MinotStateBeav said:

---

"The people I see voting for candidate XXXX" lol what are you some kind of social butterfly voter? You have to see who votes for somebody, to see if you'd fit in with the crowd? lol.

---

More like "Birds of a feather flock together". If I see fervent RFK Jr support from people I strongly disagree with, then I'm going to assume RFK Jr most likely isn't a candidate I'll support. I suppose there's a chance I could change my opinion about that, but I have almost a year to make up my mind and I'm not worrying about it much right now. 10-12 months is a long time and much can happen between now and then. Besides, things are generally decided long before the Oregon primary so it's like my vote will count for much either now or in the general election.

MinotStateBeav said:

---

"The people I see voting for candidate XXXX" lol what are you some kind of social butterfly voter? You have to see who votes for somebody, to see if you'd fit in with the crowd? lol.

---

You don't "have to", but it is one indicator. I liken it to, when evaluating a Cal Football recruit, seeing who else offered him. Generally considered one of the more reliable metrics.

Eastern Oregon Bear said:

---

As for RFK Jr., the VAST majority of the people I see supporting him are either vaccine conspiracy theorists or MAGA diehards (DINOs). That makes me immediately suspicious.

---

cbbass said it himself: RFK Jr.'s support is higher among Republicans than Democrats. Why? Because they see him as a spoiler to Biden. I know there's been some discussion of the Democrats and their corporate donors. Why not take a look at RFK's?

1. A Popular Information analysis of @RobertKennedyJr's first FEC filing reveals the lion's share of Kennedy's biggest donors have PREVIOUSLY DONATED ONLY TO REPUBLICANS

Follow along for details.

🧵 pic.twitter.com/lAXjBgyUs1

— Judd Legum (@JuddLegum) July 17, 2023

bearister said:

---

….and fresh in from the Gee, That's a Big F'ing Surprise Department:

Robert F Kennedy Jr's campaign bankrolled by Republican mega-donor


https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2023/aug/02/robert-f-kennedy-jr-republican-donor-super-pac?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other

---

"The fact that Kennedy gets so much bipartisan support tells me two things: that he's the one candidate who can unite the country and root out corruption and that he's the one Democrat who can win in the general election," Mellon said in a press release by the Super Pac circulated ahead of the reporting deadline.

Cal88 said:

---

bearister said:

---

….and fresh in from the Gee, That's a Big F'ing Surprise Department:

Robert F Kennedy Jr's campaign bankrolled by Republican mega-donor


https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2023/aug/02/robert-f-kennedy-jr-republican-donor-super-pac?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other

---

"The fact that Kennedy gets so much bipartisan support tells me two things: that he's the one candidate who can unite the country and root out corruption and that he's the one Democrat who can win in the general election," Mellon said in a press release by the Super Pac circulated ahead of the reporting deadline.

---

The fact that Kennedy gets "so much" bipartisan support tells me one thing: There are wackos at both ends of the political spectrum. In fact, it's not really a spectrum as we know one to be. Bend it into a circle.

Gavin Newsom's favorability numbers aren't looking so good. Biden received a record 81 million "votes", how would someone like Gavin Newsom ever compete against that?

BearHunter said:

---

pic.twitter.com/AjIPdBlPrW

— Robert F. Kennedy Jr (@RobertKennedyJr) August 2, 2023

Twain said this prior to Al Gore's internet and the FBI's Twitter.

---

Actually, Twain never wrote that. Lots of quotes out there attributed to him, but true scholars of the man know the truth. Yet internet wannabe intellectuals, like RFK Jr and you, fall for this nonsense every time. Maybe you shouldn't quote someone unless you have actually read them first.

Cal88 said:

---

Big C said:

---

Cal88 said:

---

bearister said:

---

….and fresh in from the Gee, That's a Big F'ing Surprise Department:

Robert F Kennedy Jr's campaign bankrolled by Republican mega-donor


https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2023/aug/02/robert-f-kennedy-jr-republican-donor-super-pac?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other

---

"The fact that Kennedy gets so much bipartisan support tells me two things: that he's the one candidate who can unite the country and root out corruption and that he's the one Democrat who can win in the general election," Mellon said in a press release by the Super Pac circulated ahead of the reporting deadline.

---

The fact that Kennedy gets "so much" bipartisan support tells me one thing: There are wackos at both ends of the political spectrum. In fact, it's not really a spectrum as we know one to be. Bend it into a circle.

---

There seems to be a whole lot of end of the political spectrum whackos, according to the latest Harris Poll:



Seriously, you have to be terminally partisan to view bipartisan support as a negative characteristic.

PS - Newsom less favorable than Chris freaking Christie!

---

We will have to agree to disagree with regards to American Presidential politics.

(and this goes to my good friend BearHunter, too) Tell me one person in the country who could beat Gavin Newsom head-to-head in a general election. Some of you are deathly afraid he will somehow become the Dem candidate.

Big C said:

---

Cal88 said:

---

Big C said:

---

Cal88 said:

---

bearister said:

---

….and fresh in from the Gee, That's a Big F'ing Surprise Department:

Robert F Kennedy Jr's campaign bankrolled by Republican mega-donor


https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2023/aug/02/robert-f-kennedy-jr-republican-donor-super-pac?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other

---

"The fact that Kennedy gets so much bipartisan support tells me two things: that he's the one candidate who can unite the country and root out corruption and that he's the one Democrat who can win in the general election," Mellon said in a press release by the Super Pac circulated ahead of the reporting deadline.

---

The fact that Kennedy gets "so much" bipartisan support tells me one thing: There are wackos at both ends of the political spectrum. In fact, it's not really a spectrum as we know one to be. Bend it into a circle.

---

There seems to be a whole lot of end of the political spectrum whackos, according to the latest Harris Poll:



Seriously, you have to be terminally partisan to view bipartisan support as a negative characteristic.

PS - Newsom less favorable than Chris freaking Christie!

---

We will have to agree to disagree with regards to American Presidential politics.

(and this goes to my good friend BearHunter, too) Tell me one person in the country who could beat Gavin Newsom head-to-head in a general election. Some of you are deathly afraid he will somehow become the Dem candidate.

---

As someone who grew up in SF and still walks there 12000+ miles over the last 13 years I can tell you that it's direction is horrible. No stats, just first hand, 'boots on the ground' viewpoint. And I take no joy in saying that about my home town. The fact that Gavin had a big hand in this trend as Mayor and now Governor leads me to believe that I will never vote for him. Just last Sunday I was run over while walking down Valencia St. by a guy who had just stolen stuff from a store and was hopping on a bike (maybe stole it too). No one was making a scene. I'm still waiting for the fixes for this. Stats don't tell the entire story. Market St and particularly the Westfield Mall will show crime down, etc. They are empty!!! Just walked through there a few weeks ago. I was amazed because we don't walk there anymore. It used to be packed...always. I don't have any great answers but neither do Gavin or London Breed. I saw on the news last night a reporter at a Walgreens saying it had the highest rate of theft of any of their stores in the country. It was two blocks away from my middle class, childhood home in the Richmond district. I couldn't believe it. Again, my point isn't that any politician has some fix for this that I know will work just that I KNOW Gavin Newsom does not.

82gradDLSdad said:

---

As someone who grew up in SF and still walks there 12000+ miles over the last 13 years I can tell you that it's direction is horrible. No stats, just first hand, 'boots on the ground' viewpoint. And I take no joy in saying that about my home town. The fact that Gavin had a big hand in this trend as Mayor and now Governor leads me to believe that I will never vote for him. Just last Sunday I was run over while walking down Valencia St. by a guy who had just stolen stuff from a store and was hopping on a bike (maybe stole it too). No one was making a scene. I'm still waiting for the fixes for this. Stats don't tell the entire story. Market St and particularly the Westfield Mall will show crime down, etc. They are empty!!! Just walked through there a few weeks ago. I was amazed because we don't walk there anymore. It used to be packed...always. I don't have any great answers but neither do Gavin or London Breed. I saw on the news last night a reporter at a Walgreens saying it had the highest rate of theft of any of their stores in the country. It was two blocks away from my middle class, childhood home in the Richmond district. I couldn't believe it. Again, my point isn't that any politician has some fix for this that I know will work just that I KNOW Gavin Newsom does not.

---

For what it's worth as another data point, I live in the city and have for many years. I am not seeing the same drastic changes. I don't spend a lot of time in the "bad" areas like the tenderloin or mid-market, but the places I do hang out don't seem much different than they have for many years and in some places they are significantly better.

For example - Golden Gate Park. The panhandle and east end of the park (and the Haight) used to be full of homeless people and drug users. I go running there frequently and it's much much better than it was prior to the pandemic. I also used to see a LOT of broken glass on the ground from cars that had been broken into and haven't seen any of that in a year or more. I don't know why it's changed, but it's noticeable to me.

When I was a kid (90's), SF was an absolute mess. There we so many parts of town that were much skechier than they are today (Polk St perhaps the most prominent example) and all the places that are bad now were bad then. If anything it's condensed to a few areas.

Don't get me wrong, this doesn't mean that I don't think there is more that we can do to improve the city to reduce crime and improve quality of life for many, but I think it's helpful to share different perspectives. I've had some people visit (or business colleagues or whatever talk to me about their visit here) and have consistently heard that they were surprised how nice SF was and that it was much cleaner and safer-feeling than they expected based on the proliferation of national news stories claiming our demise. I think there is a concerted effort to portray SF as a war zone, some of it politically motivated, and that the reality is that we suffer from a lot of the same big-city problems that other places face. SF is much safer than Jacksonville Florida for example, but the news never talks about that.

"As someone who grew up in SF and still walks there 12000+ miles over the last 13 years …."


Have you read this book? If not you kinda have to. It is custom tailored for you. Part gonzo journalism, part history and part walking tour. Gary hit a homer here.



*Gary referenced an author in his book, Denis Johnson. So I am reading his signature work, Tree of Smoke. I have to say, I am half way through and I haven't been this disappointed since reading Cormac McCarthy's Blood Meridian.

bearister said:

---

"As someone who grew up in SF and still walks there 12000+ miles over the last 13 years …."


Have you read this book? If not you kinda have to. It is custom tailored for you. Part gonzo journalism, part history and part walking tour. Gary hit a homer here.



*Gary referenced an author in his book, Denis Johnson. So I am reading his signature work, Tree of Smoke. I have to say, I am half way through and I haven't been this disappointed since reading Cormac McCarthy's Blood Meridian.

---

Sounds good. I'm not a reader but this seems right up my alley.
Thanks

bearister said:

---

---

I said I'm not A Reader but I may be The Reader

Unit2Sucks said:

---

When I was a kid (90's), SF was an absolute mess. There we so many parts of town that were much skechier than they are today (Polk St perhaps the most prominent example) and all the places that are bad now were bad then. If anything it's condensed to a few areas.

---

You can also say this about pretty much any major American city . . . crime and urban blight was much worse in the 80s and 90s than it is now.

Again, not to downplay the issues and yes there has been an uptick in crime post-pandemic that needs to be addressed (I live in Oakland and see it too). But it's helpful to keep perspective.

82gradDLSdad said:

---

Unit2Sucks said:

---

82gradDLSdad said:

---

As someone who grew up in SF and still walks there 12000+ miles over the last 13 years I can tell you that it's direction is horrible. No stats, just first hand, 'boots on the ground' viewpoint. And I take no joy in saying that about my home town. The fact that Gavin had a big hand in this trend as Mayor and now Governor leads me to believe that I will never vote for him. Just last Sunday I was run over while walking down Valencia St. by a guy who had just stolen stuff from a store and was hopping on a bike (maybe stole it too). No one was making a scene. I'm still waiting for the fixes for this. Stats don't tell the entire story. Market St and particularly the Westfield Mall will show crime down, etc. They are empty!!! Just walked through there a few weeks ago. I was amazed because we don't walk there anymore. It used to be packed...always. I don't have any great answers but neither do Gavin or London Breed. I saw on the news last night a reporter at a Walgreens saying it had the highest rate of theft of any of their stores in the country. It was two blocks away from my middle class, childhood home in the Richmond district. I couldn't believe it. Again, my point isn't that any politician has some fix for this that I know will work just that I KNOW Gavin Newsom does not.

---

For what it's worth as another data point, I live in the city and have for many years. I am not seeing the same drastic changes. I don't spend a lot of time in the "bad" areas like the tenderloin or mid-market, but the places I do hang out don't seem much different than they have for many years and in some places they are significantly better.

For example - Golden Gate Park. The panhandle and east end of the park (and the Haight) used to be full of homeless people and drug users. I go running there frequently and it's much much better than it was prior to the pandemic. I also used to see a LOT of broken glass on the ground from cars that had been broken into and haven't seen any of that in a year or more. I don't know why it's changed, but it's noticeable to me.

When I was a kid (90's), SF was an absolute mess. There we so many parts of town that were much skechier than they are today (Polk St perhaps the most prominent example) and all the places that are bad now were bad then. If anything it's condensed to a few areas.

Don't get me wrong, this doesn't mean that I don't think there is more that we can do to improve the city to reduce crime and improve quality of life for many, but I think it's helpful to share different perspectives. I've had some people visit (or business colleagues or whatever talk to me about their visit here) and have consistently heard that they were surprised how nice SF was and that it was much cleaner and safer-feeling than they expected based on the proliferation of national news stories claiming our demise. I think there is a concerted effort to portray SF as a war zone, some of it politically motivated, and that the reality is that we suffer from a lot of the same big-city problems that other places face. SF is much safer than Jacksonville Florida for example, but the news never talks about that.

---

You are absolutely right. SF is becoming a city of haves and have nots and that gap is widening. I always defend the city with the fact that there are many wonderful places to walk. What's striking is the quality of the places that are third world country like. We do avoid those now after having walked literally everywhere early on when we were younger. There are still an amazing number of tourists coming to places like fisherman's wharf even though to me it looks a bit run down. But golden gate park is bustling and clean, the presidio is amazing, most of the marina is vibrant as is north beach. I've been amazed at how Geary our in the Richmond seems to be deteriorating. I honestly don't know what the solution is. I will sound a bit like a democrat here (not bad, mind you), since we walk through Pacific heights and presidio heights a lot the difference between those monster mansions and the boarded up shacks in other neighborhoods, some quite close is staggering. I just don't know why anyone needs a house that is so big and so luxurious. That disparity in wealth is a huge problem and I don't see any solution. Even my not so well off Republican friends don't see anything wrong with that. A multi billionaire and someone who works and can hardly afford a place to live seems to be a problem in a society.
Look for my wife and me when you are running. I'm 6'3 she is 5'3. I usually have a black windbreaker tied around my waist and wear shorts. Tony and Joni.

---

That's awesome, I will keep an eye out! I'm the antifa looking guy carrying a pitchfork. j/k I don't really have a differentiating features but will keep an eye out and shout go bears at anyone who fits your descriptions!

Unit2Sucks said:

---

82gradDLSdad said:

---

Unit2Sucks said:

---

82gradDLSdad said:

---

As someone who grew up in SF and still walks there 12000+ miles over the last 13 years I can tell you that it's direction is horrible. No stats, just first hand, 'boots on the ground' viewpoint. And I take no joy in saying that about my home town. The fact that Gavin had a big hand in this trend as Mayor and now Governor leads me to believe that I will never vote for him. Just last Sunday I was run over while walking down Valencia St. by a guy who had just stolen stuff from a store and was hopping on a bike (maybe stole it too). No one was making a scene. I'm still waiting for the fixes for this. Stats don't tell the entire story. Market St and particularly the Westfield Mall will show crime down, etc. They are empty!!! Just walked through there a few weeks ago. I was amazed because we don't walk there anymore. It used to be packed...always. I don't have any great answers but neither do Gavin or London Breed. I saw on the news last night a reporter at a Walgreens saying it had the highest rate of theft of any of their stores in the country. It was two blocks away from my middle class, childhood home in the Richmond district. I couldn't believe it. Again, my point isn't that any politician has some fix for this that I know will work just that I KNOW Gavin Newsom does not.

---

For what it's worth as another data point, I live in the city and have for many years. I am not seeing the same drastic changes. I don't spend a lot of time in the "bad" areas like the tenderloin or mid-market, but the places I do hang out don't seem much different than they have for many years and in some places they are significantly better.

For example - Golden Gate Park. The panhandle and east end of the park (and the Haight) used to be full of homeless people and drug users. I go running there frequently and it's much much better than it was prior to the pandemic. I also used to see a LOT of broken glass on the ground from cars that had been broken into and haven't seen any of that in a year or more. I don't know why it's changed, but it's noticeable to me.

When I was a kid (90's), SF was an absolute mess. There we so many parts of town that were much skechier than they are today (Polk St perhaps the most prominent example) and all the places that are bad now were bad then. If anything it's condensed to a few areas.

Don't get me wrong, this doesn't mean that I don't think there is more that we can do to improve the city to reduce crime and improve quality of life for many, but I think it's helpful to share different perspectives. I've had some people visit (or business colleagues or whatever talk to me about their visit here) and have consistently heard that they were surprised how nice SF was and that it was much cleaner and safer-feeling than they expected based on the proliferation of national news stories claiming our demise. I think there is a concerted effort to portray SF as a war zone, some of it politically motivated, and that the reality is that we suffer from a lot of the same big-city problems that other places face. SF is much safer than Jacksonville Florida for example, but the news never talks about that.

---

You are absolutely right. SF is becoming a city of haves and have nots and that gap is widening. I always defend the city with the fact that there are many wonderful places to walk. What's striking is the quality of the places that are third world country like. We do avoid those now after having walked literally everywhere early on when we were younger. There are still an amazing number of tourists coming to places like fisherman's wharf even though to me it looks a bit run down. But golden gate park is bustling and clean, the presidio is amazing, most of the marina is vibrant as is north beach. I've been amazed at how Geary our in the Richmond seems to be deteriorating. I honestly don't know what the solution is. I will sound a bit like a democrat here (not bad, mind you), since we walk through Pacific heights and presidio heights a lot the difference between those monster mansions and the boarded up shacks in other neighborhoods, some quite close is staggering. I just don't know why anyone needs a house that is so big and so luxurious. That disparity in wealth is a huge problem and I don't see any solution. Even my not so well off Republican friends don't see anything wrong with that. A multi billionaire and someone who works and can hardly afford a place to live seems to be a problem in a society.
Look for my wife and me when you are running. I'm 6'3 she is 5'3. I usually have a black windbreaker tied around my waist and wear shorts. Tony and Joni.

---

That's awesome, I will keep an eye out! I'm the antifa looking guy carrying a pitchfork. j/k I don't really have a differentiating features but will keep an eye out and shout go bears at anyone who fits your descriptions!

---

BearHunter said:

---

bearister said:

---

Big C said:

---

bearister said:

---

…and RFKJr once wrote an opinion piece chewing out Ralph Nader for torpedoing Al "Inventor of the Information Super Highway and I Never Pass Up a Firm Massage" Gore's bid for the White House.

---

Interesting hypothetical: How might our world today be different, if Gore had become President instead of GW Bush?

---

No pretextural invasion of Iraq and attempt to establish the Neocon wet dream of a Pax Americana in the Middle East. Iraq would have remained an effective counterweight to Iran.

---

Or maybe Al Gore would have done the exact same thing after 9-11.

---

IF Gore's margin of victory had been sufficient enough to clearly win Florida, and IF the "Brooks Brothers Riot" to stop the vote counting in FL hadn't succeeded, and IF SCOTUS had decided the outcome of the 2000 election in favor of Gore, then I very much doubt that 9-11 would've happened.

There were several war games in progress on 9-11 -- Northern Guardian, Vigilant Warrior, and Vigilant Guardian -- all under the framework of NORAD's Global Guardian. The Vigilant Guardian exercise involved simulated air attacks within the continental U.S. So there was substantial confusion about whether the actual 9-11 attack planes were real, or if they were simulated. In addition, fighter jets that would normally scramble to intercept the incoming threats were sent up to the Arctic Circle to intercept the attack simulated in the Northern Guardian exercise.

FAA Director Jane Garvey testified to at least 11 different "suspected hijackings" appearing on the radar that morning. All those records were destroyed by "A U.S. official," according to the NYTimes.

There were so many federal agencies, military facilities, and intelligence services involved that only someone inside the Federal Government, with a high degree of command & control, could've made it happen. All of the evidence [that remains] points to VP Dick Cheney as the mastermind of the 9-11 attacks.

Furthermore, there's this tidbit from the NeoConservative Manifesto, written by a defense/intelligence think tank known as the Project For A New American Century.

Quote:

---

A transformation strategy that solely pursued capabilities for projecting force from the United States, for example, and sacrificed forward basing and presence, would be at odds with larger American policy goals and would trouble American allies.

Further, the process of transformation [massive 'defense' spending, more bases outside the U.S., research, development, & deployment of new defense technologies & organizations], even if it brings revolutionary change, is likely to be a long one, absent some catastrophic and catalyzing event like a new Pearl Harbor.

-- "Rebuilding America's Defenses," Project for a New American Century (1999), p. 51

---

Much of this manifesto comes from Dick Cheney himself, from when he was George H.W. Bush's last Secretary of Defense.

Quote:

---

In broad terms, we saw the project as building upon the defense strategy outlined by the Cheney Defense Department in the waning days of the Bush Administration. The Defense Policy Guidance (DPG) drafted in the early months of 1992 [by Cheney] provided a blueprint for maintaining U.S. preeminence [after the collapse of the Soviet Union the previous year], precluding the rise of a great power rival, and shaping the international security order in line with American principles and interests. Leaked before it had been formally approved, the document was criticized as an effort by "cold warriors" to keep defense spending high and cuts in forces small despite the collapse of the Soviet Union; not surprisingly, it was subsequently buried by the new [Clinton] administration.

-- "Rebuilding America's Defenses," PNAC, p. ii (introduction)

---

Bill Clinton, during his presidency, referred to Cheney & his PNAC cohorts as "the crazies in the basement." At the time, there was much discussion about how we could use the "Peace Dividend" that would come from reductions in defense spending after the end of the Cold War. This outbreak of peace horrified the war hawks, and prompted the development of this PNAC manifesto.

"Rebuilding America's Defenses" has essentially served as the roadmap for U.S. foreign policy since the Cheney/Bush administration came to power in 2001, even through the Obama administration. Obama kept Robert Gates as Secretary of "Defense" from the Cheney administration, and appointed Secretaries of State Hillary Clinton & John Kerry. Both Clinton & Kerry were in full support of the Cheney's PNAC plan.

Whose War? - The American Conservative


https://www.theamericanconservative.com/whose-war/

Hunter Biden, RFK Jr, Mike Pompeo and Tucker Carlson walk into a bar. Bartender says, "What'll it be, guys?"

And the fun ensues...

Unit2Sucks said:

---

Can we talk about the fact that after spending months falling in love with RFK Jr when they thought he would hurt Biden (but only had support from nutjobs - most of whom are GOP voters), conservatives are apoplectic that RFK is mounting a third party run.

Since they realize that their guy needs the crazy vote to have a chance at not losing worse than in 2020, they are now saying that RFK Jr is a deep state plant propped up by Clinton/Obama/Truman to damage Trump lol.

I don't know what will happen with RFK Jr but I love the fact that his GOP admirers are forced into damage control now so many of the the ones supporting him when he pretended to be a democrat will go into attack mode.

---

Interesting, so you're also calling BS on the corporate media's claims this past week that RFJ Jr. running as an independent will hurt Biden?