• Moderators, please send me a PM if you are unable to access mod permissions. Thanks, Habsy.

OT: American Politics

Habsy said:
He’d be smart picking someone that actually has governing experience. Someone like a governor etc.

He doesn’t need Harris, she’s from a state that Biden will win walking away. Her pull is far less out east. He needs someone to deliver a state that’ll be a death blow, like Florida or Ohio.
Click to expand...

Sherrod Brown?

Moderate democrat, polled well in Ohio before he announced he wouldn't run, like Joe favours a public option for Medicare.

Biden wins in Pennsylvania, Brown ropes in Ohio. You make up the 0.3% you lost by in Michigan and you've won.

Probably not a popular move if you're progressive but locks down a win vs Trump.
 
nDXKh3a.jpg
 
MindzEye said:
This is actually pretty important. One of Hillary's numerous mistakes was in bringing a "random guy in a suit" as her veep. Bring someone with actual cache among the progressives and she probably manages to win. Kaine didn't even bring his home state with him ffs. In an election that close, a decent veep pick might have tipped the balance.
Click to expand...

Uh, Clinton/Kaine won Virginia.
 
MindzEye said:
Your country is in legit political crisis mode because of one guy and you won't vote him out based on the veep pick?

Come on.
Click to expand...

Playing catch up on posts I missed.

Yes, When the top of the ticket is going to be two weeks shy of 78 on election day? The Veep choice matters to me.

I'm also concerned about Pence, people think he couldn't be worse than Trump but I am not so sure about that.
 
Keith Boykin @keithboykin
Specialists at Deutsche Bank recommended in 2016 and 2017 that transactions from Donald Trump and Jared Kushner be reported to the Treasury Department for money laundering, but top bank executives stepped in and never reported the transactions.

nytimes.com/2019/05/19/bus
 
Habsy said:
Caveat: The next question is NOT trying to bothsides anything but used as a baseline to what you may believe obstruction of justice is...

Do you believe Clinton obstructed justice by wiping servers and deleting emails? Please don't give me the standard "she's not the president" line. It's a simple question.
Click to expand...

She was literally following government security procedures in deleting those emails.
 
zeke said:
Keith Boykin @keithboykin
Specialists at Deutsche Bank recommended in 2016 and 2017 that transactions from Donald Trump and Jared Kushner be reported to the Treasury Department for money laundering, but top bank executives stepped in and never reported the transactions.

nytimes.com/2019/05/19/bus
Click to expand...

lol, not surprised but also... I can’t believe Republicans are okay with this shit. Talk about selling your soul.
 
Habsy this is what I gather from your posts on this topic. Just summarizing, not criticizing:

You agree that this regime needs to be gone for variety of reasons. You would help make that happen with your vote only if you got a full Dem ticket that makes them viable candidates in your eyes (so not just any Dem ticket like Warren and Harris). Otherwise, you would either not vote, or vote 3rd party again. If the latter happens, and president is reelected, so be it; additionally, if that in fact happens, you would disagree with people criticizing your vote and saying you basically helped reelect the president.
 
“The activity in question involved Trump and Kushner overseas transactions, according to five current and former bank employees. Kushner Companies was moving money to Russian individuals. The Trump Foundation was also flagged for suspicious activity.”

No kidding.
 
The Interior Department has renewed two controversial mining leases for Ivanka Trump’s billionaire Chilean landlord despite significant fears the operation will destroy a pristine Minnesota wilderness area.
 
CTheBigPicture said:
Habsy this is what I gather from your posts on this topic. Just summarizing, not criticizing:

You agree that this regime needs to be gone for variety of reasons. You would help make that happen with your vote only if you got a full Dem ticket that makes them viable candidates in your eyes (so not just any Dem ticket like Warren and Harris). Otherwise, you would either not vote, or vote 3rd party again. If the latter happens, and president is reelected, so be it; additionally, if that in fact happens, you would disagree with people criticizing your vote and saying you basically helped reelect the president.
Click to expand...

Fair assessment.

Many here have to realize I am further down life's road than they are and have options of my own. It's a popular argument to use but my not voting for one or the other is not handing the election to either. It's pretty ridiculous to think that "if 100,000 people didn't do that yada yada yada", life just doesn't work that way. You'll have trouble getting 100 people to agree on anything. I prefer to live my life one way, other people another. In the end nobody gets what they really want so you learn to live with it or live miserably.
 
Habsy said:
Playing catch up on posts I missed.

Yes, When the top of the ticket is going to be two weeks shy of 78 on election day? The Veep choice matters to me.

I'm also concerned about Pence, people think he couldn't be worse than Trump but I am not so sure about that.
Click to expand...

and the idea of President Warren worries you more than President Trump does?

You're really concerned that a policy nerd is going to try to expand medicare, consumer protection rights, and reign in wall street?
 
hockeylover said:
lol, not surprised but also... I can’t believe Republicans are okay with this shit. Talk about selling your soul.
Click to expand...

I can. Zeke and I have mentioned it a couple of times recently. The entire party has been laser focused on two things the last couple of decades.

1) Stacking SCOTUS to ensure that the "single issues" types within their ranks get fed. 2nd amendment rights are to be interpreted as incredibly broad as possible, and reproductive rights are to be rolled back as far as possible.

2) Changing demographics and ideas are to be fought tooth and nail by "voter registration" initiatives & gerrymandering at the state level.


They would literally burn the country to the ground to achieve those goals. There is nothing they wouldn't do if they were allowed to get away with it. Habsy noted the fascist tendency of part of that movement recently. I'd argue that it runs to the core of the party.
 
MindzEye said:
and the idea of President Warren worries you more than President Trump does?

You're really concerned that a policy nerd is going to try to expand medicare, consumer protection rights, and reign in wall street?
Click to expand...

I don't live my life by those rules. If I like neither I vote for neither.
 
Habsy said:
I don't live my life by those rules. If I like neither I vote for neither.
Click to expand...

Life doesn't care about your rules. You live in a duopoly. If you vote for neither, you're giving tacit approval to whichever gets elected. It's shit, but sometimes you have to be against something as much or more as you are for something else.
 
Or the simplest answer is the best. My choice, not anyone else’s. I don’t have to do shit, die is about it. You don’t even have to pay taxes if you don’t care about the ramifications.
 
Buttigieg gets a standing O at a Tass/Faux town hall meeting and handled the bad-faith “gotcha” question re: late-term abortions with intelligence and class. Rather impressive.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top