2020 Election - Catch-all Thread

sycasey
How long do you want to ignore this user?
okaydo said:

bearister said:

KH just effectively put a bow on 2020 for tRump by shredding the only moronic candidate in the Democratic field that the low information voters of Arizona, Wisconsin, North Carolina and Florida will cast a vote for. The only thing that derails the Mad King at this point is A Cheeseburger Too Far scenario.



The beauty of the U.S. presidential election is that it's a marathon. If Biden is having trouble now, then he clearly is going to have his ass kicked by Trump anyway.


Agreed. If Biden is already unable to handle attacks from fellow Dems, what do you think will happen when Trump and the Republicans go after him? By definition he's not the best candidate if he can't do better.

Didn't we all learn from Hillary Clinton not to have an "anointed" candidate before the race even starts?
okaydo
How long do you want to ignore this user?
sycasey said:

okaydo said:

bearister said:

KH just effectively put a bow on 2020 for tRump by shredding the only moronic candidate in the Democratic field that the low information voters of Arizona, Wisconsin, North Carolina and Florida will cast a vote for. The only thing that derails the Mad King at this point is A Cheeseburger Too Far scenario.



The beauty of the U.S. presidential election is that it's a marathon. If Biden is having trouble now, then he clearly is going to have his ass kicked by Trump anyway.


Agreed. If Biden is already unable to handle attacks from fellow Dems, what do you think will happen when Trump and the Republicans go after him? By definition he's not the best candidate if he can't do better.

Didn't we all learn from Hillary Clinton not to have an "anointed" candidate before the race even starts?



bearister
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Cancel my subscription to the Resurrection
Send my credentials to the House of Detention
I got some friends inside
bearister
How long do you want to ignore this user?
B.A. Bearacus said:

Snippets from that first debate must still be part of the GOP jerk off reel (especially for Evangelicals and a couple of people on here).


...but I thought Evangelicals thought it was a grave moral evil to burp the worm.
Cancel my subscription to the Resurrection
Send my credentials to the House of Detention
I got some friends inside
GBear4Life
How long do you want to ignore this user?
The Kamala attack on Biden was substantively weak and employed identity politics and virtue signaling over substance. Nothing like starting an attack with "I'm not calling you a racist, but..."

I don't think Biden got "destroyed" and thought he handled himself well. The exchange was perceived as a knockout because of the tactics Kamala used, which makes great copy, as others on this thread have already noted.

Trying to "get" Biden by invoking his opposition to federal mandates of busing as a tool to insinuate he is, in some form or another, not "committed to civil rights" is pretty disgraceful but par for the course for Shillary 2.0. Biden's record is long and more reputable than Kamala, who will BLOW her political rhetoric in whichever direction that advances her career.

I cringe at the thought of folks being swayed by these moments
Another Bear
How long do you want to ignore this user?


Ignorance is bliss but also amazingly dumb and stupid.
GBear4Life
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Don't throw stones at these people.

You've been in full meltdown mode for nearly 3 years. This board is like your Dear Diary.
Anarchistbear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
GBear4Life said:

The Kamala attack on Biden was substantively weak and employed identity politics and virtue signaling over substance. Nothing like starting an attack with "I'm not calling you a racist, but..."

I don't think Biden got "destroyed" and thought he handled himself well. The exchange was perceived as a knockout because of the tactics Kamala used, which makes great copy, as others on this thread have already noted.

I cringe at the thought of folks being swayed by these moments


I disagree that he handled it well. His reply was that he was against federally mandated busing- in other words for "states rights." She pounced on that because we all know that states rights was the view of segregation in opposing federal enforcement of equal rights. So not only did he align himself with Eastland and the others racists by his stupid example of working with them, he doubled down on his stupidity by adopting their argument.

Now granted busing was very nuanced but he did nothing to put his opposition in any context
Cal Junkie
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Another Bear said:



Ignorance is bliss but also amazingly dumb and stupid.
There is no reaching tRumpstes. For the present time being we're better off trying to encourage 50 people to vote, rather than try to convince one red hat knucklehead to change their mind.
sycasey
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Anarchistbear said:

GBear4Life said:

The Kamala attack on Biden was substantively weak and employed identity politics and virtue signaling over substance. Nothing like starting an attack with "I'm not calling you a racist, but..."

I don't think Biden got "destroyed" and thought he handled himself well. The exchange was perceived as a knockout because of the tactics Kamala used, which makes great copy, as others on this thread have already noted.

I cringe at the thought of folks being swayed by these moments


I disagree that he handled it well. His reply was that he was against federally mandated busing- in other words for "states rights." She pounced on that because we all know that states rights was the view of segregation in opposing federal enforcement of equal rights. So not only did he align himself with Eastland and the others racists by his stupid example of working with them, he doubled down on his stupidity by adopting their argument.

Now granted busing was very nuanced but he did nothing to put his opposition in any context

Bingo. There's a good argument to be made against busing but he didn't do it.

Plus when I listened to the full response it started okay and then became very rambly and confused. Biden also needs to make the case that he's not too old and he didn't help himself there either.
B.A. Bearacus
How long do you want to ignore this user?

Republicans, do your job over the next few weeks (likes, retweets, anything you can) and help amplify Russia's efforts to propagate this narrative: Kamala vs. real African Americans.
BearNIt
How long do you want to ignore this user?
At one point during the debate a question was asked of all the candidates concerning supplying healthcare for undocumented immigrants and everyone raised their hand in the affirmative. At a time when not every American has healthcare why would the candidates agree with this? Do they understand how this plays to most of America? Who is going to pay for this? Are we really going to start paying for surgeries and treatments for people who can't get healthcare in their own countries and who decide that they will come to the U.S. illegally so they can get treatment? What will be the economic impact on Hospitals throughout the country that would be tasked with providing care? Will these hospitals get reimbursed at the Medicare rate for providing services? Am I missing something?
Anarchistbear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
sycasey said:

Anarchistbear said:

GBear4Life said:

The Kamala attack on Biden was substantively weak and employed identity politics and virtue signaling over substance. Nothing like starting an attack with "I'm not calling you a racist, but..."

I don't think Biden got "destroyed" and thought he handled himself well. The exchange was perceived as a knockout because of the tactics Kamala used, which makes great copy, as others on this thread have already noted.

I cringe at the thought of folks being swayed by these moments


I disagree that he handled it well. His reply was that he was against federally mandated busing- in other words for "states rights." She pounced on that because we all know that states rights was the view of segregation in opposing federal enforcement of equal rights. So not only did he align himself with Eastland and the others racists by his stupid example of working with them, he doubled down on his stupidity by adopting their argument.

Now granted busing was very nuanced but he did nothing to put his opposition in any context

Bingo. There's a good argument to be made against busing but he didn't do it.

Plus when I listened to the full response it started okay and then became very rambly and confused. Biden also needs to make the case that he's not too old and he didn't help himself there either.


I'm not even sure it was his worst moment. He answered for his vote for the Iraq War by saying he worked hard to get the troops and his son home! No, you put them there you dumb f$ck.

Then there was the VEEP worthy " is your hand raised or not raised, Mr Vice President. The inability to swat the little mosquito Eric Swalwell. Michael Bennett pointing out his great " win" wasn't one, etc, etc.

This guy is a disaster and has been on the wrong side of history for most of his career- on war, banking, crime, women, etc. Harris also ripped him and The Deporter in Chief on immigration,

His only reason for being on the stage is that Obama dubbed him VP which he attributes to his great Civil Rights record. No , he picked you to reassure white people
Another Bear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
A New Racist Campaign Against Kamala Harris Is Taking Shape

Quote:

"Seeing the tweets declaring that Kamala isn't black enough because her parents are from Jamaica and India, I had an immediate flashback to the 2008 campaign."


Surprise, surprise!!! *********fccking Russkies.



Anarchistbear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Another Bear said:

A New Racist Campaign Against Kamala Harris Is Taking Shape

Quote:

"Seeing the tweets declaring that Kamala isn't black enough because her parents are from Jamaica and India, I had an immediate flashback to the 2008 campaign."


Surprise, surprise!!! *********fccking Russkies.






You should start your very own OT: Trump, Russia and Kamala Harris Thread.
GBear4Life
How long do you want to ignore this user?
She injected her race into the debate as a crutch to pander. And now some (for whatever reason: to troll etc) are pointing out both her AND her minority parents did not experience the stereotypical woe-is-me American Black experience, something she tried to employ to virtue signal and grandstand.

Another reason why identity politics is bad, and everybody loses. Irrational injection of race is invitation to irrational identity semantics from the other side.

They're both wrong. She is, in fact, half black - and her blackness (race) is, in fact, irrelevant.
Another Bear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Anarchistbear said:

Another Bear said:

A New Racist Campaign Against Kamala Harris Is Taking Shape

Quote:

"Seeing the tweets declaring that Kamala isn't black enough because her parents are from Jamaica and India, I had an immediate flashback to the 2008 campaign."


Surprise, surprise!!! *********fccking Russkies.






You should start your very own OT: Trump, Russia and Kamala Harris Thread.
Right after you start your anarchist wall flower on the sidelines thread. Have at it laddie...we're waiting!
Anarchistbear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Well done! Join me in destroying the authoritarian state.
BearNIt
How long do you want to ignore this user?
GBear4Life said:

She injected her race into the debate as a crutch to pander. And now some (for whatever reason: to troll etc) are pointing out both her AND her minority parents did not experience the stereotypical woe-is-me American Black experience, something she tried to employ to virtue signal and grandstand.

Another reason why identity politics is bad, and everybody loses. Irrational injection of race is invitation to irrational identity semantics from the other side.

They're both wrong. She is, in fact, half black - and her blackness (race) is, in fact, irrelevant.
Your understanding of race in America and the historical effect that it had on minorities is woefully lacking. Until the issue of race is dealt with in a comprehensive manner it will remain the 800 lb. gorilla in America. It is race that brought about slavery, Jim Crow, lynchings, the sentencing disparities concerning black vs white for possession of drugs like cocaine during the 80s and 90s, the need for civil rights, voting rights, desegregation, the 13TH, 14TH, and 15TH amendments, and we still haven't figured it out.

In the U.S. if you are part black, you are considered black by definition. To say that Harris' race is irrelevant is incorrect as it still influences a large number voters. Race still plays a major role in this country. If you don't think so then look at Charlottesville when there were marchers with torches shouting, "Jews will not replace us". Just because your parents live in an upscale community doesn't mean that racism magically disappears. Nobody can tell how much money you have just by looking at you. For most race is the first thing that they see and with that comes preconceived ideas about who you are.

Yes, she spoke up when the topic turned to race. She might as a person of color have key insights to the topic and yes she used it to score points, much like some last night used their age or a police shooting to pander and score points. That's is what politicians running for POTUS do, they score points when they can. (See Trump's Tweets)
dajo9
How long do you want to ignore this user?
You are talking to a buzzword regurtitating wall
An old white dude
GBear4Life
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Nowhere have I said that race doesn't matter to some people -- that is precisely the problem. The great civil rights activists were pleading for us as a culture to stop caring about race.

We have deluded ourselves into thinking caring about it more will unify us. Wrong. So wrong.

If you were standing in a room full of racists, what would be the one remedy to end their racism? For them to stop caring about race. By not caring about race (not to be conflated with not being aware of difference races and cultural backgrounds when you look at people), you cannot, by definition, be prejudice on the basis of race, because it becomes an arbitrary peripheral characteristic like hair color. Presuming nothing about an individual on the basis of their immutable characteristics is the goal of the civil rights movement.

And no, I don't think pandering to irrational mobs' obsession with race and identity politics is being part of the solution.

You are not just apologizing for politicians employing race, you are apologizing for people generally who do this. And of course, when other identitarian groups employ these same tactics, it magically becomes an alarming development.

You play identity politics, you get more of it. And race doesn't give anybody extra insight or less insight into anything -- sometimes, their experiences do.
Golden One
How long do you want to ignore this user?
BearNIt said:

At one point during the debate a question was asked of all the candidates concerning supplying healthcare for undocumented immigrants and everyone raised their hand in the affirmative. At a time when not every American has healthcare why would the candidates agree with this? Do they understand how this plays to most of America? Who is going to pay for this? Are we really going to start paying for surgeries and treatments for people who can't get healthcare in their own countries and who decide that they will come to the U.S. illegally so they can get treatment? What will be the economic impact on Hospitals throughout the country that would be tasked with providing care? Will these hospitals get reimbursed at the Medicare rate for providing services? Am I missing something?
You're not missing anything. The candidates are just pandering to their newest constituency--illegals and their relatives in the U.S. It's downright shamefull and providing a huge issue for Trump to take advantage of during the election. As Doug Schoen, Democratic consultant, said this afternoon, Trump was the big winner last evening.
GBear4Life
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Golden One said:

BearNIt said:

At one point during the debate a question was asked of all the candidates concerning supplying healthcare for undocumented immigrants and everyone raised their hand in the affirmative. At a time when not every American has healthcare why would the candidates agree with this? Do they understand how this plays to most of America? Who is going to pay for this? Are we really going to start paying for surgeries and treatments for people who can't get healthcare in their own countries and who decide that they will come to the U.S. illegally so they can get treatment? What will be the economic impact on Hospitals throughout the country that would be tasked with providing care? Will these hospitals get reimbursed at the Medicare rate for providing services? Am I missing something?
You're not missing anything. The candidates are just pandering to their newest constituency--illegals and their relatives in the U.S. It's downright shamefull and providing a huge issue for Trump to take advantage of during the election. As Doug Schoen, Democratic consultant, said this afternoon, Trump was the big winner last evening.
To be fair, they all raised their hand in the context of universal health care -- either single payer or a medicare for all those "in need -- which is them saying we're going to give all Americans health care....as well as illegal immigrants.

It's still an absurd notion that won't play well, but it's not like they want Americans who won't have access to health care to pay for care for illegals.
Another Bear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Anarchistbear said:

Well done! Join me in destroying the authoritarian state.
Okay sign me up...in 10 years. That's when things will break IMO. The last of the boomers have to retire or reach 65. That will mark generational change...then need a historic event (like 9/11) that must be capitalized on...but for the good of the people (now what Dubya did) and against the usual suspects (status quo, military industrial complex, corporate tax breaks, etc.) Of course it could happen sooner but something bad or catastrophic has to happen. Also Gramsci will have a say in this.
GBear4Life
How long do you want to ignore this user?
It seems like every election cycle, people try to convince us we're in the worst of times. We're always at a crossroads, on the verge of armageddon despite most notable metrics saying otherwise.



calpoly
How long do you want to ignore this user?
GBear4Life said:

It seems like every election cycle, people try to convince us we're in the worst of times. We're always at a crossroads, on the verge of armageddon despite most notable metrics saying otherwise.



Speaking of worst of time...How is the deficit?
Anarchistbear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Another Bear said:

Anarchistbear said:

Well done! Join me in destroying the authoritarian state.
Okay sign me up...in 10 years. That's when things will break IMO. The last of the boomers have to retire or reach 65. That will mark generational change...then need a historic event (like 9/11) that must be capitalized on...but for the good of the people (now what Dubya did) and against the usual suspects (status quo, military industrial complex, corporate tax breaks, etc.) Of course it could happen sooner but something bad or catastrophic has to happen. Also Gramsci will have a say in this.


I think it will happen sooner. The young are dispossessed. Alienation rules us be it violence, apathy, drug addiction, Facebook or pornography. Has there ever been a society more obsessed with health and less healthy than this one? . Watching last night's debate was really the reckoning of of the repudiation of the last 50 years of The Capitalist State of America


"Capital" [...] in the political field is analogous to "government". [...] The economic idea of capitalism, the politics of government or of authority, and the theological idea of the Church are three identical ideas, linked in various ways. To attack one of them is equivalent to attacking all of them. [...] What capital does to labour, and the State to liberty, the Church does to the spirit. This trinity of absolutism is as baneful in practice as it is in philosophy. The most effective means for oppressing the people would be simultaneously to enslave its body, its will and its reason.


kelly09
How long do you want to ignore this user?
GBear4Life said:

She injected her race into the debate as a crutch to pander. And now some (for whatever reason: to troll etc) are pointing out both her AND her minority parents did not experience the stereotypical woe-is-me American Black experience, something she tried to employ to virtue signal and grandstand.

Another reason why identity politics is bad, and everybody loses. Irrational injection of race is invitation to irrational identity semantics from the other side.

They're both wrong. She is, in fact, half black - and her blackness (race) is, in fact, irrelevant.
Absolutely right on.
bearister
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Another Bear said:

... The last of the boomers have to retire or reach 65. ... .







Cancel my subscription to the Resurrection
Send my credentials to the House of Detention
I got some friends inside
sycasey
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Golden One said:

BearNIt said:

At one point during the debate a question was asked of all the candidates concerning supplying healthcare for undocumented immigrants and everyone raised their hand in the affirmative. At a time when not every American has healthcare why would the candidates agree with this? Do they understand how this plays to most of America? Who is going to pay for this? Are we really going to start paying for surgeries and treatments for people who can't get healthcare in their own countries and who decide that they will come to the U.S. illegally so they can get treatment? What will be the economic impact on Hospitals throughout the country that would be tasked with providing care? Will these hospitals get reimbursed at the Medicare rate for providing services? Am I missing something?
You're not missing anything. The candidates are just pandering to their newest constituency--illegals and their relatives in the U.S. It's downright shamefull and providing a huge issue for Trump to take advantage of during the election. As Doug Schoen, Democratic consultant, said this afternoon, Trump was the big winner last evening.
Ah yes, illegal immigrants are such a valuable voting bloc.

Is it not possible they and/or Democratic voters might actually believe in some of this stuff on principle?
sycasey
How long do you want to ignore this user?
My personal take on the immigration stuff: 20 years ago it was definitely a loser to suggest that undocumented immigrants should have access to public services. The Democrats who are now starting to support some of that are probably betting that (1) their own base voters are moving in that direction, after years of frustration with Congress doing nothing to fix the immigration system, and (2) the Trump Administration's cruel treatment of immigrant families is going to turn public sympathy in favor of the immigrants.

We'll see who is right, but I don't think the above possibility can just be dismissed out of hand. The fact that mainstream candidates are even willing to talk about such things indicates that there has already been movement.
GBear4Life
How long do you want to ignore this user?
sycasey said:



Ah yes, illegal immigrants are such a valuable voting bloc.

Is it not possible they and/or Democratic voters might actually believe in some of this stuff on principle?
It's not the illegals that provide a significant voting block for Dems, it's the moronic liberals who are committed to this incoherent pathology.

No, it is not possible for these Dems to actually believe this stuff unless they have a mental illness, which I don't believe any of them do
sycasey
How long do you want to ignore this user?
GBear4Life said:

sycasey said:



Ah yes, illegal immigrants are such a valuable voting bloc.

Is it not possible they and/or Democratic voters might actually believe in some of this stuff on principle?
It's not the illegals that provide a significant voting block for Dems, it's the moronic liberals who are committed to this incoherent pathology.

So in other words, they are trying to represent their constituency. Horrible!
Eastern Oregon Bear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
bearister said:

Another Bear said:

... The last of the boomers have to retire or reach 65. ... .








You probably think you're jesting, but the future is now.

Get your Soylent products here!
Eastern Oregon Bear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
calpoly said:

GBear4Life said:

It seems like every election cycle, people try to convince us we're in the worst of times. We're always at a crossroads, on the verge of armageddon despite most notable metrics saying otherwise.



Speaking of worst of time...How is the deficit?
You gotta keep up. Deficits don't matter now that a Republican is in the White House.
 
×
Verify your student status
See Subscription Benefits
Trial only available to users who have never subscribed or participated in a previous trial.