US Politics: It’s Not A Crime If Your Feelings Got Hurt

[Fragile Bird]

1 hour ago, Zorral said:

In the meantime they gave away one of the 'troika of terrorism', Cuba, lock stock and barrel to Russia (how does one separate this supposedly terrorist* member of the non-terrorist TROIKA from Russia???????), and love, love, love Saudi, where in just lately they beheaded at least 37 people, and even displayed one? on a cross -- they say, 'displayed,' because they don't actually, you know, crucify people they say.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

* Trying to recall any terrorist action committed in the US by Cuba and failing ... while I can think of all kinds of bad acts including election stealing against the US by Russia and Saudi.

 

Oh, Cuba assassinated JFK, remember?

[Guest]

2 hours ago, Triskele said:

On that notion of the Dems having two bases as I mentioned upthread here's an intriguing column on the possibility of this coming to a head.   

 

 

 

While I hesitate to lend any sort of credence to an article that trots out the lazy "brigades of Bernie-bros" canard, I'll bite on this one.

I dispute the assertion that Democrats are any more divided now than they've been over the past few years, and they're certainly nowhere near as divided as they were in '72. Regardless of which candidate wins the nomination, they'll have a few things going for them that Clinton didn't have in 2016; they won't have historically low approval ratings, they won't have been the target of unending Republican attacks for a quarter-century, and they won't have been the subject of years-long investigations that last right up until mere weeks before the election.

I think that as long as there is no perception of outright favoritism this go-around, the left has just enough goodwill left in the tank from the Obama years to pull the lever for Biden, and the establishment should be able to be pragmatic enough to pull the lever for Bernie if he's the one nominated instead.

Matthew Yglesias had a good article in Vox today about how establishment Dems should separate Bernie's record from his rhetoric before they contemplate a scorched-earth anti-Sanders crusade.

And scorched-earth tactics, from any candidate, are my biggest worry in this primary (especially with such a large field), and I've already decided that I won't support any candidate who employs these kinds of tactics, even in the general election.

[DMC]

3 hours ago, Triskele said:

On that notion of the Dems having two bases as I mentioned upthread here's an intriguing column on the possibility of this coming to a head.   

A lot of this is just navel gazing.  Cartel parties always will have intra-conflict - even as the GOP continues to shrink they have factional strife.  Plus of course more and more candidates want to run because it's becoming a very beneficial career move for politicians, that isn't at all party specific. 

As for a brokered convention, again, that's just something junkies dream about imagining cuz we got nothing better to do.  My stated policy on that is I'll believe it when I see it.

[Gorn]

The only truly scary scenario I can foresee for the Democratic Party is Sanders entering the convention with a plurality (but not the majority) of candidates, and then losing to Biden (or whoever) at the convention, either because of superdelegates or because of other candidates making a deal with the eventual winner.

[Larry of the Lawn]

3 hours ago, The Great Unwashed said:

While I hesitate to lend any sort of credence to an article that trots out the lazy "brigades of Bernie-bros" canard, I'll bite on this one.

I dispute the assertion that Democrats are any more divided now than they've been over the past few years, and they're certainly nowhere near as divided as they were in '72. Regardless of which candidate wins the nomination, they'll have a few things going for them that Clinton didn't have in 2016; they won't have historically low approval ratings, they won't have been the target of unending Republican attacks for a quarter-century, and they won't have been the subject of years-long investigations that last right up until mere weeks before the election.

I think that as long as there is no perception of outright favoritism this go-around, the left has just enough goodwill left in the tank from the Obama years to pull the lever for Biden, and the establishment should be able to be pragmatic enough to pull the lever for Bernie if he's the one nominated instead.

Matthew Yglesias had a good article in Vox today about how establishment Dems should separate Bernie's record from his rhetoric before they contemplate a scorched-earth anti-Sanders crusade.

And scorched-earth tactics, from any candidate, are my biggest worry in this primary (especially with such a large field), and I've already decided that I won't support any candidate who employs these kinds of tactics, even in the general election.

Yeah, fucking hell.  I'll vote for Biden if it's him or Trump but it'll be much more uncomfortable than it was voting for Clinton.  

Right now I think my preferences go:

1.  Warren

2.  Harris

2.  Sanders

4.  Castro

Who the hell looks at the Dem field, sees Biden, and goes "that's the guy!"?  It's just name recognition, right?  

 

[mormont]

Name recognition plus strong association with Obama. I'd guess that latter factor is very significant for a lot of voters. 

[Maithanet]

For a lot of low information voters (including many independents/centerists), a return to an Obama/Biden style presidency would be a huge improvement.  Biden doesn't give you everything you want, but he's reliable, stable and competent.

He won't be getting my vote in the primary, but I wouldn't be holding my nose in the general if he is the nominee.  He's clearly qualified, and if he can win the nomination in this crowded field I'd feel a lot better about his electability.  A Biden/Harris or Biden/Abrahams ticket would be formidable, and in both cases there's a real possibility that Biden only goes for one term and then endorses his VP for 2024. 

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

15 hours ago, Jace, Basilissa said:

Italy is Jamarcus Russell elite. I have over 100 years of evidence.

That seems harsh. Brazil is a much better candidate for Jamarcus Russell elite.

[Varysblackfyre321]

Some good news ;https://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/us_7665434

California’s hotly debated mandatory vaccine bill passed the state Assembly on Thursday, leaving just one more floor vote before it heads to Gov. Jerry Brown for final approval.

Under the proposed law, parents citing religious or personal reasons would no longer be exempt from immunizing their children enrolled in California schools. The bill allows parents to opt out of immunization requirements for diseases like measles, mumps, and rubella only for medical reasons.

[Maithanet]

8 minutes ago, Varysblackfyre321 said:

Some good news ;https://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/us_7665434

California’s hotly debated mandatory vaccine bill passed the state Assembly on Thursday, leaving just one more floor vote before it heads to Gov. Jerry Brown for final approval.

Under the proposed law, parents citing religious or personal reasons would no longer be exempt from immunizing their children enrolled in California schools. The bill allows parents to opt out of immunization requirements for diseases like measles, mumps, and rubella only for medical reasons.

Huh?  Jerry Brown hasn't been governor for months. 

[Varysblackfyre321]

12 minutes ago, Maithanet said:

Huh?  Jerry Brown hasn't been governor for months. 

True. Very embarrassing to have cited this particular article and cited it. My mistake and you were right to point it out.

This is an article should have used:

https://www.msn.com/en-us/health/health-news/the-latest-california-vaccine-exemption-bill-advances/ar-BBWgtO6?OCID=ansmsnnews11

[Zorral]

13 hours ago, Fragile Bird said:

Oh, Cuba assassinated JFK, remember?

That was debunked ages ago!    (It was the mob ....  and I know you know that! )

Another significant facet of giving away Cuba to Russia is the sheer idiocy of the wart.  Rubio played him, saying that it was the Miami Cubans who got him Florida in the election.  Whereas, that was almost immediately debunked by the numbers.  Miami-Dade didn't vote him in -- it was those old white men out in the 'rural' sides of Florida who gave him Florida.

Rubio persuaded him by taking Cuba away from the average US person, average Cuban-American families (who are also doing enormous entrepreneurship in Cuba itself), pretending they can now get back the property that most never had in the first place by suing -- how are they going to do that when the nation is owned by Russia?

Everyone involved in this is a super (to go back to the current discussion of super vs primary) idiot.

 

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

13 hours ago, Fragile Bird said:

Oh, Cuba assassinated JFK, remember?

And Ted Cruz’s dad was in on it!!!

20 minutes ago, Zorral said:

That was debunked ages ago!    (It was the mob ....  and I know you know that! )

Lies! It was LBJ, Nixon, and the CIA!!!

And Ted Cruz’s dad!  

[Zorral]

Just now, Tywin et al. said:

And Ted Cruz’s dad was in on it!!!

Lies! It was LBJ, Nixon, and the CIA!!!

And Ted Cruz’s dad!  

Silly -- it was her emails ....

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

15 minutes ago, Zorral said:

Silly -- it was her emails ....

The emails had to do it because the mastermind of the plan suddenly had crippling bone spurs.

[A Horse Named Stranger]

16 hours ago, Zorral said:

* Trying to recall any terrorist action committed in the US by Cuba and failing ... while I can think of all kinds of bad acts including election stealing against the US by Russia and Saudi.

Ted Cruz.

[Paladin of Ice]

9 hours ago, larrytheimp said:

Yeah, fucking hell.  I'll vote for Biden if it's him or Trump but it'll be much more uncomfortable than it was voting for Clinton.  

Right now I think my preferences go:

1.  Warren

2.  Harris

2.  Sanders

4.  Castro

Who the hell looks at the Dem field, sees Biden, and goes "that's the guy!"?  It's just name recognition, right?  

 

Name recognition, the thought that he’s experienced, (overlooking the fact that Biden has a lot of bad experience tied to his record, such as with the drug war or being part of rewriting bankruptcy laws in a way that gutted their protections) and that the dem primary voters are disproportionately midwesterners who think all problems would be solved by Democrats being more moderate.

Biden might not have much appeal to those of us who are lefty politics junkies, but to that crowd he’s just what they’ve been waiting for.

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

2 hours ago, Paladin of Ice said:

Name recognition, the thought that he’s experienced, (overlooking the fact that Biden has a lot of bad experience tied to his record, such as with the drug war or being part of rewriting bankruptcy laws in a way that gutted their protections) and that the dem primary voters are disproportionately midwesterners who think all problems would be solved by Democrats being more moderate.

Bad experiences shape us and teach us about the mistakes we've made in the past. The mistake isn't the thing to focus on. Look more at the individual growth and how the candidate, or person in general, expresses said growth.

Quote

Biden might not have much appeal to those of us who are lefty politics junkies, but to that crowd he’s just what they’ve been waiting for.

AKA primary voters. If I was a gambling man I'd bet that Biden has already plateaued.

[Martell Spy]

Quote

 

Newly announced presidential candidate Joe Biden contacted Anita Hill earlier this month to express “regret” over the way her sexual-assault allegations against Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas were handled—but Hill didn’t walk away happy.

She told The New York Times this week that she was unsatisfied with their conversation and refuses to call what he said an apolog

“I cannot be satisfied by simply saying I’m sorry for what happened to you. I will be satisfied when I know there is real change and real accountability and real purpose,” she said. Hill added that she doesn’t think Biden yet understands the true consequences of his actions, and, as such, she cannot support his presidential bid.

“The focus on apology to me is one thing,” Hill added. “But he needs to give an apology to the other women and to the American public because we know now how deeply disappointed Americans around the country were about what they saw. And not just women. There are women there are women and men now who have just really lost confidence in our government to respond to the problem of gender violence.”

 

Anita Hill Bashes Biden, Demands He Apologize to ‘Other Women’
‘I cannot be satisfied by simply saying I’m sorry for what happened to you,’ Hill told The New York Times of her conversation with the ex-veep.

https://www.thedailybeast.com/anita-hill-bashes-biden-demands-he-apologize-to-other-women?source=articles&via=rss

[Martell Spy]

Quote

 

WASHINGTON — All those times Donald Trump railed about the secretive “deep state” trying to undermine his presidency, he might have tried checking upstairs and down the hall.

That was the location of the West Wing office of former White House chief lawyer Don McGahn, who, according to the report issued last week by special counsel Robert Mueller, repeatedly thwarted Trump by failing to comply with his boss’ orders to block the Russia investigation and then cover up his attempts to do so.

And in so doing, McGahn and a number of his White House colleagues joined the long list of bureaucrats, top agency officials and Republican lawmakers who have settled on one simple trick for dealing with Trump’s illegal, unethical or simply unwelcome demands: ignoring them, knowing that Trump is likely to forget and move on.

“As always with Trump, you have to figure out when to take it seriously,” said one former top Republican National Committee member on condition of anonymity. “This guy brings out more of that from more people in more situations than anybody possibly could.”

 

If Trump Is So Worried About The ‘Deep State,’ He Should Try Looking In The White House
Don McGahn and others in the White House did what’s become common among Republicans in Washington: Dealing with Trump by ignoring him.

https://www.huffpost.com/entry/deep-state-white-house_n_5cc0be43e4b01b6b3efc1c43