Vivek update...not that anyone cares

15,607 Views | 263 Replies | Last: 10 days ago by bear2034
Eastern Oregon Bear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Big C said:

Eastern Oregon Bear said:

Big C said:

bear2034 said:

Big C said:


Vivek: rhymes with strudel, baby!

Hey Big C, Niki's birth name is Nimarata Randhawa.



Thanks for the info! What should we make of that?
Put it in the Presidential name changes file next to Gerald Ford.


I forget: What was Ford's deal? (I do know who William Blythe was!)
Gerald Ford was born Leslie Lynch King Jr. Apparently Mr. King Sr was a domestic abuser and his mother got a divorce when Ford was young. She later married Gerald R. Ford Sr and in the process, Leslie Lynch King Jr was renamed Gerald R. Ford Jr. I'm paraphrasing Wikipedia extensively here, so the finer details may be off.
calbear93
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Genocide Joe said:

calbear93 said:

bear2034 said:


What is it about Nikki Haley that impressed you besides the fact she's not Trump?
What is it that I like about Haley? She is not bat**** crazy playing the populist angle saying stupid things just to cater to angry voters who are deciding who will be the next bat**** crazy leader because they are angry. She was effective as a governor and as our UN Ambassador.
Remember folks, what matters in picking a leader is not whether they support policies that will improve your life. It's whether they have good manners as they funnel your tax dollars into wars you don't want and bailouts for their rich friends.

Your support for Haley is unconvincing, other than that she's a Republican who isn't Trump.
Quite frankly, you are projecting your populist propaganda onto others.

Respect for the constitution and our rule of law is not good manners. It used to be just an assumption. Now, with populists taking over, it's a liability.

And who wants war? It's like saying people like putting others in prison. No, we don't. But we need deterrence and we need to use force at times to stop further instability. When our interests and world order are threatened and instability created by bad actors, I am in favor of taking military actions. Just because you want us to put up walls and pretend that we can live as isolationists as if the rest of the world doesn't exist doesn't mean that's what everyone wants or that's even even feasible. And frankly, I have no idea what you stand for. No wars? Great. Let's add end of hunger, end of poverty, and end of crime. I all for it. But how?

And bailout for rich friends? Look, I don't want to get into a discussion on economics with folks with populists tilt because, one, they don't really know how finances work and, two, it all becomes about class warfare. That's not interesting to me.

I generally support conservative policies. Trump is more an 80s Bernie Sanders than a true conservative, mixed in with other populist heroes like George Wallace. No thanks.

Big C
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Eastern Oregon Bear said:

Big C said:

Eastern Oregon Bear said:

Big C said:

bear2034 said:

Big C said:


Vivek: rhymes with strudel, baby!

Hey Big C, Niki's birth name is Nimarata Randhawa.



Thanks for the info! What should we make of that?
Put it in the Presidential name changes file next to Gerald Ford.


I forget: What was Ford's deal? (I do know who William Blythe was!)
Gerald Ford was born Leslie Lynch King Jr. Apparently Mr. King Sr was a domestic abuser and his mother got a divorce when Ford was young. She later married Gerald R. Ford Sr and in the process, Leslie Lynch King Jr was renamed Gerald R. Ford Jr. I'm paraphrasing Wikipedia extensively here, so the finer details may be off.

For real? Wow, I was alive during the Ford administration and did not know that (plus I consider myself fairly knowledgeable about the Presidents, especially the later ones). Maybe it was too "controversial" for the time and was not widely publicized?
Cal88
How long do you want to ignore this user?
bearister said:

Because she isn't old, stupid, dangerous, delusional, a business fraud, a tax cheat, devoid of empathy, a seditionist, a traitor, a sexual abuser, a horrible parent, a racist, a serial liar, a pretend Christian, hateful, a mocker of the disabled or a criminal. I guess you're right, because she isn't tRump.

Haley is by far the most dangerous candidate out there, as she is completely beholden to AIPAC. She will rubber-stamp any new war Netanyahu wants,

Past US presidents have reined in Israel, including Eisenhower, JFK, Carter, Reagan, Bush sr and even Obama, but Haley has shown zero daylight between her policies and those of the neocons, with Haley you'd be getting Dubya-Cheney foreign policy on steroids.
bear2034
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Cal88 said:

bearister said:

Because she isn't old, stupid, dangerous, delusional, a business fraud, a tax cheat, devoid of empathy, a seditionist, a traitor, a sexual abuser, a horrible parent, a racist, a serial liar, a pretend Christian, hateful, a mocker of the disabled or a criminal. I guess you're right, because she isn't tRump.

Haley is by far the most dangerous candidate out there, as she is completely beholden to AIPAC. She will rubber-stamp any new war Netanyahu wants,

Past US presidents have reined in Israel, including Eisenhower, JFK, Carter, Reagan, Bush sr and even Obama, but Haley has shown zero daylight between her policies and those of the neocons, with Haley you'd be getting Dubya-Cheney foreign policy on steroids.


Newsom? Michelle? Maybe they want to install Haley.
bear2034
How long do you want to ignore this user?


I don't think I've ever seen anyone handle the media better than Vivek, at least for non-politicians.
Lets Go Brandon
How long do you want to ignore this user?
bear2034 said:



I don't think I've ever seen anyone handle the media better than Vivek, at least for non-politicians.
Lets Go Brandon
How long do you want to ignore this user?
calbear93 said:

Genocide Joe said:

calbear93 said:

bear2034 said:


What is it about Nikki Haley that impressed you besides the fact she's not Trump?
What is it that I like about Haley? She is not bat**** crazy playing the populist angle saying stupid things just to cater to angry voters who are deciding who will be the next bat**** crazy leader because they are angry. She was effective as a governor and as our UN Ambassador.
Remember folks, what matters in picking a leader is not whether they support policies that will improve your life. It's whether they have good manners as they funnel your tax dollars into wars you don't want and bailouts for their rich friends.

Your support for Haley is unconvincing, other than that she's a Republican who isn't Trump.
Quite frankly, you are projecting your populist propaganda onto others.

Respect for the constitution and our rule of law is not good manners. It used to be just an assumption. Now, with populists taking over, it's a liability.

And who wants war? It's like saying people like putting others in prison. No, we don't. But we need deterrence and we need to use force at times to stop further instability. When our interests and world order are threatened and instability created by bad actors, I am in favor of taking military actions. Just because you want us to put up walls and pretend that we can live as isolationists as if the rest of the world doesn't exist doesn't mean that's what everyone wants or that's even even feasible. And frankly, I have no idea what you stand for. No wars? Great. Let's add end of hunger, end of poverty, and end of crime. I all for it. But how?

And bailout for rich friends? Look, I don't want to get into a discussion on economics with folks with populists tilt because, one, they don't really know how finances work and, two, it all becomes about class warfare. That's not interesting to me.

I generally support conservative policies. Trump is more an 80s Bernie Sanders than a true conservative, mixed in with other populist heroes like George Wallace. No thanks.

Lets Go Brandon
How long do you want to ignore this user?

calbear93
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Genocide Joe said:

calbear93 said:

Genocide Joe said:

calbear93 said:

bear2034 said:


What is it about Nikki Haley that impressed you besides the fact she's not Trump?
What is it that I like about Haley? She is not bat**** crazy playing the populist angle saying stupid things just to cater to angry voters who are deciding who will be the next bat**** crazy leader because they are angry. She was effective as a governor and as our UN Ambassador.
Remember folks, what matters in picking a leader is not whether they support policies that will improve your life. It's whether they have good manners as they funnel your tax dollars into wars you don't want and bailouts for their rich friends.

Your support for Haley is unconvincing, other than that she's a Republican who isn't Trump.
Quite frankly, you are projecting your populist propaganda onto others.

Respect for the constitution and our rule of law is not good manners. It used to be just an assumption. Now, with populists taking over, it's a liability.

And who wants war? It's like saying people like putting others in prison. No, we don't. But we need deterrence and we need to use force at times to stop further instability. When our interests and world order are threatened and instability created by bad actors, I am in favor of taking military actions. Just because you want us to put up walls and pretend that we can live as isolationists as if the rest of the world doesn't exist doesn't mean that's what everyone wants or that's even even feasible. And frankly, I have no idea what you stand for. No wars? Great. Let's add end of hunger, end of poverty, and end of crime. I all for it. But how?

And bailout for rich friends? Look, I don't want to get into a discussion on economics with folks with populists tilt because, one, they don't really know how finances work and, two, it all becomes about class warfare. That's not interesting to me.

I generally support conservative policies. Trump is more an 80s Bernie Sanders than a true conservative, mixed in with other populist heroes like George Wallace. No thanks.


I like Christie and I am glad that he was the one person running who mercilessly attacked Trump.

But I would not take Christie's comments as some unveiling of some truth.

Christie is the one who first endorsed Trump after dropping out in 2016, left the race early every time he ran, and says we need someone other than Trump but won't endorse anyone to help.

If we are dealing with reality, there are only three serious candidates in the Republican primary as we had predicted after the last larger debate. It's Haley, DeSantis, and Trump. If we are against Trump and against Trump vs. Biden, what is the realistic alternative to that? Forget burying our head in the sand or expecting some miracle, who is the one candidate that will not be bat**** crazy when in office, is not a populist putting up stupid things that will get cheers but will never be implemented, and who can beat Biden?
Big C
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Cal88 said:

bearister said:

Because she isn't old, stupid, dangerous, delusional, a business fraud, a tax cheat, devoid of empathy, a seditionist, a traitor, a sexual abuser, a horrible parent, a racist, a serial liar, a pretend Christian, hateful, a mocker of the disabled or a criminal. I guess you're right, because she isn't tRump.

Haley is by far the most dangerous candidate out there, as she is completely beholden to AIPAC. She will rubber-stamp any new war Netanyahu wants,

Past US presidents have reined in Israel, including Eisenhower, JFK, Carter, Reagan, Bush sr and even Obama, but Haley has shown zero daylight between her policies and those of the neocons, with Haley you'd be getting Dubya-Cheney foreign policy on steroids.

I haven't been a Haley Hater, but when I heard her talk about the Middle East recently, it was a little scary the way she supported the Israeli government so unconditionally. She sounded like it was still October 8th or 9th... and even then...
dajo9
How long do you want to ignore this user?
The most relevant part of this thread is in the title noting nobody cares about Vivek. But it looks like he's got an election fraud issue to deal with in Rhode Island now.
https://www.threads.net/@tomwellborn3/post/C1-d5vcv0Ql/?igshid=NTc4MTIwNjQ2YQ==
bear2034
How long do you want to ignore this user?


Nikki, DeSantis, and Christie spent millions and aren't going to win. Vivek, the only non-politician and not beholden to special interests has gained the respect of many. Meanwhile, Trump continues to enjoy free press coverage from the media.
Lets Go Brandon
How long do you want to ignore this user?

dimitrig
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Genocide Joe said:





Corporations used to provide training to their employees. Only high level employees like doctors and lawyers needed to go to college.

Now businesses have outsourced that training to universities and students pay for it themselves. Disingenuous people then blame the students for taking out loans because it costs so much. They worry about how to pay for them later which makes perfect financial sense because without a degree you will be forever behind in lifetime earnings.

Maybe more corporations should offer to pay for the education of their workforce through tuition reimbursements. Some do, but many do not or the amounts are ridiculously small.
dajo9
How long do you want to ignore this user?
dimitrig said:

Genocide Joe said:





Corporations used to provide training to their employees. Only high level employees like doctors and lawyers needed to go to college.

Now businesses have outsourced that training to universities and students pay for it themselves. Disingenuous people then blame the students for taking out loans because it costs so much. They worry about how to pay for them later which makes perfect financial sense because without a degree you will be forever behind in lifetime earnings.

Maybe more corporations should offer to pay for the education of their workforce through tuition reimbursements. Some do, but many do not or the amounts are ridiculously small.



Or worse, industries like trucking have learned to make money off people training to become truckers. Prospective employees pay for the privilege. The failure rate for new truckers is so high because it is part of the corporate profit model. They always need new trainees to profit from.
dimitrig
How long do you want to ignore this user?
dajo9 said:

dimitrig said:

Genocide Joe said:





Corporations used to provide training to their employees. Only high level employees like doctors and lawyers needed to go to college.

Now businesses have outsourced that training to universities and students pay for it themselves. Disingenuous people then blame the students for taking out loans because it costs so much. They worry about how to pay for them later which makes perfect financial sense because without a degree you will be forever behind in lifetime earnings.

Maybe more corporations should offer to pay for the education of their workforce through tuition reimbursements. Some do, but many do not or the amounts are ridiculously small.



Or worse, industries like trucking have learned to make money off people training to become truckers. Prospective employees pay for the privilege. The failure rate for new truckers is so high because it is part of the corporate profit model. They always need new trainees to profit from.


I don't know anything about how training for truck driving works. The freight companies charge their future employees for training? I know there are truck driving schools but I didn't realize the employers ran them. I assumed they were independent.

bearister
How long do you want to ignore this user?
He blew tRump and still gets kicked to the curb.

Trump turns on Vivek Ramaswamy in Truth Social post



https://mol.im/a/12960771
Cancel my subscription to the Resurrection
Send my credentials to the House of Detention
I got some friends inside
bear2034
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Big C said:

Cal88 said:

bearister said:

Because she isn't old, stupid, dangerous, delusional, a business fraud, a tax cheat, devoid of empathy, a seditionist, a traitor, a sexual abuser, a horrible parent, a racist, a serial liar, a pretend Christian, hateful, a mocker of the disabled or a criminal. I guess you're right, because she isn't tRump.

Haley is by far the most dangerous candidate out there, as she is completely beholden to AIPAC. She will rubber-stamp any new war Netanyahu wants,

Past US presidents have reined in Israel, including Eisenhower, JFK, Carter, Reagan, Bush sr and even Obama, but Haley has shown zero daylight between her policies and those of the neocons, with Haley you'd be getting Dubya-Cheney foreign policy on steroids.

I haven't been a Haley Hater, but when I heard her talk about the Middle East recently, it was a little scary the way she supported the Israeli government so unconditionally. She sounded like it was still October 8th or 9th... and even then...
movielover
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Big C said:

movielover said:

dajo9 said:

calbear93 said:

dajo9 said:

calbear93 said:

dajo9 said:

calbear93 said:

bear2034 said:

dajo9 said:

bear2034 said:

dajo9 said:

Joe Biden has been the best President of my lifetime
C'mon man.
Who you got?
Abraham Lincoln. I have pics of his inauguration somewhere.
Any president other than Carter and maybe the second Bush. Heck, even among the Democrats, Clinton was one my favorite president, and Obama, before he went down the rabbit hole of identity politics, was effective and mostly inspirational.


So in my adult life, you've got Clinton, Obama, and Trump. Interesting choices.

Obama sucked at responding to the Great Recession. We had the slow rebound and Biden has done a great job avoiding that. Clinton did a lot of great things but ultimately his deregulation of the financial industry led to real problems a decade down the road. He also cut capital gains taxes.

Don't get me wrong - Clinton and Obama were both successful but Biden has brought us from a complete mess to thriving normalcy.
Clearly not Trump, but yes, and I would add Reagan and the first Bush.

Obama did not suck at responding to the Great Recession. Not sure what you were doing at the time, but, without intending to be offensive or insulting, I don't take your assessment of the economy or economic policies very seriously. Sorry, but you have shown lack of deep and actual insight (beyond posting stupid graphs or twitter but actual, real life knowledge) of financial and economic realities. So, from my end and having represented corporations during that time (even some who were on the verge of bankruptcy because of shut down in liquidity), Obama did what was necessary and forced the even healthy banks to take the shame away from rescue by forcing everyone to take a rescue and avoid an existential threat of our financial systems. Idiots who had no understanding of what was at stake and what was being done complained about it.

Biden, based on my frequent discussions with people who are actually financial leaders, board members, CEOs, etc., is generally view as clueless and always behind. If you think he did a great job on the economy the last three years, we will never agree, and you may need to deal with actual people in leadership and decision makers. Sorry, not trying to minimize your great MBA, but you and I will never agree on economic assessment because, for the most part, things you write on these topics are so counter to what I am seeing with my investments, my advisement on boards, and my friendships with private equity and hedge fund managers, and not just folks renting out their second home. Sorry, we disagree. Biden is not good for the economy, and even the folks he appointed at the SEC and FTC are absolute, utter disasters.

You and I don't need to go into the weeds on this, because we have crossed this path many times before, from inflation, equity investments, interest rates, monetary policies, and you seem to live in an alternate reality from mine.


I was a minor when Reagan and Bush Sr were elected but Bush Sr was far too eager for war for my tastes. I don't think anybody supports his type of foreign policy anymore.

Obama embraced conservative austerity and set the recovery back years. It was clear the economy needed more government spending in his 1st term but he acquiesced too easily to Republican demands.
Not sure what you mean by being too eager for war. He is the one who withdrew from Iraq instead of destroying a government without a replacement like second Bush.

Not sure what you also meant by austerity. Assume you realize that the Republicans had the House (assuming you know how government works and who holds the purse in the federal government) and that his Fed appointment juiced the monetary policy to create the most amount of wealth and biggest bull market in my lifetime.

But here we go again. Your reality is divorced from my experience, so let's leave it here. Not sure my assessment of your economic acumen needs more degradation, and we won't convince each other.


Iraq and Panama. Both unnecessary Bush Sr. wars. Imagine us invading a Central American country like that today.

Obama's entire approach was always to find compromise with Republicans. It's why I supported Hillary. It was obvious they wanted to sabotage Obama with fiscal austerity and a bad recovery for the American people. Obama went along rather than fighting. It was his biggest mistake and it was a painful mistake for the American people.


What did Obama ever fight for, beyond ObamaCare? Didn't campaign a lot down the ticket, from what I recall. Left the DNC buried in debt. Didn't pass prison reform or close the border. But he and Holder did take the Patriot Act from Bush Jr., and weaponize our intell agencies against American citizens and opponents.

Noem takes down Birdbrain (Nikki Haley); VP candidate?



In the interview, Kristi Noem talked about "getting work done", but it seemed to be in a different context than the elephant in the room: the work she appears to recently have had done on her lips.


Sounds sexist. She has a soft, yet strong, touch. I think a lot of women would find that appealing, and she can clearly articulate her message, unlike the current hapless & inarticulate VP.
movielover
How long do you want to ignore this user?
"... angry voters who are deciding who will be the next bat**** crazy leader..."

Huh? Immediately Pudding Brain handed Middle Eastern terrorists tens of Billions in military weapons and armaments. Historic blunder.

The Joe Biden Administration and his Progressive handlers have gotten us into multiple wars, including Russia cleaning our proxy's clock. Over 500K Ukranians killed, 100K amputees, a nation wrecked and Russia considerably stronger.

Then he essentially hands Iran over $50 Billion, so they can fund terrorists to attack Irael. One historic blunders after another.

Under PDJT, we had peace and prosperity.
calbear93
How long do you want to ignore this user?
movielover said:

"... angry voters who are deciding who will be the next bat**** crazy leader..."

Huh? Immediately Pudding Brain handed Middle Eastern terrorists tens of Billions in military weapons and armaments. Historic blunder.

The Joe Biden Administration and his Progressive handlers have gotten us into multiple wars, including Russia cleaning our proxy's clock. Over 500K Ukranians killed, 100K amputees, a nation wrecked and Russia considerably stronger.

Then he essentially hands Iran over $50 Billion, so they can fund terrorists to attack Irael. One historic blunders after another.

Under PDJT, we had peace and prosperity.
Trump just stated that people dying as a result of voting for him would be worth it. I think if you stand back, you really cannot excuse away that kind of behavior or consider that anything other than bat**** crazy.

I am not sure Biden go us into wars. Russia is the one continuing to bomb civilian buildings. I suspect Putin has his own mind and agency.
movielover
How long do you want to ignore this user?
According to Cal88s sources, civilian casualties inflicted by Russia have been very low. In fact, Russia stayed anchored in Bakhmut for months, using it as a meat grinder to chew through Ukrainian servicemen.
calbear93
How long do you want to ignore this user?
movielover said:

According to Cal88s sources, civilian casualties inflicted by Russia have been very low. In fact, Russia stayed anchored in Bakhmut for months, using it as a meat grinder to chew through Ukrainian servicemen.
OK, even if true, it is still a war started by Putin and civilian casualties inflicted by Putin. At what point, do we hold the actual actors / criminals accountable instead of arguing that someone else caused them to behave criminally?
Big C
How long do you want to ignore this user?
movielover said:

Big C said:

movielover said:

dajo9 said:

calbear93 said:

dajo9 said:

calbear93 said:

dajo9 said:

calbear93 said:

bear2034 said:

dajo9 said:

bear2034 said:

dajo9 said:

Joe Biden has been the best President of my lifetime
C'mon man.
Who you got?
Abraham Lincoln. I have pics of his inauguration somewhere.
Any president other than Carter and maybe the second Bush. Heck, even among the Democrats, Clinton was one my favorite president, and Obama, before he went down the rabbit hole of identity politics, was effective and mostly inspirational.


So in my adult life, you've got Clinton, Obama, and Trump. Interesting choices.

Obama sucked at responding to the Great Recession. We had the slow rebound and Biden has done a great job avoiding that. Clinton did a lot of great things but ultimately his deregulation of the financial industry led to real problems a decade down the road. He also cut capital gains taxes.

Don't get me wrong - Clinton and Obama were both successful but Biden has brought us from a complete mess to thriving normalcy.
Clearly not Trump, but yes, and I would add Reagan and the first Bush.

Obama did not suck at responding to the Great Recession. Not sure what you were doing at the time, but, without intending to be offensive or insulting, I don't take your assessment of the economy or economic policies very seriously. Sorry, but you have shown lack of deep and actual insight (beyond posting stupid graphs or twitter but actual, real life knowledge) of financial and economic realities. So, from my end and having represented corporations during that time (even some who were on the verge of bankruptcy because of shut down in liquidity), Obama did what was necessary and forced the even healthy banks to take the shame away from rescue by forcing everyone to take a rescue and avoid an existential threat of our financial systems. Idiots who had no understanding of what was at stake and what was being done complained about it.

Biden, based on my frequent discussions with people who are actually financial leaders, board members, CEOs, etc., is generally view as clueless and always behind. If you think he did a great job on the economy the last three years, we will never agree, and you may need to deal with actual people in leadership and decision makers. Sorry, not trying to minimize your great MBA, but you and I will never agree on economic assessment because, for the most part, things you write on these topics are so counter to what I am seeing with my investments, my advisement on boards, and my friendships with private equity and hedge fund managers, and not just folks renting out their second home. Sorry, we disagree. Biden is not good for the economy, and even the folks he appointed at the SEC and FTC are absolute, utter disasters.

You and I don't need to go into the weeds on this, because we have crossed this path many times before, from inflation, equity investments, interest rates, monetary policies, and you seem to live in an alternate reality from mine.


I was a minor when Reagan and Bush Sr were elected but Bush Sr was far too eager for war for my tastes. I don't think anybody supports his type of foreign policy anymore.

Obama embraced conservative austerity and set the recovery back years. It was clear the economy needed more government spending in his 1st term but he acquiesced too easily to Republican demands.
Not sure what you mean by being too eager for war. He is the one who withdrew from Iraq instead of destroying a government without a replacement like second Bush.

Not sure what you also meant by austerity. Assume you realize that the Republicans had the House (assuming you know how government works and who holds the purse in the federal government) and that his Fed appointment juiced the monetary policy to create the most amount of wealth and biggest bull market in my lifetime.

But here we go again. Your reality is divorced from my experience, so let's leave it here. Not sure my assessment of your economic acumen needs more degradation, and we won't convince each other.


Iraq and Panama. Both unnecessary Bush Sr. wars. Imagine us invading a Central American country like that today.

Obama's entire approach was always to find compromise with Republicans. It's why I supported Hillary. It was obvious they wanted to sabotage Obama with fiscal austerity and a bad recovery for the American people. Obama went along rather than fighting. It was his biggest mistake and it was a painful mistake for the American people.


What did Obama ever fight for, beyond ObamaCare? Didn't campaign a lot down the ticket, from what I recall. Left the DNC buried in debt. Didn't pass prison reform or close the border. But he and Holder did take the Patriot Act from Bush Jr., and weaponize our intell agencies against American citizens and opponents.

Noem takes down Birdbrain (Nikki Haley); VP candidate?



In the interview, Kristi Noem talked about "getting work done", but it seemed to be in a different context than the elephant in the room: the work she appears to recently have had done on her lips.


Sounds sexist. She has a soft, yet strong, touch. I think a lot of women would find that appealing, and she can clearly articulate her message, unlike the current hapless & inarticulate VP.

Sounds racist.
Lets Go Brandon
How long do you want to ignore this user?

movielover
How long do you want to ignore this user?
concordtom
How long do you want to ignore this user?
calbear93 said:

Genocide Joe said:

calbear93 said:

Genocide Joe said:

calbear93 said:

bear2034 said:


What is it about Nikki Haley that impressed you besides the fact she's not Trump?
What is it that I like about Haley? She is not bat**** crazy playing the populist angle saying stupid things just to cater to angry voters who are deciding who will be the next bat**** crazy leader because they are angry. She was effective as a governor and as our UN Ambassador.
Remember folks, what matters in picking a leader is not whether they support policies that will improve your life. It's whether they have good manners as they funnel your tax dollars into wars you don't want and bailouts for their rich friends.

Your support for Haley is unconvincing, other than that she's a Republican who isn't Trump.
Quite frankly, you are projecting your populist propaganda onto others.

Respect for the constitution and our rule of law is not good manners. It used to be just an assumption. Now, with populists taking over, it's a liability.

And who wants war? It's like saying people like putting others in prison. No, we don't. But we need deterrence and we need to use force at times to stop further instability. When our interests and world order are threatened and instability created by bad actors, I am in favor of taking military actions. Just because you want us to put up walls and pretend that we can live as isolationists as if the rest of the world doesn't exist doesn't mean that's what everyone wants or that's even even feasible. And frankly, I have no idea what you stand for. No wars? Great. Let's add end of hunger, end of poverty, and end of crime. I all for it. But how?

And bailout for rich friends? Look, I don't want to get into a discussion on economics with folks with populists tilt because, one, they don't really know how finances work and, two, it all becomes about class warfare. That's not interesting to me.

I generally support conservative policies. Trump is more an 80s Bernie Sanders than a true conservative, mixed in with other populist heroes like George Wallace. No thanks.


I like Christie and I am glad that he was the one person running who mercilessly attacked Trump.

But I would not take Christie's comments as some unveiling of some truth.

Christie is the one who first endorsed Trump after dropping out in 2016, left the race early every time he ran, and says we need someone other than Trump but won't endorse anyone to help.

If we are dealing with reality, there are only three serious candidates in the Republican primary as we had predicted after the last larger debate. It's Haley, DeSantis, and Trump. If we are against Trump and against Trump vs. Biden, what is the realistic alternative to that? Forget burying our head in the sand or expecting some miracle, who is the one candidate that will not be bat**** crazy when in office, is not a populist putting up stupid things that will get cheers but will never be implemented, and who can beat Biden?


That's called the null set.
calbear93
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Genocide Joe said:





Not much of a shocker. I think he is hitching his wagon on being the VP but doesn't seem like Trump is still a fan. Maybe he will get a cabinet position if Trump wins.

It does seem like it will be Biden v Trump again. How fantastic for the country.
dimitrig
How long do you want to ignore this user?
calbear93 said:

Genocide Joe said:





Not much of a shocker. I think he is hitching his wagon on being the VP but doesn't seem like Trump is still a fan. Maybe he will get a cabinet position if Trump wins.

It does seem like it will be Biden v Trump again. How fantastic for the country.


I am saddened that over 50% of GOP voters in Iowa chose Trump.

I just don't even know what to say about that.



Unit2Sucks
How long do you want to ignore this user?
dimitrig said:




I am saddened that over 50% of GOP voters in Iowa chose Trump.

I just don't even know what to say about that.




49% of the highly conservative GOP caucus in Iowa voted against Trump. The caucus goers represent fairly diehard voters (about ~15% of Iowa voters) and Trump only got 56k total votes. In 2016, when he lost the Iowa caucus (don't worry, he claimed fraud), he received 45k votes. 56k votes for an incumbent like Trump shows a lack of enthusiasm.

Trump won but I'm sure he's throwing ketchup plates at walls right now.
smh
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Unit2Sucks said:

dimitrig said:

..Trump won but I'm sure he's throwing ketchup plates at walls right now..

curious, looked up the phrase..
https://knowyourmeme.com/memes/events/donald-trump-throwing-ketchup
> Donald Trump Throwing Ketchup refers to an alleged incident detailed in Cassidy Hutchinson's June 28th, 2022, testimony to the January 6th Committee, in which former President Donald [duck] Trump purportedly threw a plate against the wall in the White House after watching a news segment on TV that angered him. The segment featured his recently-resigned Attorney General Bill Barr telling the press there was no evidence of voter fraud in the 2020 presidential election. The broken plate led to a ketchup smear which Hutchinson stated she helped the White House valet clean up. Following her testimony, the alleged event went viral online, seeing references in memes mostly poking fun at Trump for his behavior.
calbear93
How long do you want to ignore this user?
dimitrig said:

calbear93 said:

Genocide Joe said:





Not much of a shocker. I think he is hitching his wagon on being the VP but doesn't seem like Trump is still a fan. Maybe he will get a cabinet position if Trump wins.

It does seem like it will be Biden v Trump again. How fantastic for the country.


I am saddened that over 50% of GOP voters in Iowa chose Trump.

I just don't even know what to say about that.




I think the more we consider how out of touch most of us in the coast and in Washinton are with Middle America and how much Washington is broken that someone as horrible as Trump seems like the best choice, the more we can move forward and progress. What will be trifling would be complaining about the voters, the form of democracy, and the other party when none of those are changing anytime soon or within the control of any of us.

If I had to guess, Trump will be the next President. I think Biden has turned off enough people who may have begrudgingly voted for him in the purple states that he will lose some of the key states that he won in 2020, especially in the Midwest. I hope to be proven wrong, but I am skeptical that Biden will win.

But as horrible as it is to me that Trump will be president again, I also believe that our country will survive. It's just the good and the bad of democratic republic form of government we have. It's not changing anytime soon so we make the best of it.
MinotStateBeav
How long do you want to ignore this user?
calbear93 said:

Genocide Joe said:





Not much of a shocker. I think he is hitching his wagon on being the VP but doesn't seem like Trump is still a fan. Maybe he will get a cabinet position if Trump wins.

It does seem like it will be Biden v Trump again. How fantastic for the country.
I'd like to see him as the commerce secretary imo.
calbear93
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Unit2Sucks said:

dimitrig said:




I am saddened that over 50% of GOP voters in Iowa chose Trump.

I just don't even know what to say about that.




49% of the highly conservative GOP caucus in Iowa voted against Trump. The caucus goers represent fairly diehard voters (about ~15% of Iowa voters) and Trump only got 56k total votes. In 2016, when he lost the Iowa caucus (don't worry, he claimed fraud), he received 45k votes. 56k votes for an incumbent like Trump shows a lack of enthusiasm.

Trump won but I'm sure he's throwing ketchup plates at walls right now.
When was the last time anyone in a highly contested primary won over 50% in Iowa? I am rooting for Haley but don't think there is any chance it will be anything other than Trump against a highly vulnerable Biden.
 
×
subscribe Verify your student status
See Subscription Benefits
Trial only available to users who have never subscribed or participated in a previous trial.