The Swamp

tennbengal wrote: ↑Wed Oct 14, 2020 2:54 pm Or not. This is a good counter-point:

Yup, my Conservative friend is all over this. He hasn't posted on FB in weeks, today he posted several of the banned articles saying "I posted links legitimate news sources FB is blocking, can you see the links?" Then asking his left-leaning friends to explain how FB and Twitter aren't manipulating the media we see to get Biden elected. If you start from the premise that the NY Post and NY Times are equally legitimate papers, it seems like he has a strong point. I think it would have been less damaging to allow people to read the articles, because it was sleazy salacious bs. And people are piling on that everything in the media is slanted against Trump.

The Sybian wrote: ↑Wed Oct 14, 2020 1:15 pm

Nonlinear FC wrote: ↑Wed Oct 14, 2020 12:39 pm

The Sybian wrote: ↑Wed Oct 14, 2020 12:25 pm Speaking of the Lincoln Project, I was wondering what they were going to do if Trump died. Considering they are all establishment GOP guys, were they going to take all of that money and start pumping it into supporting a potential GOP replacement for Trump? Would have been the greatest ploy ever to take (presumably Democrat money), and end up using it to promote the GOP candidate.

I honestly think these guys are sincere in what they're doing. They might be using it all to make bank, but I believe them when they say the current iteration of the GOP just isn't tenable long-term.

The numbers bear this out, which is what all the McConnell shit is all about -- get whatever you can on the books in the next few cycles, before it's too late.

I don't doubt this at all, they are been virulently anti-Trump since the 2016 Primaries. I just worry that people see them as a Liberal beacon of greatness, but the second Trump is out, they will go to work at knocking down Biden and the Dems, and I worry that people will glom on to them. Plus, they are in large part responsible for what the GOP has become. They are dirty tricksters and stretched the rules and norms so far that Trump could walk in and take over their party. If Trump died tomorrow, they are by no means Biden guys, and they will move quickly to back a mainstream GOP candidate, and now they have a giant nest egg of Dem money to do it. I'm just gaming out scenarios here, but that would have been the greatest coup for them.

Bolded ---> the first picture in this tweet.

Not sure where that guy is getting his "they don't move polls" info. Smells like some bullshit.

That said, I'm not dying on the Lincoln Project hill. Enemy of my enemy is all I'll say.

If somehow the Democrats can steer any Hunter Biden news into "Jared and Ivanka literally made $X million over the last 4 years because Trump is president and you as a media enterprise couldn't give a shit less so what the fuck are we talking about" it would be a good counter, in my opinion.

Nonlinear FC wrote: ↑Wed Oct 14, 2020 4:36 pm Not sure where that guy is getting his "they don't move polls" info. Smells like some bullshit.

That said, I'm not dying on the Lincoln Project hill. Enemy of my enemy is all I'll say.

Amen.

People have so much outrage. Keep it focussed on the true villains.

Nonlinear FC wrote: ↑Wed Oct 14, 2020 4:36 pmEnemy of my enemy is all I'll say.

But your enemy isn't Trump, its conservatives / the GOP.

mister d wrote: ↑Wed Oct 14, 2020 5:32 pm

Nonlinear FC wrote: ↑Wed Oct 14, 2020 4:36 pmEnemy of my enemy is all I'll say.

But your enemy isn't Trump, its conservatives / the GOP.

All of the above. But, Trump is first and foremost. Cannot imagine the hellscape he'd create with a second term.

He's creating it with the explicit backing or enabling of the GOP. The few times they don't like something he's doing, they put a stop to it.

So Biden is having a town hall tomorrow and now trump is doing the same at the same time.. Honestly, this is going to be horrible for Biden cause everyone will watch trump over Biden because of the unpredictability.

psunate77 wrote: ↑Wed Oct 14, 2020 8:53 pm So Biden is having a downhill tomorrow and now trump is doing the slalom now after having gone downhill already.

Fixed it for you

Johnnie wrote: ↑Wed Oct 14, 2020 12:47 pm

mister d wrote: ↑Wed Oct 14, 2020 12:41 pm Wonder if they'll be given a louder voice in the Dem party than the actually elected progressive bloc.

Wouldn't shock me. Corporatist, centrist Democrats are basically diet Republicans on an actual political spectrum.

Right. Look at Biden and Romney. Their positions on abortion are almost exactly the same! And taxes! And healthcare! And worker safety! And civil rights! And environmental regulation!

I mean, Biden would also nominate Barrett to the Supreme Court, right?

JFC.

mister d wrote: ↑Wed Oct 14, 2020 12:41 pm Wonder if they'll be given a louder voice in the Dem party than the actually elected progressive bloc.

What does this even mean? Is Biden going to give Steve Schmidt veto power over appointments? Appoint Rick Wilson to Treasury? Let one of those guys direct Kamala’s vote in the Senate?

This is awesome. Hopefully Trump is next.

Steve of phpBB wrote: ↑Wed Oct 14, 2020 10:19 pmRight. Look at Biden and Romney. Their positions on abortion are almost exactly the same! And taxes! And healthcare! And worker safety! And civil rights! And environmental regulation!

Steve of phpBB wrote: ↑Wed Oct 14, 2020 10:28 pmWhat does this even mean? Is Biden going to give Steve Schmidt veto power over appointments? Appoint Rick Wilson to Treasury? Let one of those guys direct Kamala’s vote in the Senate?

It feels like these are tandem posts. Yes, I have a serious concern that both the party itself and Project-receptive Biden voters won't immediate discard the group post-election and treat this all as one-way penance. This group now has (1) long-standing insider status, (2) Dem acceptance and (3) solid funding. If they get Trump out, what does all their newfound clout, money and energy go towards? So no, I don't think they'd get veto power in the same way lobbying groups don't technically have veto power, but I don't expect them to be ignored either. (And if I had to guess, if Biden wins the Project will split in half, probably publicly, to work both parties while staying connected.)

A secondary concern is that someone like you, who loves to treat marginal differences between politicians as massive differences so long as the party letters are different, doesn't see an issue forming an alliance with the same people whose most palatable former client is probably the totally-much-worse-than-Biden Mitt Romney. Ideologies don't just disappear, but the means of achieving those ideologies can.

mister d wrote: ↑Thu Oct 15, 2020 7:54 am

Steve of phpBB wrote: ↑Wed Oct 14, 2020 10:19 pmRight. Look at Biden and Romney. Their positions on abortion are almost exactly the same! And taxes! And healthcare! And worker safety! And civil rights! And environmental regulation!

Steve of phpBB wrote: ↑Wed Oct 14, 2020 10:28 pmWhat does this even mean? Is Biden going to give Steve Schmidt veto power over appointments? Appoint Rick Wilson to Treasury? Let one of those guys direct Kamala’s vote in the Senate?

It feels like these are tandem posts. Yes, I have a serious concern that both the party itself and Project-receptive Biden voters won't immediate discard the group post-election and treat this all as one-way penance. This group now has (1) long-standing insider status, (2) Dem acceptance and (3) solid funding. If they get Trump out, what does all their newfound clout, money and energy go towards? So no, I don't think they'd get veto power in the same way lobbying groups don't technically have veto power, but I don't expect them to be ignored either. (And if I had to guess, if Biden wins the Project will split in half, probably publicly, to work both parties while staying connected.)

If Biden wins, and especially if he gets a Senate majority, there will be massive pressure on him from Lincoln Project types to (1) not expand the Supreme Court; (2) not add a public option to the ACA; (3) not push for environmental legislation that resembles even a watered-down version of the Green New Deal; and (4) balance out needed short-term relief with long-term cuts to Social Security and/or Medicaid.

But he’s the most Progressive Democratic candidate ever, so nothing to worry about...

Joe K wrote: ↑Thu Oct 15, 2020 8:15 am
If Biden wins, and especially if he gets a Senate majority, there will be massive pressure on him from Lincoln Project types to (1) not expand the Supreme Court; (2) not add a public option to the ACA; (3) not push for environmental legislation that resembles even a watered-down version of the Green New Deal; and (4) balance out needed short-term relief with long-term cuts to Social Security and/or Medicaid.

But he’s the most Progressive Democratic candidate ever, so nothing to worry about...

Right, and if the Lincoln Project continues putting out slick videos, but under Biden undermining Progressive goals, will they hold sway over moderate Dems who have grown to accept or like the Lincoln Project because they make the best viral anti-Trump ads? If Biden wins, Lincoln Project doesn't just disappear, not with the amount of success their videos are having and the amount of money they are raking in. I love their videos, but ultimately these guys are Bush/Cheney partisans with very different ideas and goals from Dems and a history of playing dirty politics, so let's be wary of their end game. Use them to defeat Trump, then not give them any oxygen.

mister d wrote: ↑Thu Oct 15, 2020 7:54 am

Steve of phpBB wrote: ↑Wed Oct 14, 2020 10:19 pmRight. Look at Biden and Romney. Their positions on abortion are almost exactly the same! And taxes! And healthcare! And worker safety! And civil rights! And environmental regulation!

Steve of phpBB wrote: ↑Wed Oct 14, 2020 10:28 pmWhat does this even mean? Is Biden going to give Steve Schmidt veto power over appointments? Appoint Rick Wilson to Treasury? Let one of those guys direct Kamala’s vote in the Senate?

It feels like these are tandem posts. Yes, I have a serious concern that both the party itself and Project-receptive Biden voters won't immediate discard the group post-election and treat this all as one-way penance. This group now has (1) long-standing insider status, (2) Dem acceptance and (3) solid funding. If they get Trump out, what does all their newfound clout, money and energy go towards? So no, I don't think they'd get veto power in the same way lobbying groups don't technically have veto power, but I don't expect them to be ignored either. (And if I had to guess, if Biden wins the Project will split in half, probably publicly, to work both parties while staying connected.)

A secondary concern is that someone like you, who loves to treat marginal differences between politicians as massive differences so long as the party letters are different, doesn't see an issue forming an alliance with the same people whose most palatable former client is probably the totally-much-worse-than-Biden Mitt Romney. Ideologies don't just disappear, but the means of achieving those ideologies can.

Ask those folks whose kids were ripped from their arms how marginal those differences are. Or the gay folks whose marriages are at stake. Or employees who can no longer effectively sue to enforce their civil rights.

Those marginalized and disadvantaged folks are the ones the privileged left cares about most of all, right?

Oh my fucking god stop. Ask all those same fucking questions then add in "those who are bankrupt with medical debt" and wonder why you aren't all-in for Sanders or someone who cares EVEN MORE about helping people beyond the EVEN MORE levels you love to point out. Every single fucking time you do this you act like the line lands to the right of Biden (or Pelosi or your corp Dem du jour) and everyone is required to pick one side of the line, but never move the line.

Biden vs Trump: "LOOK AT ALL THEIR DIFFERENCES, SUPPORT BIDEN OR YOU'RE KILLING EVERYONE YOU CLAIM TO CARE ABOUT!"

Biden vs Romney: "LOOK AT ALL THEIR DIFFERENCES, SUPPORT BIDEN OR YOU'RE KILLING EVERYONE YOU CLAIM TO CARE ABOUT!"

Biden vs Sanders: "What is this, a purity test? If you don't get everything you want you're going to harp on the ways they're dissimilar? Just take what you can get, ok."

mister d wrote: ↑Thu Oct 15, 2020 9:57 am Oh my fucking god stop. Ask all those same fucking questions then add in "those who are bankrupt with medical debt" and wonder why you aren't all-in for Sanders or someone who cares EVEN MORE about helping people beyond the EVEN MORE levels you love to point out. Every single fucking time you do this you act like the line lands to the right of Biden (or Pelosi or your corp Dem du jour) and everyone is required to pick one side of the line, but never move the line.

Good point. Ask the millions of people saved from medical bankruptcy by the ACA whether there's a difference in the parties.

mister d wrote: ↑Thu Oct 15, 2020 9:57 am Oh my fucking god stop. Ask all those same fucking questions then add in "those who are bankrupt with medical debt" and wonder why you aren't all-in for Sanders or someone who cares EVEN MORE about helping people beyond the EVEN MORE levels you love to point out. Every single fucking time you do this you act like the line lands to the right of Biden (or Pelosi or your corp Dem du jour) and everyone is required to pick one side of the line, but never move the line.

Steve said back in February that he’d rather have Bloomberg be the Democratic nominee than Sanders. So it’s hard to take his moralizing about progressives seriously when he himself was fine with a nominee who (literally) governed as a Republican, campaigned for George W. Bush, illegally spied on Muslim communities, used the police to harass people of color, and repeatedly sexually harassed women. Makes me wonder if it’s not really about “purity tests” and instead is about the fact that Steve just prefers a center or even center-right economic platform over a progressive one.

Steve of phpBB wrote: ↑Thu Oct 15, 2020 10:32 amGood point. Ask the millions of people saved from medical bankruptcy by the ACA whether there's a difference in the parties.

Again and again and again and again and again. Focus on the 1/3 of those uninsured who did gain insurance under Obamacare and not the 2/3 who remain uninsured because it wasn't enough. Again, there's a line from Trump to Romney to Biden to Sanders (to choose four on the line) and its amazing that every single time you loudly celebrate the line just to the right of Biden.

Drove out to the Eastern Shore this weekend for a nice little getaway. Expected to see a fairly consistent Trump sign presence and was pleasantly surprised. Most of the drive is pretty rural/farm country.

I know it's anecdotal, but seeing about 40 percent of the signs being Biden/Harris was a pretty big surprise.

Keep in mind, back in 2016, we were on a campus visit for my daughter in Wilmington, NC the weekend before the election. 99 percent Trump signs.

The ONE sign for Hillary was in downtown Wilmington. I know I've told that story a number of times, but my wife and I were some of the few of our friends that predicted big trouble for that election. That trip freaked us out.

Nonlinear FC wrote: ↑Thu Oct 15, 2020 11:52 am Drove out to the Eastern Shore this weekend for a nice little getaway. Expected to see a fairly consistent Trump sign presence and was pleasantly surprised. Most of the drive is pretty rural/farm country.

I know it's anecdotal, but seeing about 40 percent of the signs being Biden/Harris was a pretty big surprise.

Keep in mind, back in 2016, we were on a campus visit for my daughter in Wilmington, NC the weekend before the election. 99 percent Trump signs.

The ONE sign for Hillary was in downtown Wilmington. I know I've told that story a number of times, but my wife and I were some of the few of our friends that predicted big trouble for that election. That trip freaked us out.

I'm seeing similar things around my town, which is pretty much made up of older, white couples. For the 2016 elections, I'd say 95 to 98 percent of my town had Trump signs. This year, it's probably closer to 60-40 for Trump.

I did see a pretty outstanding yard sign yesterday. It read:

Presidents are temporary. Wu-Tang is forever.

Planning to drive down the beach for the first time in a while tomorrow night. I'm really interested to see if any Biden signs have popped up down there or on the drive. It's been nearly all Trump signs for a while now.

mister d wrote: ↑Thu Oct 15, 2020 10:50 am

Steve of phpBB wrote: ↑Thu Oct 15, 2020 10:32 amGood point. Ask the millions of people saved from medical bankruptcy by the ACA whether there's a difference in the parties.

Again and again and again and again and again. Focus on the 1/3 of those uninsured who did gain insurance under Obamacare and not the 2/3 who remain uninsured because it wasn't enough. Again, there's a line from Trump to Romney to Biden to Sanders (to choose four on the line) and its amazing that every single time you loudly celebrate the line just to the right of Biden.

See, I think there's a few fallacies in your reasoning. We're talking about whether there are anything except marginal differences between the parties. To me, it appears that you're saying no there isn't, because neither party is promoting Medicare for All.

I think you're wrong because ...

1. Even if the Dem and Republican positions on healthcare were identical, the fact remains that there are huge differences between the parties on all these other issues I keep prattling on about. Those differences affect millions of people in profound ways. To say that there is no real difference between the parties utterly ignores those issues and those millions.

2. There are, of course, massive differences between the Dem and R positions on healthcare. Read Biden's plan. Read the Republican plan. Again, massive differences that if enacted would make real improvements in the lives of millions.

You downplay the effect of the ACA on the uninsured. The number of uninsured went from 46 million to 27 million. That is 19 million actual real-life people whose lives were improved. In addition to the people affected by all of those other issues.

Sure, that still leaves millions of people who need help. I think the vast majority of them will be benefited by Biden's health plan. But even if not, there is no way they would be better off under a Trump/Romney presidency.

3. When it comes to this particular election, I think it's fallacious to suggest that Medicare for All is even on the table. Or on the horizon. We (or the millions of folks I'm talking about) will be lucky if Joe Manchin is the median vote in the Senate. Medicare for All is not passing Congress, even if Sanders were elected.

And Joe, come the fuck on. You know full well why I said I would prefer to have Bloomberg as the nominee than Sanders. Because Bloomberg would beat Trump. Sanders - maybe he would, maybe he wouldn't.

i don't recall if i wrote a similar thing back in 2016 or if i had checked out of life by then but in the summer of 2016 we drove from Vancouver -> San Francisco and back over a week and I made note that i literally did not see *one* Hilary sign. zero. that's exactly when i started freaking out and thinking "this is not going to turn out well"

obviously completely anecdotal and unscientific but you could feel it somehow.

Now i'm obviously in a way different locale, a block east of Buffalo city limits so technically we're in a suburb but again a super rough count of signs is probably at worst 20-1 for Biden/Harris in our village. probably a lot higher if you count those (us, e.g.) that don't have a political sign but any one of those "in our america [we're not dickheads, etc" or BLM signs. that's encouraging. anytime you see a trumpf flag (accompanied by the blue line flag - 100% of the time) there's a neighbour or two next door or across the street with B/H. I'm sure a very warm greeting each morning in the driveways.

(...i still am steeled for the shittiest result possible of course.)

Nonlinear FC wrote: ↑Thu Oct 15, 2020 11:52 am Drove out to the Eastern Shore this weekend for a nice little getaway. Expected to see a fairly consistent Trump sign presence and was pleasantly surprised. Most of the drive is pretty rural/farm country.

I know it's anecdotal, but seeing about 40 percent of the signs being Biden/Harris was a pretty big surprise.

Keep in mind, back in 2016, we were on a campus visit for my daughter in Wilmington, NC the weekend before the election. 99 percent Trump signs.

The ONE sign for Hillary was in downtown Wilmington. I know I've told that story a number of times, but my wife and I were some of the few of our friends that predicted big trouble for that election. That trip freaked us out.

MaxWebster wrote: ↑Thu Oct 15, 2020 12:13 pm i don't recall if i wrote a similar thing back in 2016 or if i had checked out of life by then but in the summer of 2016 we drove from Vancouver -> San Francisco and back over a week and I made note that i literally did not see *one* Hilary sign. zero. that's exactly when i started freaking out and thinking "this is not going to turn out well"

obviously completely anecdotal and unscientific but you could feel it somehow.

Now i'm obviously in a way different locale, a block east of Buffalo city limits so technically we're in a suburb but again a super rough count of signs is probably at worst 20-1 for Biden/Harris in our village. probably a lot higher if you count those (us, e.g.) that don't have a political sign but any one of those "in our america [we're not dickheads, etc" or BLM signs. that's encouraging. anytime you see a trumpf flag (accompanied by the blue line flag - 100% of the time) there's a neighbour or two next door or across the street with B/H. I'm sure a very warm greeting each morning in the driveways.

(...i still am steeled for the shittiest result possible of course.)

Nonlinear FC wrote: ↑Thu Oct 15, 2020 11:52 am Drove out to the Eastern Shore this weekend for a nice little getaway. Expected to see a fairly consistent Trump sign presence and was pleasantly surprised. Most of the drive is pretty rural/farm country.

I know it's anecdotal, but seeing about 40 percent of the signs being Biden/Harris was a pretty big surprise.

Keep in mind, back in 2016, we were on a campus visit for my daughter in Wilmington, NC the weekend before the election. 99 percent Trump signs.

The ONE sign for Hillary was in downtown Wilmington. I know I've told that story a number of times, but my wife and I were some of the few of our friends that predicted big trouble for that election. That trip freaked us out.

I’m in serious Maga land here. Holy fuck. It’s about 90-10 Trump to Biden, which I take as massive progress.

Steve of phpBB wrote: ↑Thu Oct 15, 2020 12:06 pm1. Even if the Dem and Republican positions on healthcare were identical, the fact remains that there are huge differences between the parties on all these other issues I keep prattling on about. Those differences affect millions of people in profound ways. To say that there is no real difference between the parties utterly ignores those issues and those millions.

No one has ever said there's no difference between the parties, just that being better isn't being good and that those in power should be held to account if "we're not them" is all they have to offer.

Steve of phpBB wrote: ↑Thu Oct 15, 2020 12:06 pmThe number of uninsured went from 46 million to 27 million. That is 19 million actual real-life people whose lives were improved. In addition to the people affected by all of those other issues.

I don't get how you recognize the massive different being insured makes in someone's life when you're content, for financial or political reasons, to leave almost 10% uninsured. If you can go "OH SO DON'T YOU GIVE A FUCK ABOUT GAY PEOPLE" whenever someone says Biden is closer to a center Republican than anything near the left side of his own party, why can't we harp on the fact that you're fully willing to use the health of 27 million as a trade-off because you deem caring for them unrealistic?

Steve of phpBB wrote: ↑Thu Oct 15, 2020 12:06 pm3. When it comes to this particular election, I think it's fallacious to suggest that Medicare for All is even on the table. Or on the horizon. We (or the millions of folks I'm talking about) will be lucky if Joe Manchin is the median vote in the Senate. Medicare for All is not passing Congress, even if Sanders were elected.

The argument isn't about whether we think it would pass in the current or next congress, its why you're willing to accept this as a platform. And whether your willingness to accept and to shout down those who won't is colored by your state in life.

Steve of phpBB wrote: ↑Thu Oct 15, 2020 12:06 pmAnd Joe, come the fuck on. You know full well why I said I would prefer to have Bloomberg as the nominee than Sanders. Because Bloomberg would beat Trump. Sanders - maybe he would, maybe he wouldn't.

Because we've never seen Trump defeat a smarmy, unlikeable centrist.

(And again, by that logic Romney is massively better than Trump and a better bet than either Biden or Bloomberg. But you have your line and that line is tied to party affiliation versus progress or positions.)

mister d wrote: ↑Thu Oct 15, 2020 12:43 pm

Steve of phpBB wrote: ↑Thu Oct 15, 2020 12:06 pm1. Even if the Dem and Republican positions on healthcare were identical, the fact remains that there are huge differences between the parties on all these other issues I keep prattling on about. Those differences affect millions of people in profound ways. To say that there is no real difference between the parties utterly ignores those issues and those millions.

No one has ever said there's no difference between the parties, just that being better isn't being good and that those in power should be held to account if "we're not them" is all they have to offer.

Steve of phpBB wrote: ↑Thu Oct 15, 2020 12:06 pmThe number of uninsured went from 46 million to 27 million. That is 19 million actual real-life people whose lives were improved. In addition to the people affected by all of those other issues.

I don't get how you recognize the massive different being insured makes in someone's life when you're content, for financial or political reasons, to leave almost 10% uninsured. If you can go "OH SO DON'T YOU GIVE A FUCK ABOUT GAY PEOPLE" whenever someone says Biden is closer to a center Republican than anything near the left side of his own party, why can't we harp on the fact that you're fully willing to use the health of 27 million as a trade-off because you deem caring for them unrealistic?

Steve of phpBB wrote: ↑Thu Oct 15, 2020 12:06 pm3. When it comes to this particular election, I think it's fallacious to suggest that Medicare for All is even on the table. Or on the horizon. We (or the millions of folks I'm talking about) will be lucky if Joe Manchin is the median vote in the Senate. Medicare for All is not passing Congress, even if Sanders were elected.

The argument isn't about whether we think it would pass in the current or next congress, its why you're willing to accept this as a platform. And whether your willingness to accept and to shout down those who won't is colored by your state in life.

Steve of phpBB wrote: ↑Thu Oct 15, 2020 12:06 pmAnd Joe, come the fuck on. You know full well why I said I would prefer to have Bloomberg as the nominee than Sanders. Because Bloomberg would beat Trump. Sanders - maybe he would, maybe he wouldn't.

Because we've never seen Trump defeat a smarmy, unlikeable centrist.

(And again, by that logic Romney is massively better than Trump and a better bet than either Biden or Bloomberg. But you have your line and that line is tied to party affiliation versus progress or positions.)

Dude. Didn’t you say the differences are marginal?

And the fact that you think Romney is somehow massively better than Trump makes me question your perspective even more. Yeah, presumably Romney is better in that he might obey the law and principles our democracy relies on, but when it comes to all those issues that affect people’s lives, Romney is basically the same as Trump.

That’s the whole fucking point. When it comes to the vast majority of substantive policy issues, Trump is just a standard Republican. Which is very very different from being a standard Democrat - if you look beyond “does the party advocate Medicare for All”.

I said the differences in the center are marginal. If you line up the five of Trump, Romney, Bloomberg, Biden and Sanders, where do you see the marginal gaps and where do you see the landscape altering gaps?

mister d wrote: ↑Thu Oct 15, 2020 1:06 pm I said the differences in the center are marginal. If you line up the five of Trump, Romney, Bloomberg, Biden and Sanders, where do you see the marginal gaps and where do you see the landscape altering gaps?

I think there’s one landscape altering gap between Trump and Romney on a mostly theoretical level, in that Trump has no respect for democracy and the fundamental principle that democracy only works if the losing side accepts their losses.

As far as substantive policies and practical effects go, there’s a landscape altering gap between Trump/Romney and Bloomberg/Biden/Sanders. Maybe there’s also a gap between Bloomberg and Biden/Sanders as well.

There’s very little gap between a Biden presidency and a Sanders presidency as far as practical effects over the next four years. They’re both to the left of the median vote in the Senate, which (obviously) has to enact any law and approve all judges and agency appointments.

I'm not referring to what a hypothetical next congress would allow or block, I'm referring to ideology.

My town has always been Republican, but that has been changing for the past 10 years with more young people moving from NYC to raise families. In 2016, Hillary beat Trump by less than 1% in my town, which was a big surprise as my town always votes Republican. She won huge in my county, only 2 out of 21 municipalities voted Trump. I see a few Trump signs around town, but I think people are embarrassed to put them out. One guy, whose daughter my daughter played soccer and basketball with, just put out a giant "Trump 2020 No More Bullshit!" My kids were shocked and horrified, but I'm not the least bit surprised. I'm seeing a lot more Biden signs than Hillary signs in 2016, but I feel like the majority of signs are for local candidates. 2016 had much fewer Presidential signs than previous election years, probably about the same number in 2020, but overwhelmingly Biden.

Just to put a bow on my side of the "are the Dems tangibly different or are they people you should also fight against" debate:


They don't get it, they're rich enough to not have to get it and as long as people excuse and promote them as "better than the Republicans", there will never be incentive to get it.

The Sybian wrote: ↑Thu Oct 15, 2020 1:49 pm My town has always been Republican, but that has been changing for the past 10 years with more young people moving from NYC to raise families. In 2016, Hillary beat Trump by less than 1% in my town, which was a big surprise as my town always votes Republican. She won huge in my county, only 2 out of 21 municipalities voted Trump. I see a few Trump signs around town, but I think people are embarrassed to put them out. One guy, whose daughter my daughter played soccer and basketball with, just put out a giant "Trump 2020 No More Bullshit!" My kids were shocked and horrified, but I'm not the least bit surprised. I'm seeing a lot more Biden signs than Hillary signs in 2016, but I feel like the majority of signs are for local candidates. 2016 had much fewer Presidential signs than previous election years, probably about the same number in 2020, but overwhelmingly Biden.

Hey, can you do us a favor and stick to the topic of all political threads on this board.

So the Senate is investigating the Biden email the NYT broke yesterday.. How much you wanna bet they make some ruling that Biden can't be on the ballot or some shit?

They are going to do whatever they can to make sure Trump stays in office. They owe it to him for dome reason, even tho alot of them are going to be ousted.

psunate77 wrote: ↑Thu Oct 15, 2020 2:10 pm So the Senate is investigating the Biden email the NYT broke yesterday.. How much you wanna bet they make some ruling that Biden can't be on the ballot or some shit?

They are going to do whatever they can to make sure Trump stays in office. They owe it to him for dome reason, even tho alot of them are going to be ousted.

Dude, get a blanket... Your hair's on fire!

I can't tell if he's trying to parody a panicked liberal or if all of these posts are in good faith. Pretty sure which is worse.