effectively decided the 2106 presidential election could fit into the football stadium in Ann Arbor. The abject cowardice of the Dems is going to give us Trump again, because they steadfastly refuse to take bold or any other sort of action, when the goal is so clearly within reach if they'd just close ranks and get kids to the damn polls. Even with the candidate they chose last time and the shenanigans from (certain quarters of) DOJ, it was that close. Just put out a product people want to buy. Hillary, frankly, ran to the right of Nixon and I think that ultimately doomed her. I might be, in a moment of madness, hilariously optimistic about that, I dunno. Still. Trump's voters will vote for him, out of either rabid fanaticism or shrugging self-interest. Give us an alternative possessed of qualities other than being not Trump, and we'll see what happens. https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/politics/2016-election/swing-state-margins/ To the bold. They have no product other than overly affectionate Biden. Oh yeah, ICE is bad.
Sabel79 Posted May 31, 2019 Report Posted May 31, 2019 5 hours ago, SABRES 0311 said: To the bold. They have no product other than overly affectionate Biden. Oh yeah, ICE is bad. Which is entirely the problem.
LGR4GM Posted May 31, 2019 Report Posted May 31, 2019 5 hours ago, SABRES 0311 said: To the bold. They have no product other than overly affectionate Biden. Oh yeah, ICE is bad. Because they are not paying attention to what most of america wants. They should be hammering the tax plan that completely screwed this country and the tariffs that are screwing the country. Instead they rail against what? Random Trump tweets like a bunch of middle school kids. 1
Eleven Posted May 31, 2019 Report Posted May 31, 2019 1 hour ago, LGR4GM said: Because they are not paying attention to what most of america wants. They should be hammering the tax plan that completely screwed this country and the tariffs that are screwing the country. Instead they rail against what? Random Trump tweets like a bunch of middle school kids. He is a master of distraction. It got him elected once and it likely will get him elected again. Gotta stop making it about his cult of personality and return to the issues. 1
SABRES 0311 Posted May 31, 2019 Report Posted May 31, 2019 5 hours ago, Sabel79 said: Which is entirely the problem. 5 hours ago, LGR4GM said: Because they are not paying attention to what most of america wants. They should be hammering the tax plan that completely screwed this country and the tariffs that are screwing the country. Instead they rail against what? Random Trump tweets like a bunch of middle school kids. MSM doesn’t do any favors to politicians on either side. They hammer topics with speculation for ratings and to fill that 24 hour news cycle. People get twisted up by the Hannity and Cuomos out there so politicians have to react accordingly. Occasionally they do their job like with the Boeing issue. They seem to only bring it up when there is new information and then tie it together with what they reported previously. FWIW I watch more CNN than Fox and I’m still on the Trump Train. 1
Eleven Posted May 31, 2019 Report Posted May 31, 2019 27 minutes ago, SABRES 0311 said: MSM doesn’t do any favors to politicians on either side. They hammer topics with speculation for ratings and to fill that 24 hour news cycle. People get twisted up by the Hannity and Cuomos out there so politicians have to react accordingly. Occasionally they do their job like with the Boeing issue. They seem to only bring it up when there is new information and then tie it together with what they reported previously. FWIW I watch more CNN than Fox and I’m still on the Trump Train. MSM is another big reason Trump was elected--at least at the primary level. All that free air time...
LGR4GM Posted May 31, 2019 Report Posted May 31, 2019 36 minutes ago, SABRES 0311 said: MSM doesn’t do any favors to politicians on either side. They hammer topics with speculation for ratings and to fill that 24 hour news cycle. People get twisted up by the Hannity and Cuomos out there so politicians have to react accordingly. Occasionally they do their job like with the Boeing issue. They seem to only bring it up when there is new information and then tie it together with what they reported previously. FWIW I watch more CNN than Fox and I’m still on the Trump Train. Are you on the Trump train or the Republican train. I feel like they have diverged.
SABRES 0311 Posted May 31, 2019 Report Posted May 31, 2019 1 minute ago, LGR4GM said: Are you on the Trump train or the Republican train. I feel like they have diverged. Trump Train. Specifically I like how he is at least trying something different with NOKO. It may not work but if you send young guys to fight it should be the last resort. He openly stated he doesn’t want regime change in Iran which I also like because nation building sucks. He seems to really support Israel too. I get they have political issues in their own country but their people live in the lion’s den and historically dealt with a lot of hardships. They are fighters and resilient which I respect. I think the Republicans will continue backing him so long as the Russia thing can be spun. Right now the message is no wrong doing on his part but massive corruption in the DoJ and intel community. If that well dries up I see them jumping ship. Honestly I can’t support any party as a whole. The joker said it best in the Dark Knight when speaking to Harvey Dent. Best example I could think of. However I do not like the tariffs. I think they are a waste of time. That said I myself don’t have a solution so it probably makes me sound like a whiner.
Weave Posted May 31, 2019 Report Posted May 31, 2019 4 hours ago, LGR4GM said: Are you on the Trump train or the Republican train. I feel like they have diverged. Que?? Seems to me that they have come together. It's a marriage of convenience, but it's a marriage. Find a Republican in Congress or Senate willing to disagree publicly with the President. How many? 2? 3? They are in lock step right now.
Marvin Posted June 2, 2019 Report Posted June 2, 2019 On 5/31/2019 at 6:51 PM, Weave said: Que?? Seems to me that they have come together. It's a marriage of convenience, but it's a marriage. Find a Republican in Congress or Senate willing to disagree publicly with the President. How many? 2? 3? They are in lock step right now. You are correct. On the national level, most Conservatives and Republicans who dislike Trump have been ostracised if not outright purged. Look at what happened to Justin Amash when he came out for impeaching Trump. IMHO, it looks like the desire to completely remake the Judiciary over-rules principle, honour, justice, backbone, and Truth. Here on the ground, my assertion that, "Donald Trump is everything I dislike about Bill Clinton writ large," got my wife kicked out of a Pagan discussion group a couple of months ago. Trump has such a stranglehold on the NYS Republican Party that generations-long family loyalties and flat-out competence have been ignored in favour of blind loyalty.
Drunkard Posted June 3, 2019 Report Posted June 3, 2019 On 5/31/2019 at 6:51 PM, Weave said: Que?? Seems to me that they have come together. It's a marriage of convenience, but it's a marriage. Find a Republican in Congress or Senate willing to disagree publicly with the President. How many? 2? 3? They are in lock step right now. I wish the Democrats could unite the way the GOP does. Republicans seems to be able to huddle up together and all agree on 2 or 3 talking points that they all hammer into the ground whether its on taxes, terrorism, war, guns, abortion, private school vouchers, or whatever. The Democrats have an opportunity to re-brand/spin these tariffs by calling it a Trump tax increase on consumer spending or something along those lines but they seem intent on trying out liberal or out "woke" each other, rather than uniting under a common banner. Messages (correct or not) gain traction through repetition. If the two dozen Democratic Presidential candidates could all regurgitate the same talking point about the Trump tariffs/trade taxes it would get repeated through all the various networks of the media and start to sink in with the American public.
SABRES 0311 Posted June 3, 2019 Report Posted June 3, 2019 8 hours ago, Drunkard said: I wish the Democrats could unite the way the GOP does. Republicans seems to be able to huddle up together and all agree on 2 or 3 talking points that they all hammer into the ground whether its on taxes, terrorism, war, guns, abortion, private school vouchers, or whatever. The Democrats have an opportunity to re-brand/spin these tariffs by calling it a Trump tax increase on consumer spending or something along those lines but they seem intent on trying out liberal or out "woke" each other, rather than uniting under a common banner. Messages (correct or not) gain traction through repetition. If the two dozen Democratic Presidential candidates could all regurgitate the same talking point about the Trump tariffs/trade taxes it would get repeated through all the various networks of the media and start to sink in with the American public. At this point they are trying to separate themselves from each other and get ahead. If they all say the same thing it makes it harder to stand out. With the exception of Robert O'Rourke they are low energy people so I think Biden gets the nod from the DNC as the safest bet.
SABRES 0311 Posted October 17, 2019 Report Posted October 17, 2019 (edited) Tulsi threw a curveball. I don’t know why but I like her better than the other Dem candidates. Edited October 17, 2019 by SABRES 0311
SABRES 0311 Posted October 18, 2019 Report Posted October 18, 2019 HRC suggests Tulsi is being groomed by Russia. ? Let me guess, Trump conspired with Putin to “groom” her.
SABRES 0311 Posted October 19, 2019 Report Posted October 19, 2019 And now Jill Stein was apparently under Russian influence at some point. Some people say when you point fingers at everyone else it’s because you are the guilty one. Oh well, call Bobby back in for two more years.
Eleven Posted October 21, 2019 Report Posted October 21, 2019 On 10/17/2019 at 6:52 PM, SABRES 0311 said: Tulsi threw a curveball. I don’t know why but I like her better than the other Dem candidates. I know why I do.
SABRES 0311 Posted October 21, 2019 Report Posted October 21, 2019 1 minute ago, Eleven said: I know why I do. She seems like a more direct person if that makes sense. Kind of take things head on.
Eleven Posted October 21, 2019 Report Posted October 21, 2019 (edited) 1 minute ago, SABRES 0311 said: She seems like a more direct person if that makes sense. Kind of take things head on. She's also gorgeous. More seriously, she is direct, she is on point, she has good ideas, and she's NOT A BOOMER. Edited October 21, 2019 by Eleven
Recommended Posts