2020 Election - Catch-all Thread

47,781 Views | 1420 Replies | Last: 4 hrs ago by Professor Turgeson Bear
concordtom
How long do you want to ignore this user?
dajo9 said:

sycasey said:

dajo9 said:

Not really.

We have actual conservatives enacting economic policy. What they do is what it is.
Reagan was really successful at defining "economic conservative" as something other than what conservatives actually did.


True. I refuse to accept the lies. Concordtom should see it for what it is.
I do.
You don't if you accept a false label.
concordtom
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Unit2Sucks said:


Harris at the top of the ticket could work. I'm not sure how she would do at governing either but I would have more faith in her than Bernie.

Of course, if voters could get over the fact that she dated Willie Brown because apparently having dated a black guy is disqualifying for people like ConcordTom.

woah, buddy! Those are fighting words.
Even with as much as I share about myself here, you have little understanding of who I am and what my journey has been. And the pertinent part about it here, I am not going to share with you, because that is none of your business.
The next time you choose to throw out racists bs like that, be prepared to receive a sock in the face!
No, seriously, you are WAY out of bounds with that comment and need to rethink yourself!

My problem with Harris and Brown has nothing to do with race. It has everything to do with the age difference and the power-disparity between them. My impression of Willie Brown was not a favorable one. Yet, he found some nice young attractive gal, and she accepted him into her life. Now, I don't know what their relationship was like, but I do not respect folks that sleep around as a matter of convenience.

Shame on you for throwing around the racist lie. Go see my comments above about Obama.

Maybe you were just trying to light my fire.
Congrats, it worked.
dajo9
How long do you want to ignore this user?
concordtom said:

dajo9 said:

Not really.

We have actual conservatives enacting economic policy. What they do is what it is.
It's not financially conservative to run trillion dollar surpluses.
They call themselves conservative, but they are not.
Don't you also call them conservatives! They are fiscally irresponsible!


Call me old fashioned but I believe you are what you do
An old white dude
concordtom
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Exactly.
And they are NOT conservative.
So don't accept the label.
Unit2Sucks
How long do you want to ignore this user?
CT - I actually have a pretty good sense that you aren't bringing up the Willie Brown thing out of racism but look at how it reads and how it will be used by right wing Pravda.

Trump nails porn stars while his wife is pregnant and it didn't stop him from becoming president. Why would the fact thst Harris dated an older gentleman 20+ years ago have any relevance to her ascendancy?

In your response above you are essentially attacking Brown for the relationship yet you continue to bring it up as a red flag on Harris. You might think you have the right motivations but you are amplifying Faux News when you do so.

Might want to rethink that one or continue to come off as out of touch.


concordtom said:

Unit2Sucks said:


Harris at the top of the ticket could work. I'm not sure how she would do at governing either but I would have more faith in her than Bernie.

Of course, if voters could get over the fact that she dated Willie Brown because apparently having dated a black guy is disqualifying for people like ConcordTom.

woah, buddy! Those are fighting words.
Even with as much as I share about myself here, you have little understanding of who I am and what my journey has been. And the pertinent part about it here, I am not going to share with you, because that is none of your business.
The next time you choose to throw out racists bs like that, be prepared to receive a sock in the face!
No, seriously, you are WAY out of bounds with that comment and need to rethink yourself!

My problem with Harris and Brown has nothing to do with race. It has everything to do with the age difference and the power-disparity between them. My impression of Willie Brown was not a favorable one. Yet, he found some nice young attractive gal, and she accepted him into her life. Now, I don't know what their relationship was like, but I do not respect folks that sleep around as a matter of convenience.

Shame on you for throwing around the racist lie. Go see my comments above about Obama.
Anarchistbear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Sexual relations don't have to be defined in terms of victims or "power" and " powerless"- this is pretty disparaging of women who can enter into sex for their own purposes and have their own power. She was an ambitious woman who f$cked an older man. So what? I suspect she got out of the relationship what she put into it. So did Willie. I'm not a Kamala Harris fan but this is trivial in the scheme of things.
Another Bear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Yogi Bear said:

dajo9 said:

Bernie Sanders looks like the clear front runner to me. His energized base would clean Biden's clock in early primaries. Those two are getting double the polling of others.

I think a Sanders / Harris ticket would be pretty formidable.
https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2020/president/us/2020_democratic_presidential_nomination-6730.html
I don't want Biden. I like him personally and as VP. As POTUS, his ability to gaff and put his foot in his mouth will be attacked. Mostly however he's been an insider for a very, long time. Some admirable things but also some weird crap, like the Clarence Thomas confirmation and how he questioned Anita Hill. Yes that was a long time ago but it's on tape. To use a FB analogy, this is like signing a 42 y.o. journeyman QB to run a title contender when there's better talent out there.
YMMV. Have a nice day. Enjoy the sunshine. Smoke two joints. That's what she said.
Yogi Bear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Another Bear said:

Yogi Bear said:

dajo9 said:

Bernie Sanders looks like the clear front runner to me. His energized base would clean Biden's clock in early primaries. Those two are getting double the polling of others.

I think a Sanders / Harris ticket would be pretty formidable.
https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2020/president/us/2020_democratic_presidential_nomination-6730.html
I don't want Biden. I like him personally and as VP.
As a person, I agree. As a president, compared to Trump he would be a breath of fresh air. But I want someone who is energized about making big changes. He would be a business as usual president and that's not enough for what we need.
Another Bear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Yogi Bear said:

Another Bear said:

Yogi Bear said:

dajo9 said:

Bernie Sanders looks like the clear front runner to me. His energized base would clean Biden's clock in early primaries. Those two are getting double the polling of others.

I think a Sanders / Harris ticket would be pretty formidable.
https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2020/president/us/2020_democratic_presidential_nomination-6730.html
I don't want Biden. I like him personally and as VP.
As a person, I agree. As a president, compared to Trump he would be a breath of fresh air. But I want someone who is energized about making big changes. He would be a business as usual president and that's not enough for what we need.
Well anyone compared to Trump looks better or GREAT. Agree Biden would be business as usual and we can't afford that, not with the transition and the GOP being illogical and just nuts. Need someone who can clapback and punch hard, and new ideas.
YMMV. Have a nice day. Enjoy the sunshine. Smoke two joints. That's what she said.
sycasey
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Another Bear said:

Yogi Bear said:

dajo9 said:

Bernie Sanders looks like the clear front runner to me. His energized base would clean Biden's clock in early primaries. Those two are getting double the polling of others.

I think a Sanders / Harris ticket would be pretty formidable.
https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2020/president/us/2020_democratic_presidential_nomination-6730.html
I don't want Biden. I like him personally and as VP. As POTUS, his ability to gaff and put his foot in his mouth will be attacked. Mostly however he's been an insider for a very, long time. Some admirable things but also some weird crap, like the Clarence Thomas confirmation and how he questioned Anita Hill. Yes that was a long time ago but it's on tape. To use a FB analogy, this is like signing a 42 y.o. journeyman QB to run a title contender when there's better talent out there.
It's worth noting that whenever Biden has tried to actually run for President he's done poorly. I'm not sure he'd actually be good on the stump. His polling right now is good, but also a lot of it is name recognition.
BearsWiin
How long do you want to ignore this user?
concordtom said:

dajo9 said:

Not really.

We have actual conservatives enacting economic policy. What they do is what it is.
It's not financially conservative to run trillion dollar surpluses.
They call themselves conservative, but they are not.
Don't you also call them conservatives! They are fiscally irresponsible!
Fiscal conservative doesn't mean wanting balanced budgets. Social liberals want balanced budgets, too. Fiscal conservative means wanting low taxes and limited government. You can't be a fiscal conservative and a social liberal because the things that social liberals want require major government involvement and higher taxes.

As an aside, Mayor Pete killed it on the CNN Town Hall this evening. Hope more than a dozen people nationwide were watching
B.A. Bearacus
How long do you want to ignore this user?
BearsWiin said:

As an aside, Mayor Pete killed it on the CNN Town Hall this evening. Hope more than a dozen people nationwide were watching
He's a complete unknown to me, and I haven't watched this townhall (yet), but David Axelrod agrees with you.

Unit2Sucks
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Mayor Pete is probably playing to make a name for himself and of course have a shot at the VP.

As for the discussion of whether one can be a social liberal and fiscal conservative, I do think it's possible to fit that description, although of course not as defined by the current strand of progressive thought. You can be a social liberal in favor of all of the cost less social policies (freedom of choice, anti discrimination, sensible gun control, liberal immigration and nationalization, etc.) while still being in favor of reasonable limits on government spending. If you cut military spending significantly, you get there. I suppose the environment is a big differentiator because there are some economic costs associated with regulation, but I don't think that's necessarily inconsistent with the position.

You can still consider yourself a social liberal even if you aren't in favor of Medicare for all, UBI or free college. You can still consider yourself a fiscal conservative if you favor single payer healthcare backed by a business tax (especially one thst roughly matches what businesses are already paying for employee health benefits).
BearsWiin
How long do you want to ignore this user?
B.A. Bearacus said:

BearsWiin said:

As an aside, Mayor Pete killed it on the CNN Town Hall this evening. Hope more than a dozen people nationwide were watching
He's a complete unknown to me, and I haven't watched this townhall (yet), but David Axelrod agrees with you.



Do yourself a favor and take a look at his performance on CNN tonight. Or, if you'd like, take a look at his Pod Save America appearance from about two weeks ago. He says a lot of the same things in those two appearances.



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

concordtom said:

dajo9 said:

Not really.

We have actual conservatives enacting economic policy. What they do is what it is.
It's not financially conservative to run trillion dollar surpluses.
They call themselves conservative, but they are not.
Don't you also call them conservatives! They are fiscally irresponsible!
Fiscal conservative doesn't mean wanting balanced budgets. Social liberals want balanced budgets, too. Fiscal conservative means wanting low taxes and limited government. You can't be a fiscal conservative and a social liberal because the things that social liberals want require major government involvement and higher taxes.

As an aside, Mayor Pete killed it on the CNN Town Hall this evening. Hope more than a dozen people nationwide were watching
You have deflated my faith in the ability of intelligent BI'ers to have sage discussion, because that's a bunch of gobblygook that you just wrote. Do you want me to break down why? Or maybe don't even bother.

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

Sexual relations don't have to be defined in terms of victims or "power" and " powerless"- this is pretty disparaging of women who can enter into sex for their own purposes and have their own power. She was an ambitious woman who f$cked an older man. So what? I suspect she got out of the relationship what she put into it. So did Willie. I'm not a Kamala Harris fan but this is trivial in the scheme of things.
I didn't say she was powerless. Clearly (it seems to me in my shallow understanding of their relationship) they used each other, and that bothers me.

I DO want our leaders to maintain a high level or morality in their personal lives.
Being president, to me, is about more than just policy. It's also about being a role model.
concordtom
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Unit2Sucks said:

CT - I actually have a pretty good sense that you aren't bringing up the Willie Brown thing out of racism but look at how it reads and how it will be used by right wing Pravda.

Trump nails porn stars while his wife is pregnant and it didn't stop him from becoming president. Why would the fact thst Harris dated an older gentleman 20+ years ago have any relevance to her ascendancy?

In your response above you are essentially attacking Brown for the relationship yet you continue to bring it up as a red flag on Harris. You might think you have the right motivations but you are amplifying Faux News when you do so.

Might want to rethink that one or continue to come off as out of touch.
If you don't think I'm basing my judgment here on race, then don't be the right wing Pravda and make the case that I am.

I never said it was acceptable that trump is the sexual scumbag that he is. Quite to the contrary. He disqualified himself long time ago!! Before even running. And that disregards any of his sexual escapades.

Fake news? I offered an opinion. Where is the "news" in that?

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

BearsWiin said:

concordtom said:

dajo9 said:

Not really.

We have actual conservatives enacting economic policy. What they do is what it is.
It's not financially conservative to run trillion dollar surpluses.
They call themselves conservative, but they are not.
Don't you also call them conservatives! They are fiscally irresponsible!
Fiscal conservative doesn't mean wanting balanced budgets. Social liberals want balanced budgets, too. Fiscal conservative means wanting low taxes and limited government. You can't be a fiscal conservative and a social liberal because the things that social liberals want require major government involvement and higher taxes.

As an aside, Mayor Pete killed it on the CNN Town Hall this evening. Hope more than a dozen people nationwide were watching
You have deflated my faith in the ability of intelligent BI'ers to have sage discussion, because that's a bunch of gobblygook that you just wrote. Do you want me to break down why? Or maybe don't even bother.


Look, I get it, you want balanced budgets and the government to stay out of your metaphorical bedroom. Who doesn't? I used to say that same thing of myself until I realized how meaningless the characterization really was.

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

Another Bear said:

Yogi Bear said:

dajo9 said:

Bernie Sanders looks like the clear front runner to me. His energized base would clean Biden's clock in early primaries. Those two are getting double the polling of others.

I think a Sanders / Harris ticket would be pretty formidable.
https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2020/president/us/2020_democratic_presidential_nomination-6730.html
I don't want Biden. I like him personally and as VP. As POTUS, his ability to gaff and put his foot in his mouth will be attacked. Mostly however he's been an insider for a very, long time. Some admirable things but also some weird crap, like the Clarence Thomas confirmation and how he questioned Anita Hill. Yes that was a long time ago but it's on tape. To use a FB analogy, this is like signing a 42 y.o. journeyman QB to run a title contender when there's better talent out there.
It's worth noting that whenever Biden has tried to actually run for President he's done poorly. I'm not sure he'd actually be good on the stump. His polling right now is good, but also a lot of it is name recognition.
Yes, I remember. He's good at schmoozing the average person, very charming but under fire...he gaffs. He might be better "reacting" to people than stumping.
YMMV. Have a nice day. Enjoy the sunshine. Smoke two joints. That's what she said.
blungld
How long do you want to ignore this user?
BearsWiin said:

B.A. Bearacus said:

BearsWiin said:

As an aside, Mayor Pete killed it on the CNN Town Hall this evening.


Do yourself a favor and take a look at his performance on CNN tonight.
I am all in on Butt!

"The Bear will not quilt, the Bear will not dye!"
Another Bear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
This editorial makes sense to me. People want a ringer who can beat (no destroy Trump) but there might be unintended consequences. To beat the new fascism and authoritarianism...need a hard reset. Not a retread.

The Trouble With Biden
Quote:

Defeating Trump isn't the same thing as defeating Trumpism

Quote:

As they begin their search for a nominee, most Democrats more than half, according to a February poll from Monmouth University prize electability above all else. They want a sure thing, someone who will beat President Trump.

But beating Trump isn't the same as beating Trumpism. Unseating the president won't automatically undermine the white resentment and racial chauvinism that drive his movement. That will depend on the nature of the campaign against him and whether it challenges the assumptions of his ideology or affirms them in the name of electoral pragmatism.

The possibility of defeating Trump without defeating Trumpism looms over Joe Biden's possible run for the 2020 Democratic nomination. The former vice president's not-yet-candidacy centers on his appeal to the white, blue-collar workers who rejected Hillary Clinton in favor of Donald Trump. He believes he could have won them in 2016, and he thinks he can win them now. This isn't just about Biden's working-class affect. As a senator from Delaware, Biden understood himself as a staunch defender of Middle American interests.
Articles goes on about how Biden was once at the cutting edge of change...in 1972 but he was also fence sitting a bit. He was against forced desegregation and busing in Delaware and it made sense then (to him, his constituents). Today, he's more establishment and that might not cut it with generational and demographic shifts.
YMMV. Have a nice day. Enjoy the sunshine. Smoke two joints. That's what she said.
Anarchistbear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Cutting edge in 1972





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

I am all in on Butt!
Boot-edge-edge.
Apparently lots of them in Malta.
Yogi Bear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Another Bear said:

This editorial makes sense to me. People want a ringer who can beat (no destroy Trump) but there might be unintended consequences. To beat the new fascism and authoritarianism...need a hard reset. Not a retread.

The Trouble With Biden
Quote:

Defeating Trump isn't the same thing as defeating Trumpism

Quote:

As they begin their search for a nominee, most Democrats more than half, according to a February poll from Monmouth University prize electability above all else. They want a sure thing, someone who will beat President Trump.

But beating Trump isn't the same as beating Trumpism. Unseating the president won't automatically undermine the white resentment and racial chauvinism that drive his movement. That will depend on the nature of the campaign against him and whether it challenges the assumptions of his ideology or affirms them in the name of electoral pragmatism.

The possibility of defeating Trump without defeating Trumpism looms over Joe Biden's possible run for the 2020 Democratic nomination. The former vice president's not-yet-candidacy centers on his appeal to the white, blue-collar workers who rejected Hillary Clinton in favor of Donald Trump. He believes he could have won them in 2016, and he thinks he can win them now. This isn't just about Biden's working-class affect. As a senator from Delaware, Biden understood himself as a staunch defender of Middle American interests.
Articles goes on about how Biden was once at the cutting edge of change...in 1972 but he was also fence sitting a bit. He was against forced desegregation and busing in Delaware and it made sense then (to him, his constituents). Today, he's more establishment and that might not cut it with generational and demographic shifts.
Politicians and major donors want Biden because they want someone that won't upset the apple cart. They want to win because of what it will enable them to do. Very few congressmen and senators want sweeping change. They want to take their turn at the trough.

Defeating Trumpism is folly. This country has had racist views as long as it's existed. If those people can no longer find other idiots who intentionally chose Trump over Hillary because they stupidly thought he'd be better, they'll go back to pushing their agendas under the radar like they did before Obama. But they won't be defeated. They're always going to be around, waiting for a time where they can come out from the dark and push their white nationalist crap in the open.
bearister
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Anarchistbear said:

Cutting edge in 1972







He looks like he has Russian hands and Roman fingers.
Cancel my subscription to the Resurrection
Send my credentials to the House of Detention
I got some friends inside
Another Bear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Yogi Bear said:

Another Bear said:

This editorial makes sense to me. People want a ringer who can beat (no destroy Trump) but there might be unintended consequences. To beat the new fascism and authoritarianism...need a hard reset. Not a retread.

The Trouble With Biden
Quote:

Defeating Trump isn't the same thing as defeating Trumpism

Quote:

As they begin their search for a nominee, most Democrats more than half, according to a February poll from Monmouth University prize electability above all else. They want a sure thing, someone who will beat President Trump.

But beating Trump isn't the same as beating Trumpism. Unseating the president won't automatically undermine the white resentment and racial chauvinism that drive his movement. That will depend on the nature of the campaign against him and whether it challenges the assumptions of his ideology or affirms them in the name of electoral pragmatism.

The possibility of defeating Trump without defeating Trumpism looms over Joe Biden's possible run for the 2020 Democratic nomination. The former vice president's not-yet-candidacy centers on his appeal to the white, blue-collar workers who rejected Hillary Clinton in favor of Donald Trump. He believes he could have won them in 2016, and he thinks he can win them now. This isn't just about Biden's working-class affect. As a senator from Delaware, Biden understood himself as a staunch defender of Middle American interests.
Articles goes on about how Biden was once at the cutting edge of change...in 1972 but he was also fence sitting a bit. He was against forced desegregation and busing in Delaware and it made sense then (to him, his constituents). Today, he's more establishment and that might not cut it with generational and demographic shifts.
Politicians and major donors want Biden because they want someone that won't upset the apple cart. They want to win because of what it will enable them to do. Very few congressmen and senators want sweeping change. They want to take their turn at the trough.

Defeating Trumpism is folly. This country has had racist views as long as it's existed. If those people can no longer find other idiots who intentionally chose Trump over Hillary because they stupidly thought he'd be better, they'll go back to pushing their agendas under the radar like they did before Obama. But they won't be defeated. They're always going to be around, waiting for a time where they can come out from the dark and push their white nationalist crap in the open.

Disagree that defeating Turmpism is folly. Why? Because Trumpism is fascism, authoritarianism and the back end of that is global kleptocracy fueled by the Russians and the global .01%.

Racism, hate and division are being leveraged to divide and destabilize the U.S. and democracy. So is all hate. The whole gaslighting of facts, the whole "Truth isn't truth" crap is what is at stake. The U.S. has an unique history and race is very much part of it...and it's being used.

So how do we stop it? Lift all boats...help the white underclass/trump voters...but help everyone. When everyone is fed, secure and not/less stressed about making ends met...they're more humane to each other. Prosperity does that. That's how you fight the leverage of hate.

Divide and conquer is the oldest trick in the book and with race it's so easy in the U.S. That's why Trump is also killing off any healthcare reform, wants to make cuts on Social Security. Why? Because an unstable society is easier to control and manipulate...same a divided on race.
YMMV. Have a nice day. Enjoy the sunshine. Smoke two joints. That's what she said.
concordtom
How long do you want to ignore this user?
This dude is gonna run one day!
Wow.


From today:
Yogi Bear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
concordtom said:

This dude is gonna run one day!
Wow.


From today:

I'll never understand why his career didn't end at Mayor. Dude is a slime.
sycasey
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Yogi Bear said:

concordtom said:

This dude is gonna run one day!
Wow.


From today:

I'll never understand why his career didn't end at Mayor. Dude is a slime.
What makes you say so?
Anarchistbear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Facebook removed several Elizabeth Warren ads on its site that called for the break up of tech. Later, after the story went public they relented and allowed them.
concordtom
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Yogi Bear said:

I'll never understand why his career didn't end at Mayor. Dude is a slime.
Honestly, I don't know him.
Why do you say that?
I just liked the interview.
concordtom
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Anarchistbear said:

Facebook removed several Elizabeth Warren ads on its site that called for the break up of tech. Later, after the story went public they relented and allowed them.
Ha. I saw her yell that it was time to finally break up the tech giants.
Wow.
I'm not sure that's a winning strategy!!
The enemy is not the tech companies!!
Dumb angle.

She's got some good ideas, but is flawed.
Like a rocket scientist who parks by Braille.
Anarchistbear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
concordtom said:

Yogi Bear said:

I'll never understand why his career didn't end at Mayor. Dude is a slime.
Honestly, I don't know him.
Why do you say that?
I just liked the interview.


It may be time for more moral disillusionment for you. Newsome had a scandalous affair with his campaign manager's wife plus his ex wife Kimberly Guilfoyle is a Fox News babe and Donald Trump Jr's girlfriend. So he and Trump Jr have shared the same foxhole.

Also for someone who claims to be well informed you seem universally uninformed. Why is that?
concordtom
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Sure way to defeat Trump?

Biden-Flake ticket.
How many GOP would not go for that?
How many Dems would be so disgusted that they would vote Trump. Flake was anti trump enough to see him as a non-trump, which is mission #1.

Let Biden win the ticket, then declare his secret "beat Trump" VP candidate.

ha, I know this is nuts, but I just can't wait for trump to go down.

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

concordtom said:

Yogi Bear said:

I'll never understand why his career didn't end at Mayor. Dude is a slime.
Honestly, I don't know him.
Why do you say that?
I just liked the interview.


It may be time for more moral disillusionment for you. Newsome had a scandalous affair with his campaign manager's wife plus his ex wife Kimberly Guilfoyle is a Fox News babe and Donald Trump Jr's girlfriend. So he and Trump Jr have shared the same foxhole.

Also for someone who claims to be well informed you seem universally uninformed. Why is that?
I didn't know about the wife affair.
I did know about his ex-wife and trump jr.
Foxhole, ha, that's funny!

Uh, let's just say that it's because I didn't go to Cal. We can both chuckle about that fact without further barbs.
 
×
Verify your student status
See Subscription Benefits
Trial only available to users who have never subscribed or participated in a previous trial.