Poll

Best sandwich filling

Trump (R)
Sandford (R)
Walsh (R)
Weld (R)
Bennet (D)
Biden (D)
Booker (D)
Bullock (D)
Buttigieg (D)
Castro (D)
Delaney (D)
Gabbard (D)
Klobuchar (D)
Messam (D)
O'Rourke (D)
Ryan (D)
Sanders (D)
Sestak (D)
Steyer (D)
Warren (D)
Williamson (D)
Yang (D)
A Libertarian
A Green
One of the other ones
Moat (R)
Who fucking cares I dunno some cunt
Guntrip
Les Dennis
Eddie Large
Ralf Little
A musician or actor who think they can make a difference and will ultimately fail
Bensip Hammons
Castro
Gulf Holdall
Ham
Plain
Cook(D)
Bomb(D)

Author Topic: US Elections 2020 thread  (Read 127700 times)

Paul Calf

  • LOTION MAN
  • Golden Member
  • *****
  • พระบาทสมเด็จพระวชิรเกล้าเจ้าอยู่หัวเป็นคนงี่เง่าของฆาตกร
Re: US Elections 2020 thread
« Reply #1860 on: December 05, 2019, 06:42:20 AM »
it's exactly as dignified as your extremely weird concern trolling

“Melt”. “Extremely weird”. “Troll”.

You really don’t have anything but slurs and bitter attacks do you?

Re: US Elections 2020 thread
« Reply #1861 on: December 05, 2019, 06:42:37 AM »
Mind, I suppose it’s more dignified than trying to justify the barefaced hypocrisy of the original comment.

What do you do when people start attacking Bernie for being too old?

When Bernie makes the 'corn pop' speech, then you might have a fair comparison

Re: US Elections 2020 thread
« Reply #1862 on: December 05, 2019, 06:45:49 AM »
“Melt”. “Extremely weird”. “Troll”.

You really don’t have anything but slurs and bitter attacks do you?

Do you have anything except ambient ill-motivated grievance and weird snipes from the sidelines? Your contributions to these discussions are 95% garbage as a rule. Seriously, I know you do this deliberately because you like to do a bit of trolling to pass the time and satisfy some latent emptiness and bitterness but it's absolutely pathetic. Do you never get bored with yourself? Because I can guarantee you other people do.

Urinal Cake

  • -0/-0
Re: US Elections 2020 thread
« Reply #1863 on: December 05, 2019, 06:48:22 AM »
That it is fair? His age has not hindered his mental faculties but people are entitled to criticize him regarding his physical health due to his recent heart attack. And you know he counters that? By a medical report.

Paul Calf

  • LOTION MAN
  • Golden Member
  • *****
  • พระบาทสมเด็จพระวชิรเกล้าเจ้าอยู่หัวเป็นคนงี่เง่าของฆาตกร
Re: US Elections 2020 thread
« Reply #1864 on: December 05, 2019, 06:54:00 AM »
Do you have anything except ambient ill-motivated grievance and weird snipes from the sidelines? Your contributions to these discussions are 95% garbage as a rule. Seriously, I know you do this deliberately because you like to do a bit of trolling to pass the time and satisfy some latent emptiness and bitterness but it's absolutely pathetic. Do you never get bored with yourself? Because I can guarantee you other people do.

I fully understand that denigration of our parents and grandparents is essential to progress and our sense of mental hygiene but don’t pretend it’s some sort of moral rectitude or anything other than replacing yesterday’s prejudices with today’s.

“LOL PEOPLE hate U” is a particularly scummy tactic.

Re: US Elections 2020 thread
« Reply #1865 on: December 05, 2019, 06:55:13 AM »
Mate. Watch some fucking Biden and Trump speeches. You are getting annoyed and manufacturing a grievance because you know fuck all, as usual.

Paul Calf

  • LOTION MAN
  • Golden Member
  • *****
  • พระบาทสมเด็จพระวชิรเกล้าเจ้าอยู่หัวเป็นคนงี่เง่าของฆาตกร
Re: US Elections 2020 thread
« Reply #1866 on: December 05, 2019, 07:36:28 AM »
I know that Biden and Trump are hopelessly inarticulate, out of their depth and very much ripe for exploitation by greedier, more cunning players.

I just don’t think there’s any reason to bring age into it, or try to offer armchair diagnosis of mental illness from a distance. It will backfire.

Re: US Elections 2020 thread
« Reply #1867 on: December 05, 2019, 07:37:47 AM »
That, ladies and gentlemen, is pure, ripe, concern trolling. You're watching someone who knows nothing try to enter a conversation they're not equipped to participate in by manufacturing some way that they can score a point. Paul, I know you don't actually believe this purse-lipped shit, otherwise you'd be one of the most easily offended and alarmist people in the world, have you ever thought of getting a real fucking hobby?

Old Nehamkin

  • You know - for kids!
Re: US Elections 2020 thread
« Reply #1868 on: December 05, 2019, 07:51:43 AM »
It is a horrifying prospect that this election will likely come down to two men who self-evidently suffer from dementia and can barely string a coherent sentence together between them.

It is also horrifying that in Biden's case, these glaring mental health issues have been comprehensively glossed over by virtually the entire American media class, while in Trump's case they have simply become accepted as part of his presidential style, to be met with not much more than tepid snark from liberals and playful shrugs from conservatives. 

It's most horrifying of all that these two candidates- senility aside- jointly embody the most regressive, selfish and arrogant aspects of the boomer mindset and that the election of either one of them would condemn working class Americans of all ages to even more profound depths of misery and hopelessness than they currently suffer.

I don't think it's ageism to discuss this or to find a bit of grim humour at the idea of the grotesque, apocalyptic spectacle of an actual election campaign between these two men.

« Last Edit: December 05, 2019, 08:25:35 AM by Old Nehamkin »

Paul Calf

  • LOTION MAN
  • Golden Member
  • *****
  • พระบาทสมเด็จพระวชิรเกล้าเจ้าอยู่หัวเป็นคนงี่เง่าของฆาตกร
Re: US Elections 2020 thread
« Reply #1869 on: December 05, 2019, 08:06:32 AM »
You're right.

It's political correctness gone mad.

Old Nehamkin

  • You know - for kids!
Re: US Elections 2020 thread
« Reply #1870 on: December 05, 2019, 08:07:49 AM »
Also being old is inherently funny, let's be honest.

Re: US Elections 2020 thread
« Reply #1871 on: December 05, 2019, 08:18:23 AM »

Re: US Elections 2020 thread
« Reply #1872 on: December 05, 2019, 04:02:07 PM »
I fully understand that denigration of our parents and grandparents is essential to progress and our sense of mental hygiene but don’t pretend it’s some sort of moral rectitude or anything other than replacing yesterday’s prejudices with today’s.

“LOL PEOPLE hate U” is a particularly scummy tactic.

Surely you have to take the adjectives as a whole. It is "senile old disasters", not simply old people. If they were just old there would be no criticism. It is that they are old and clearly suffering from some age-related mental issues that is the problem. I don't know how you can see the two of them trying to string sentences together and come to any other conclusion

Cuellar

  • Taxes, they'll be lower...son
Re: US Elections 2020 thread
« Reply #1873 on: December 05, 2019, 04:14:20 PM »
It’s nice that we’ve still got ageism isn’t it? Any other characteristic in place of ‘old’ and there’s no way you’d have made that post.

Fortunately, we seem to have reserved age for emergency situations where our hidden and bitter prejudices need an outlet.

Calm down love. The two (Biden and Trump) can barely speak coherently. They are objectively old and fucked, mentally. It'd be a right laugh.

mojo filters

  • Self-impeacher
Re: US Elections 2020 thread
« Reply #1874 on: December 05, 2019, 07:07:49 PM »


As opposed to Halperin who seems entirely unembarrassed by the myriad accusations of genuine sexual harassment brought against him, and has spent every waking hour since unashamedly trying to wheedle his way back onto cable news.

I'm not defending Mark's conduct, back when he worked in a senior and influential position at ABC's news division.

I do know he's approached Mika Brzezinski, Joe Scarborough and Mike Smerconish - in attempting to revive his cable career.

The only person to indulge such was Smerconish, who to the best of my knowledge only hosted him once on his radio show - not on CNN.

Michael Smerconish might provide entertaining controversial commentary on TV for one hour per week. However such judgement is tempered by the knowledge he previously worked for controversial, party swapping former Philadelphia mayor Frank Rizzo.

To suggest I'm insensitive to the cause of social justice is quite offensive!

I've written extensively on the horrors of Rizzo's tenure as Philly police commissioner, both in his early actions relating to the oppression of local Black Panthers, and in the terribly disturbing murder of harmless MOVE activists.

I take issue with Matt Taibbi, as he couldn't even get the finer details of the Halperin / Heilemann dispute correct.

Halperin has indeed been somewhat unapologetic, and around the same time demanded an absurd amount of money from John for the materials that would allow Heilemann to shop a newly written 2016 cycle memoir around.

Neither John nor Mark currently receive the generous 7 figure salary that Bloomberg provided, for their time-limited contract to produce and present With All Due Respect during the 2016 primary and election cycle.

Following his swift fall from grace, Mark Halperin lost around six jobs in one day. He only gained some subsequent glimmer of gainful employment when dubious publisher Judith Regan (who controversially commissioned OJ Simpson's If I Did It) engaged him to write a political strategy guide.

That book sold a mere 600 copies in the first week.

It was mired in controversy due to Halperin using quotes from political strategists across the spectrum, most of whom expressed regret when media business reporters such as Brian Stelter questioned their ethics.

As far as Halperin returning to cable, neither Andy Lack nor Noah Oppenheim are in any way sympathetic to his cause. Plus to the best of my knowledge, Jeff Zucker is sticking to his publicly stated policy of avoiding any controversial hires, whether refugees from Suzanne Scott's objectionable state TV or any other undesirables.

Famous Mortimer

  • War - it's fantastic!
    • International Syndicate of Cult Film Critics
Re: US Elections 2020 thread
« Reply #1875 on: December 05, 2019, 07:15:03 PM »

mojo filters

  • Self-impeacher
Re: US Elections 2020 thread
« Reply #1876 on: December 05, 2019, 07:39:17 PM »

Re: US Elections 2020 thread
« Reply #1877 on: December 05, 2019, 07:44:31 PM »
“Melt”. “Extremely weird”. “Troll”.

You really don’t have anything but slurs and bitter attacks do you?

Thinks the word "troll" is a slur.
Used a right wing troll account for ages just to wind people up.

Urinal Cake

  • -0/-0
Re: US Elections 2020 thread
« Reply #1878 on: December 05, 2019, 08:28:07 PM »
Quote
And he said that Biden is “too old” to serve as president.

"You're a damn liar," Biden responded.

“Look, the reason I’m running is because I’ve been around a long time and I know more than most people know and I can get things done. That’s why I’m running. And you want to check my shape, man, let’s do push-ups together here, man, let’s run, let’s do whatever you want to do, let’s take an IQ test,” Biden said.
https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/nidhiprakash/joe-biden-iq-test

Biden can defend himself fine, Paul Calf. I wish that protestor challenged him back with a memory test.

chveik

  • DON'T GET THAT COVID, YEAH!?
Re: US Elections 2020 thread
« Reply #1879 on: December 05, 2019, 08:35:32 PM »
I fully understand that denigration of our parents and grandparents is essential to progress and our sense of mental hygiene but don’t pretend it’s some sort of moral rectitude or anything other than replacing yesterday’s prejudices with today’s.

“LOL PEOPLE hate U” is a particularly scummy tactic.

ok boomer

kngen

  • Member
  • **
  • Fighting sleep's deathlike grip
Re: US Elections 2020 thread
« Reply #1880 on: December 05, 2019, 08:43:58 PM »
Stuff.

So basically what I said then. You don't get paid linage on here, you know.

Quote
To suggest I'm insensitive to the cause of social justice is quite offensive!

I've written extensively on the horrors of Rizzo's tenure as Philly police commissioner, both in his early actions relating to the oppression of local Black Panthers, and in the terribly disturbing murder of harmless MOVE activists.

"I just want to understand man's inhumanity to man … and then make a programme about it."

Anyway, at the risk of one your hectoring, all-encompassing postcards from the centre, this stems from you saying (and I'm not quite sure why) that Halperin was "sadly #metoo-ed". Taibbi was sad, too. The irony was amusing to me. I've never seen you express an opinion on Taibbi before, but I had a feeling that, were you to do so, it wouldn't be a positive one. That you didn't fail to disappoint is pretty funny, too.

mojo filters

  • Self-impeacher
Re: US Elections 2020 thread
« Reply #1881 on: December 05, 2019, 11:00:22 PM »
Well I'm not offended if my unfiltered ramblings are beyond the attention span of random readers.

When I finally get that dream job at Axios, I guess I'll be forced to reign in my predilection to write in the long form that doesn't insult the experienced reader [/sarcasm].

I guess if I explored a time and motion exercise, I'd possibly be embarrassed at the amount of time I spend paring back my verbose prose, where linage is limited.

I'm perfectly happy to be the object of your amusement. I remember my first editor telling me it was preferable to evoke some strong reaction, than to dwell in the well of boring bland copy.

To be fair, he lost his job soon after. I guess a lack of managerial talent, trumped an ability to repeat hacky alliteration.

Mark's #MeToo downfall was not just sad for the young women he affected, who were finally able to speak out. It was utilised as an excuse to criticise his solid body of work, with opinion writers suddenly discovering and espousing the notion he was nothing but a shallow, horse race-commentating pundit.

Understanding man's inhumanity to man allowed me to finally write about a subject of long term interest, that had lingered ever since the post-law school experience of Gideon noncompliance, cut short my interest in idealised benevolence.

Sarah Koenig's Serial podcast ignited a few years of enjoyable true crime assignments - exploring the nexus between media, human frailties and the criminal justice system.

I'd hoped Jean-Xavier Lestrade's innovative 2004 Staircase doc would do the same, given he'd just won the Oscar for Murder On A Sunday Morning. Despite the heightened profile of the director, it only seemed to attract the attention of practising lawyers until the case was reopened, many years later.

I'd love to provide editorial assistance to a quality documentary maker such as Liz Garbus, on the subject of Frank Rizzo's tenure from 1968 to 1980. Unfortunately Jason Osder got there first with his excellent film Let The Fire Burn - though I still think there's more left to explore.

I wouldn't waste my time critiquing Matt Taibbi, if I thought he was just some privileged hack. He can write well, in the right circumstances.

I just wince at his painful attempts to try and ensure that positive comparisons to Hunter S. Thompson and Charles Bukowski will appear in the first graf of his obituary.

I guess it can be easy to to assume someone writes from the centre. I just predicate my words on facts. After that, I'm happy to add complementary commentary and opinion.

Right now our news cycle moves at the speed of Trump. Just keeping the factual content straight can be a challenge, given how unmoored his administration is to straight forward truth.

If you want some genuine opinion - I think most, if not all ranks of reporters and editors are secretly rooting for Trump to win a second term.

At least it keeps the chyron writing staff busy and gainfully employed. That said, I'm embarrassed by the overuse of Breaking News bumpers on otherwise respectable news channels.
« Last Edit: December 05, 2019, 11:12:36 PM by mojo filters »

Re: US Elections 2020 thread
« Reply #1882 on: December 06, 2019, 01:41:23 AM »
Edit glitch.

That last post, haven't even read it but whatever it is about most long mojo filters posts I seem to always scan it as something a bot spits out. Is it the paragraphing? The total absence of personality? Maybe it's a wayyyyy longer post that has been edited down like crazy to a really unnatural structure... man, I dunno what it is.

Re: US Elections 2020 thread
« Reply #1883 on: December 06, 2019, 02:11:03 AM »
If you want some genuine opinion - I think most, if not all ranks of reporters and editors are secretly rooting for Trump to win a second term.

At least it keeps the chyron writing staff busy and gainfully employed. That said, I'm embarrassed by the overuse of Breaking News bumpers on otherwise respectable news channels.

Bleak, but not surprising. He's going to win again, isn't he :(

Urinal Cake

  • -0/-0
Re: US Elections 2020 thread
« Reply #1884 on: December 06, 2019, 03:58:26 AM »
I predicted a split in the party if the Dems lose and I think that's more likely to happen since Clinton and Obama cannot fucking retire and keep their mouth shut. But that wing owns the Brand and they're going nowhere.

Sanders, Yang and Gabbard might make peace with the party after a defeat in a close and vitriolic primary  but their fan base? I think their hate is pure.

mojo filters

  • Self-impeacher
Re: US Elections 2020 thread
« Reply #1885 on: December 06, 2019, 04:05:51 AM »
Bleak, but not surprising. He's going to win again, isn't he :(

Maybe, though not necessarily.

Incumbency confers a significant advantage. Plus ask any democratic staffer working Iowa or New Hampshire ground game, they'll say the congressional impeachment theater rarely comes up - yet the nebulous "electability" factor to beat Trump at the ballot box, is a common concern.

There's only two recent one-term presidents. I'm reluctant to invoke Jimmy Carter, as the post-Watergate political hangover was a unique situation. Beating Gerald Ford did not take much work. When you look at how popular Reagan was twice, there was a clear political direction in favor of the republicans.

Bush 41 faced serious opposition from three sides in 1992, by contrast.

Pat Buchanan offered a far stronger primary challenge, than the combined forces of Bill Weld, Joe Walsh and Mark Sanford can muster.

In the general, Ross Perot as a self-funding yet popular third party candidate, exploited the newly controversial NAFTA and took 19% of the popular vote - mostly from the republican's right flank, thus hurting Bush.

Bush 41 had experienced high favorables and high approval numbers, primarily resulting from successful foreign policy achievements. They did not last though.

Bill Clinton was an insurgent candidate benefiting from economic recession, plus once the Berlin Wall came down and the USSR dissolved - Bush's foreign policy quickly outdated.

Looking at the current numbers, I can only see a narrow path to a second term for Trump. However that pathway is still eminently navigable.

I'm not convinced the "electability" (or lack thereof) of the democratic nominee will be quite as important as anticipated.

Instead I'd look at medium to longer term economic factors. Whilst the US economy is superficially in good health, continuing the achievements of Obama - there are key indicators suggesting some kind of economic downturn.

The inverted yield curve (where short-term government bonds are traded on the market at a higher price than long term equivalents) has always occurred prior to a recession. Add to that 11 years of solid growth, and economists would suggest there's significant scope for a natural market correction.

Since the markets have slowed to a reasonably consistent pace in the last few years, they may simply either continue down that same path, or gradually slow some more - without significantly impacting the consumer economy.

In either of the latter circumstances, Trump comes up favorite. However should the markets adjust dramatically downwards sometime soon, that would likely favor any democrat from Biden to Bernie.

Should the US economy genuinely descend into a recession that affects individual 401(k)s and union pension investments - I'd suggest Bernie's firebrand rhetoric will really resonate in key midwestern states such as Wisconsin, Michigan, Pennsylvania, Ohio and so forth.

However if the markets stay healthy whilst real wages continue to be deflated, the electoral map is most likely to look similar to 2016. Hence it will be incumbent on whichever nominee the democrats pick to work on the turnout Hillary struggled with.

If you are unsure about which democratic candidate to support or donate to, I'd suggest checking out Stacey Abram's Fair Fight 2020 campaign - she's focusing on maintaining voter rolls, stopping partisan purging of the same, plus GOTV efforts in key battlegrounds the democrats need to win.

Re: US Elections 2020 thread
« Reply #1886 on: December 06, 2019, 04:29:38 AM »
You look at elections since Bush Snr's loss and I think what stands out is that the candidate up again the incumbent was generally a worse less convincing option than who they faced in their initial win, Biden would fit into that perfectly.

Urinal Cake

  • -0/-0
Re: US Elections 2020 thread
« Reply #1887 on: December 06, 2019, 04:43:32 AM »
If the economy stayed the same or even grew there are still economic questions about healthcare,taxing the wealthy and automation. And the Democrats have had the opportunity to shake things out. Trump is the status quo- he might dangle healthcare reform just to get rid of Obamacare and Obama's legacy.
 
The other thing is sentiment. The numbers might say the country on the whole is doing okay but a lot of people personally don't feel they're doing okay. Especially compared to the lives of their parents, grandparents etc.

Paul Calf

  • LOTION MAN
  • Golden Member
  • *****
  • พระบาทสมเด็จพระวชิรเกล้าเจ้าอยู่หัวเป็นคนงี่เง่าของฆาตกร
Re: US Elections 2020 thread
« Reply #1888 on: December 06, 2019, 05:26:48 AM »
Well I'm not offended if my unfiltered ramblings are beyond the attention span of random readers.

When I finally get that dream job at Axios, I guess I'll be forced to reign in my predilection to write in the long form that doesn't insult the experienced reader [/sarcasm].

I guess if I explored a time and motion exercise, I'd possibly be embarrassed at the amount of time I spend paring back my verbose prose, where linage is limited.

I'm perfectly happy to be the object of your amusement. I remember my first editor telling me it was preferable to evoke some strong reaction, than to dwell in the well of boring bland copy.

To be fair, he lost his job soon after. I guess a lack of managerial talent, trumped an ability to repeat hacky alliteration.

Mark's #MeToo downfall was not just sad for the young women he affected, who were finally able to speak out. It was utilised as an excuse to criticise his solid body of work, with opinion writers suddenly discovering and espousing the notion he was nothing but a shallow, horse race-commentating pundit.

Understanding man's inhumanity to man allowed me to finally write about a subject of long term interest, that had lingered ever since the post-law school experience of Gideon noncompliance, cut short my interest in idealised benevolence.

Sarah Koenig's Serial podcast ignited a few years of enjoyable true crime assignments - exploring the nexus between media, human frailties and the criminal justice system.

I'd hoped Jean-Xavier Lestrade's innovative 2004 Staircase doc would do the same, given he'd just won the Oscar for Murder On A Sunday Morning. Despite the heightened profile of the director, it only seemed to attract the attention of practising lawyers until the case was reopened, many years later.

I'd love to provide editorial assistance to a quality documentary maker such as Liz Garbus, on the subject of Frank Rizzo's tenure from 1968 to 1980. Unfortunately Jason Osder got there first with his excellent film Let The Fire Burn - though I still think there's more left to explore.

I wouldn't waste my time critiquing Matt Taibbi, if I thought he was just some privileged hack. He can write well, in the right circumstances.

I just wince at his painful attempts to try and ensure that positive comparisons to Hunter S. Thompson and Charles Bukowski will appear in the first graf of his obituary.

I guess it can be easy to to assume someone writes from the centre. I just predicate my words on facts. After that, I'm happy to add complementary commentary and opinion.

Right now our news cycle moves at the speed of Trump. Just keeping the factual content straight can be a challenge, given how unmoored his administration is to straight forward truth.

If you want some genuine opinion - I think most, if not all ranks of reporters and editors are secretly rooting for Trump to win a second term.

At least it keeps the chyron writing staff busy and gainfully employed. That said, I'm embarrassed by the overuse of Breaking News bumpers on otherwise respectable news channels.

Quote
... brevity is the soul of wit
And tediousness the limbs and outward flourishes...

Re: US Elections 2020 thread
« Reply #1889 on: December 06, 2019, 06:38:36 AM »
The key takeaway here is that either one thing will happen, or the opposite thing will happen.

The polling data consistently shows a movement in that direction, though we can't rule out the possibility that it also shows a movement in another direction.

The evidence indicates that the economy is slowly improving, though the same evidence might also indicate that the economy is slowly declining.

Trump's ability to dominate the news cycle could increase if either Warren or Biden win the nomination, but could also decrease if the nomination is won by either Biden or Warren.

According to surveys, some Americans are distrustful of tedious wonkish drivel, but others regularly masturbate over pictures of Nate Silver.

In summary then: dispassionate.
« Last Edit: December 06, 2019, 06:56:27 AM by Ominous Dave »

Tags: