Jump to content
DanteGabriel

US Politics: RIP EHK FYVM GOP

Recommended Posts

6 minutes ago, Mindwalker said:

Stupid question: What does 'AA voter' mean?

African American.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What short do you use for Asian American Voters, or the Alcoholics Anomynous voters. Ok the last one is easy. SCOTUS judge, although he has been very much out with his drinking.

Anyway, you could be a bit clearer with your short forms.

Share this post


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

Yeah, might be. It's interesting in that it's both a very big repudiation of Clinton AND a repudiation of Sanders all in one. It's also probably the case that many of his revolutionary ideas that were not mainstream are very much part of the regular discourse and are considered pretty 'normal' in dem circles now, so he isn't quite so unique in that regard. 

Still I would have expected more loyalty from some of his base. As it stands, he was outfunded by Buttigieg last quarter (seriously?) and his poll numbers are dropping all over the place, and it just seems weird. Biden's too, mind you. 

But this is what I've always argued with you. The myth of Bernie's "loyal base." The Bernie Bros if you will. It's not real. People liked him last time in the primary (I still like him). But when he lost, he lost. Most of us went to vote for the Dem. nominee. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Simon Steele said:

But this is what I've always argued with you. The myth of Bernie's "loyal base." The Bernie Bros if you will. It's not real. People liked him last time in the primary (I still like him). But when he lost, he lost. Most of us went to vote for the Dem. nominee. 

A BernieBro told me on Twitter that I was probably making up my son's cancer in order to gain sympathy. Please don't gaslight me and tell me my experiences aren't actually 'real'. 

And that's really not my point, anyway. I would have expected those Sanders voters to have largely stayed with Sanders this time around as well. But instead we have probably half or more of them defecting entirely, both in voting preference and in money. That's unusual in general - usually people who have picked a side stay with that side for a while psychologically - and it's unusual given the relative passion and youth of the supporters that Sanders had. But that doesn't appear to be the case here. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
Quote

If you believe the signals coming out of the bond market, it might be time to start counting down until our next recession.

Quote

As of this week, the U.S. Treasury yield curve has now been inverted for a full quarter—an incredibly dull-sounding turn of events that happens to be an unusually reliable warning sign that an economic downturn is on the way.

The Single Most Reliable Recession Indicator of the Past 50 Years Has Officially Started Blaring

https://slate.com/business/2019/07/yield-curve-bond-market-recession.html

Edited by Martell Spy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
52 minutes ago, Martell Spy said:

The Single Most Reliable Recession Indicator of the Past 50 Years Has Officially Started Blaring

https://slate.com/business/2019/07/yield-curve-bond-market-recession.html

Been watching this for ages. In the meantime the markets have set record highs. I was obviously too early about 4 or 6 weeks when I said there was a relatively short window to take profits and run (the yield curve had been inverted for some time and China tariffs were due to kick in) but the crash that happened in the 90s was marked by a hot market in the summer that crashed in September once the traders came back from vacation. A number of my broker friends are 80% cash now.

And back in Trumpland, funds that were earmarked for repairs in National parks were diverted to Trump’s 4th of July spectacle. Only $2.5 M, but that fixes a lot of broken stuff.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, Fragile Bird said:

Been watching this for ages. In the meantime the markets have set record highs. I was obviously too early about 4 or 6 weeks when I said there was a relatively short window to take profits and run (the yield curve had been inverted for some time and China tariffs were due to kick in) but the crash that happened in the 90s was marked by a hot market in the summer that crashed in September once the traders came back from vacation. A number of my broker friends are 80% cash now.

And back in Trumpland, funds that were earmarked for repairs in National parks were diverted to Trump’s 4th of July spectacle. Only $2.5 M, but that fixes a lot of broken stuff.

I was early too. I actually sold all of positions several weeks ago. I have been sitting in cash, mostly because I see all of the indicators telling me that the market is overbought. I continue to sit in cash because nothing out there looks buyable. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

From Mother Jones. I encourage everyone to subscribe to, and to read regularly, Mother Jones.  Please do click on this link to see it on their site, because of course clicks are nanocurrency. 

Also, I recommend signing up for Jonathan Katz's The Long Version newsletter, it's really good.

There are many ways to look at what AOC is saying in this interview, many perspectives from which to think about it, to be outraged by it. 

But there's one detail I want to call attention to. You have to read down into the interview to get to it.

That particular group of captive women that AOC visited, shivering in that south Texas icebox cell, were all Cubans. 

I call attention to this to put a perspective on the T***pists' recent actions toward Cuba. This is what the T***pists think of Cubans.  

This is long but it is a necessary read for any decent citizen and voter in the United States of America.  The depravity on view here is beyond words, but these people, investigating against the will of everyone running this country, have done their best.  Recall, their phones were confiscated, and they went off the guided tour script to the great outrage of their handlers.

This is NOT about AOC, but about what all these investigators saw and reported.

Please, please, click on the link below and read all of it. 

* * *

https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2019/07/the-whole-facilitys-culture-is-rotted-from-the-core-what-alexandria-ocasio-cortez-saw-inside-the-el-paso-camps/

“The Whole Facility’s Culture Is Rotted From the Core”: What Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez Saw Inside the El Paso Camps

In an interview with Mother Jones, AOC describes the cruelty and impunity she glimpsed at the border.

by Jonathan M. Katz

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, No one of consequence said:

Lol. That entire interview has been proven a lie.  She never even entered the facility. Just another false narrative. 

Lol!!!!!!!

The story originated from the same person who claimed ranchers were finding prayer rugs abandoned in the desert.  Glad to see you read credible news sources. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A note from a moderator:

 

In a thread full of people sharing links to stories to discuss, it's worthwhile that if you have a countervailing story that you share a source for that story rather than just making a claim that has to be taken on faith. It leads to a lot of trouble when someone shows up and says things that could be construed as misleading or outright false because there's literally nothing offered to show the claim has some kind of basis in fact.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, Kalbear said:

Yeah, might be. It's interesting in that it's both a very big repudiation of Clinton AND a repudiation of Sanders all in one. It's also probably the case that many of his revolutionary ideas that were not mainstream are very much part of the regular discourse and are considered pretty 'normal' in dem circles now, so he isn't quite so unique in that regard. 

Still I would have expected more loyalty from some of his base. As it stands, he was outfunded by Buttigieg last quarter (seriously?) and his poll numbers are dropping all over the place, and it just seems weird. Biden's too, mind you. 

They are OLD.  And we know a lot about them.  And while pretty much anyone with a shred of a conscience draws a clear contrast to Trump, they have some Venn diagram overlap (VERY old white guys who say crazy things for a start).  

I am, at this point, team Harris.  She's just GOOD.  She has a great presence, is a bona fide liberal (though maybe not as progressive as some would want - stay with me, this is good for her in the general), has been in the public eye long enough that hopefully there aren't BIG surprises, and has features that, while maybe not attractive to the farthest left wing of the party, are big plusses in the general, including her prosecutorial background.  She is also a huge visual contrast to a Trump in pretty much every possible way.  I think the Trump machine fears her and has started crazy pants stuff against her, which also suggests that their research things she is real.

Share this post


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

A BernieBro told me on Twitter that I was probably making up my son's cancer in order to gain sympathy. Please don't gaslight me and tell me my experiences aren't actually 'real'. 

And that's really not my point, anyway. I would have expected those Sanders voters to have largely stayed with Sanders this time around as well. But instead we have probably half or more of them defecting entirely, both in voting preference and in money. That's unusual in general - usually people who have picked a side stay with that side for a while psychologically - and it's unusual given the relative passion and youth of the supporters that Sanders had. But that doesn't appear to be the case here. 

As Kalbear's self-appointed interpreter I'll restate on his behalf that a shitload of Bernies support seems to have been motivated by external sources.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Three new national polls out today - ABC/WaPo, YouGov, and Ipsos.  The trend of Warren and Harris surging while Biden and Sanders drop is very clear by now, and suggests Mayor Pete may be the Rudy of the top-tier.  Further, this steep and rather rapid decline from Biden and Sanders is something I anticipated, but not this early.  And suggests perhaps we're looking at a Warren/Harris showdown when people start actually voting.  Obviously, general caveats are needed - it is still WAY too early, anything can happen, anyone could emerge or tank, etc.  But I think it's time to start thinking about a Warren/Harris battle, or at least I am because I'm a huge dork.  And that is exactly why I started that shitshow of an argument in the last thread.

What I'm thinking is that Bernie continues to slip as Warren eats up his support.  Harris does the same to Biden, but he has a bigger cushion.  So, come Iowa, Warren/Harris/Biden are the top three.  The order doesn't matter much as long as the margins are close.  Then Warren wins NH, and Harris wins SC (Nevada has always been lower salience than the other three first contests, for whatever reason.  Plus it's harder to handicap, although I suppose Harris may have a geographical advantage).  In that scenario, we could see Harris and Warren as the clear top two by - and certainly after - Super Tuesday as Joe's electability argument officially goes out the window.

Share this post


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

Lol!!!!!!!

The story originated from the same person who claimed ranchers were finding prayer rugs abandoned in the desert.  Glad to see you read credible news sources. 

Considering how many legislators and other people were present and witnessing, and continuing to witness, the person who made up the lie that AOC didn't do this -- really, they should do a better job lying than that.  But the people who buy this shyte are desperate, evidently (as well as impaired in vision, reading comprehension and analysis). 

And again, this making the story about AOC, when it is about what the border control agents are doing to the refugees in the concentration camps, which is depraved and sadistic in the extreme.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On the other hand, Morning Consult/538 found polling the same people before and after the debates that while Biden lost and Harris gained, everyone else remained pretty static. My take is that the top tier remains Biden/Sanders/Warren with Harris now joining this tier more strongly.

Also, the ABC/WaPo polls show Sanders in a pretty clear 2nd place (as does Ipsos, but not as much), so I don't actually see why this narrative of is taking hold. Maybe we should wait till more than just the YouGov poll showing him slipping past 2nd place.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, IheartIheartTesla said:

Also, the ABC/WaPo polls show Sanders in a pretty clear 2nd place (as does Ipsos, but not as much), so I don't actually see why this narrative of is taking hold.

Because the ABC/WaPO and Ipsos polls still have a "don't know" of 17 and 21, respectively.  I agree that the main takeaway here is there is now a clear top four in Biden/Sanders/Warren/Harris - and it's a lot more even between those four than it used to be.  The narrative is taking hold because if that happens, it's likely to be the case that all those "don't knows" go to Warren and Harris, who are relatively unknown, compared to Biden and Sanders, who've been around the block a few times.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, IheartIheartTesla said:

On the other hand, Morning Consult/538 found polling the same people before and after the debates that while Biden lost and Harris gained, everyone else remained pretty static. My take is that the top tier remains Biden/Sanders/Warren with Harris now joining this tier more strongly.

Also, the ABC/WaPo polls show Sanders in a pretty clear 2nd place (as does Ipsos, but not as much), so I don't actually see why this narrative of is taking hold. Maybe we should wait till more than just the YouGov poll showing him slipping past 2nd place.

As a psychologist I'm not sure polling the same people is the best method for this question, as there is research showing that asking someone to publicly state an opinion tends to make it less likely for them to change it. I would expect that factor to operate for some people even on an "anonymous" survey since they know they are being asked the same question by the same organization. 

Share this post


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

×