Political Discussion

Ed Selley said:
This argument is the mirror of the one that the UK has over Blair achieving power in 1997 and it can be summarised thus;

Would you rather have someone who does 40-50% of the stuff you want from a position of power or one who offers 100% of what you want and a warm fuzzy feeling in your nethers but does so from a position of perennial opposition?
Click to expand...

That depends on what he or she is doing the other 50% of the time.

And in the case of Bill, it was a bunch of shit (NAFTA, financial deregulation, privatization of the public sector) that gutted the middle class of this country and helped cause the Great Recession so your hypothetical is a pretty easy answer.
 
DownIsTheNewUp said:
That depends on what he or she is doing the other 50% of the time.

And in the case of Bill, it was a bunch of shit (NAFTA, financial deregulation, privatization of the public sector) that gutted the middle class of this country and helped cause the Great Recession so your hypothetical is a pretty easy answer.
Click to expand...

Easy provided that no assumption is made of what a Republican administration would have done in the same period or are you actively saying you'd have preferred that? I don't see (and I freely admit, I'm on the wrong side of the Atlantic for all the fine details) how there's a different outcome. More traditional Democratic candidates had got nowhere significant in '84 and '88 so why would they have suddenly triumphed in '92?
 
RenegadeMonster said:
View attachment 36000

Wow, Washington State is close. Bernie is winning currently by votes but Biden has more Pledge Delegates.
Click to expand...
Unfortunately it is not looking good. Exit polling in WA State had late deciders heavily swinging Biden’s way. As a mail in state the early stuff is what’s being counted now, the later arriving vote will probably swing more Biden’s way.
 
I've supported Bernie in the primaries the last two elections but I think it is time for him to get out of the race to be honest. His press conference this morning just sounded desperate.
 
Twentytwo said:
I've supported Bernie in the primaries the last two elections but I think it is time for him to get out of the race to be honest. His press conference this morning just sounded desperate.
Click to expand...


How he responds to this as well as his supporters will make a difference in how the progressive movement moves forward.
 
Indymisanthrope said:
It's just a little mnemonic device to help you out anytime you start thinking, "Hey, isn't this exactly the type of thing he was chastising other candidates about doing?" Don't be silly -- it's okay if Bernie does it!
Click to expand...
Ah, because of Warren. I getcha and yes it’s pretty hypocritical. My hope is, if he won’t drop out now; he gives it one last hurrah, with the Debate and next Tuesday but if he get spanked he needs to shut it down and jump on the No Malarkey Express with everyone else.

Then I would hermetically seal Diamond Joe in a bunker somewhere in Delaware and hold Bloomberg to his word, having him air attack ads calling Trump a buffoon real time as he mishandles the pandemic/ market collapse until Election Day.
 
TenderLovingKiller® said:
Ah, because of Warren. I getcha and yes it’s pretty hypocritical. My hope is, if he won’t drop out now; he gives it one last hurrah, with the Debate and next Tuesday but if he get spanked he needs to shut it down and jump on the No Malarkey Express with everyone else.

Then I would hermetically seal Diamond Joe in a bunker somewhere in Delaware and hold Bloomberg to his word, having him air attack ads calling Trump a buffoon real time as he mishandles the pandemic/ market collapse until Election Day.
Click to expand...
I'm being a little facetious; as long as he doesn't go negative and/or tease some last-minute ploy at the convention, I think a healthy primary is mostly fine, and I disagree with any party leadership that says he has to drop out now so that the party can unify. The party will unify just fine. Giving the states that haven't voted yet a reason to stay engaged and invested in the outcome is a good thing, IMO.
 
www.cnn.com

Senate panel scraps subpoena in probe related to Bidens

Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Chairman Ron Johnson scrapped a planned vote Wednesday for a subpoena in the committee's Republican-led investigation into the Ukrainian energy firm that hired former Vice President Joe Biden's son.
www.cnn.com www.cnn.com

Apparently we were real close to a probe on the Biden's actually happening.
 
RenegadeMonster said:
www.cnn.com

Senate panel scraps subpoena in probe related to Bidens

Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Chairman Ron Johnson scrapped a planned vote Wednesday for a subpoena in the committee's Republican-led investigation into the Ukrainian energy firm that hired former Vice President Joe Biden's son.
www.cnn.com www.cnn.com

Apparently we were real close to a probe on the Biden's actually happening.
Click to expand...
I fully expect this to get revisited before November. DJT will stop at nothing to stay in office.
 
Ed Selley said:
Easy provided that no assumption is made of what a Republican administration would have done in the same period or are you actively saying you'd have preferred that? I don't see (and I freely admit, I'm on the wrong side of the Atlantic for all the fine details) how there's a different outcome. More traditional Democratic candidates had got nowhere significant in '84 and '88 so why would they have suddenly triumphed in '92?
Click to expand...

The field goal posts feel like they are moving. This started as a conversation over which president of my lifetime was least shitty (Obama) and then shifted to whether I would rather have somebody who offers 50% of what I want versus 100% (but gets nothing done). My answer is that depends on what's happening with that other 50%. And in my eyes, it was more like 10-90 with Bill considering how far reaching the negative impacts of his decisions were on various communities (see: the crime bill of 94 for another banger that has yet to be mentioned).

Like the fact that the big selling point for Dems seems to be-- "well, they only shove a stick up your pee-hole every other day (as opposed to every day)" is precisely why Democrats have, in many ways, lost my generation and why they keep losing elections. Sorry, but I'd prefer the guy who promises me ointment for my inflamed urethra but will probably get obstructed in his attempt to obtain it. Because at least I know he's gonna have the decency to let me keep my pants on.
 
Last edited:
DownIsTheNewUp said:
The field goal posts feel like they are moving. This started as a conversation over which president of my lifetime was least shitty (Obama) and then shifted to whether I would rather have somebody who offers 50% of what I want versus 100% (but gets nothing done). My answer is that depends on what's happening with that other 50%. And in my eyes it was more like 10-90 considering how far reaching the negative impacts of his decisions were on various communities (see: the crime bill of 94 for another banger that has yet to be mentioned).

Like the fact that the big selling point for Dems seems to be-- "well, they only shove a stick up your pee-hole every other day (as opposed to every day)" is precisely why Democrats have, in many ways, lost my generation and why they keep losing elections. Sorry, but I'd prefer the guy who promises me ointment for my inflamed urethra but will probably get obstructed in his attempt to obtain it. Because at least I know he's gonna have the decency to let me keep my pants on.
Click to expand...
I'm looking for a president that'll install a colostomy bag for me so I don't have to use my peehole.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top