2020 US Presidential Nominees

[pjcrows]

Fair call, with the only blip being FDR.

 

[FredLeDeux]

Most of the analysis in that article is pretty dense.

Yes, it's just a repeat of the same two hackneyed anti-Sanders "argument" his opponents have been making for 6 years.

 

[Les Malone]

Geezus Molly, where did this sudden and (on your part) totally unprecedented concern with "fairness" spring from?

Is that one of the cards they told you to play when things got desperate?

So that's a no then ?.

and

you still cant back up any of your claims.

TBH, i am pretty sure i can't out child you.

you win ... but nothing.

 

[FredLeDeux]

Fair call, with the only blip being FDR.

Aahh, but he was "a class traitor", didn't you hear?

 

[happy_eagle]

What sort of statement is that?.

Stop barracking for the Eagles, they don't need you, probably don't know you exist.

Political parties are not sports teams

 

[happy_eagle]

Bit of back and forth

 

[FredLeDeux]

So that's a no then ?.

and

you still cant back up any of your claims.

TBH, i am pretty sure i can't out child you.

you win ... but nothing.

See you again sometime Molly, sorry if no pay today means you go hungry this week.

 

[Les Malone]

Political parties are not sports teams

Cut and dried then.

Because no one barracks or is one eyed for a political party like a football team.

That's that then.

 

[Les Malone]

See you again sometime Molly, sorry if no pay today means you go hungry this week.

You are such a winner Fried, its beyond me how you lower yourself to right the working classes of all their ills on bigfooty.

 

[Cooldude]

Bit of back and forth

Pete's plan has an individual mandate so it isn't really a choice, is it? Get on my plan or get fined

 

[pjcrows]

Yes, it's just a repeat of the same two hackneyed anti-Sanders "argument" his opponents have been making for 6 years.

"They'll label him a high-taxing socialist".

They call any Democrat that.

"He only won by 2% in New Hampshire".

He faced 9 other opponents instead of 1.

"The NH exit poll demographic data didn't look great for Sanders"

It's New Hampshire.

"We need a centrist!"

Definitely worked in 2016...



There are so many similarities between the Dem primary race of 2019/20 and the Republican race of 2015/16. An establishment media that is at best totally clueless or, more likely, deliberately hostile.

 

[FredLeDeux]

"They'll label him a high-taxing socialist".

They call any Democrat that.

"He only won by 2% in New Hampshire".

He faced 9 other opponents instead of 1.

"The NH exit poll demographic data didn't look great for Sanders"

It's New Hampshire.

"We need a centrist!"

Definitely worked in 2016...



There are so many similarities between the Dem primary race of 2019/20 and the Republican race of 2015/16. An establishment media that is at best totally clueless or, more likely, deliberately hostile.

There is overwhelming evidence that "deliberately hostile" is it.

 

[Cooldude]

Looking at the polls, the red states will still vote Biden and Florida the Queensland of America, manages to pick the worst candidate again in Bloomberg

It's gonna be a contested convention

 

[pjcrows]

Looking at the polls, the red states will still vote Biden and Florida the Queensland of America, manages to pick the worst candidate again in Bloomberg

It's gonna be a contested convention

An establishment wet dream. They'd wait til the second round and launch Bloomberg or Biden in to the nomination, guaranteeing Trump a second term.

Anything to avoid Sanders.

 

[Nuggs Bunny]

Firstly, Republican presidential candidates have won the popular vote just once since 1990. They win elections despite that because of the quirks of the electoral college.

This is a pointless distinction because US elections aren't won on the popular vote. As such, I have edited your above statement to make it more concise.

Secondly, Trump's hostile takeover of the party involved them abandoning several long-held orthodoxies. How can you say they "stay true to their beliefs"? Conservatives have spent a generation arguing for free trade, the importance of institutions, law and order, US leadership in international affairs and the idea that character in office matters. That's all gone out the window.

So don't tell me that is the party that "stays true to their beliefs". Tax cuts for the wealthy are still on the menu but they've otherwise embraced the most naked, contradictory expedience in the interests of self-preservation and executive power.

If you're talking about culture war issues like guns, abortion and immigration, all wrapped up in racially tinged populist framing, that's just the red meat that gets fed to the low-information base to keep them voting against their own interests. That's not the party "staying true to its beliefs". It's entirely cynical.

These culture war issues may deliver sugar hits to the base but that's not the same as consistent adherence to coherent principles or "beliefs", unless you are talking about some kind of religious dogma informing policy positions. That horse bolted along with all those cherished conservative principles when Trump subverted the party to his own interests and the party's representatives in government embraced it.

Calling Trump a "hostile takeover" is patently ridiculous given that 1,441 delegates representing 60% of all Republican delegates in the 2016 primary voted for him to win the party nomination as their 2016 presidential candidate.

Trump won on a platform of removing Obama-era reforms, curbing the powers of the EPA and a pledge to safeguard the supposed personal rights of middle americans who feel under threat by things like gays getting married, brown people moving into your neighborhood and women having abortions. I'd be shocked if anybody thought those policies were out of step with what the Republicans have been championing since Reagan, let alone the last eight years they spent in the house under Obama. The republicans have always existed as a small government, low taxation, free market political party since they were founded 160 years ago; those are their core principles, not things like free trade which can be accepted or rejected as is convenient to the economy of the day.

Obama won two terms and left office with an approval rating nudging 60 percent.

If that's "shooting yourself in the foot" then the Democrats should do it over and over.

And then Trump won the election which should have been a cakewalk for the Democrats but yeah, that approval rating, that's the real legacy at the end of the day.

I have nothing against Obama, I feel he's often unfairly maligned for his lack of action which is due in no part to an extremely hostile house that he endured for six years, but his presidency had a minimal impact on the outcomes of most americans and that was a big factor in why anti-establishment candidates suddenly became vogue in 2016.

 

[FredLeDeux]

An establishment wet dream. They'd wait til the second round and launch Bloomberg or Biden in to the nomination, guaranteeing Trump a second term.

Anything to avoid Sanders.

And we still don't know whether Bloomberg has secretly agreed to finance the DNC like Clinton did.

 

[pjcrows]

And we still don't know whether Bloomberg has secretly agreed to finance the DNC like Clinton did.

Of course he is.

To be fair though, he's spent the better part of the last 30 years - including the last two years - funding Republicans.

Haha. What an ass-backwards political system.

 

[FireKrakouer]

One of them said I'd be the 'first up against the wall.'

I was so perturbed I had to leave the thread.

If they ever get you in front of a firing squad, simply kick the incoming bullets away with your high quality genuine leather steel-capped aussie made Blundstones. Once they're out of ammo, you know what to do.
#ROADHOUSE

 

[Sweet Jesus]

This is a pointless distinction because US elections aren't won on the popular vote. As such, I have edited your above statement to make it more concise.

It makes the point that Republican candidates aren't necessarily more popular, which is entirely relevant to the point you were making.

Calling Trump a "hostile takeover" is patently ridiculous given that 1,441 delegates representing 60% of all Republican delegates in the 2016 primary voted for him to win the party nomination as their 2016 presidential candidate.

It's not ridiculous at all. That's why the Republican establishment, including Fox News, tried to resist his nomination in 2015 and early 2016 before buckling.

Your point is that he beat the other candidates and won the nomination? Sure, but that's not the same as the establishment supporting him from the outset, which they clearly did not. Hence the expression "hostile takeover".

Trump won on a platform of removing Obama-era reforms, curbing the powers of the EPA and a pledge to safeguard the supposed personal rights of middle americans who feel under threat by things like gays getting married, brown people moving into your neighborhood and women having abortions. I'd be shocked if anybody thought those policies were out of step with what the Republicans have been championing since Reagan, let alone the last eight years they spent in the house under Obama. The republicans have always existed as a small government, low taxation, free market political party since they were founded 160 years ago; those are their core principles, not things like free trade which can be accepted or rejected as is convenient to the economy of the day.

That is a selective account of why Trump won.

But you say the Republicans have always been a "free market political party", but not necessarily in favour of free trade as a principle? How does that work? What does "free market" mean if they don't support free trade? Are they in favour of the free market but also supportive of tariffs? How does that work? Support for the free market and therefore free trade has been an article of faith for Republicans at least since Reagan, yet Trump eschewed it in favour of tariffs. If they're "free market" why do they support farm subsidies? It is an obvious reversal of long-standing conservative/Republican orthodoxy.

Other conservative bedrock ideas that have been abandoned include: the importance of institutions, law and order, US leadership in international affairs and the idea that moral character in high office matters. These have gone out the window under Trump. So to argue the conservatives have "stayed true to their beliefs" is patently nonsense. They jettisoned a smorgasbord of principles in order to embrace Trump.

You also mention gay marriage, but under Trump that culture war issue has basically been abandoned. Nor is it clear what Trump's actual position is when it comes to abortion.

And then Trump won the election which should have been a cakewalk for the Democrats but yeah, that approval rating, that's the real legacy at the end of the day.

Obama wasn't running against Trump. Had he been allowed to run, he most likely would have secured a third term.

If Obama winning two terms and leaving office with that kind of approval rating is "shooting themselves in the foot", the Democrats should be planning to do it again as much as possible.

I have nothing against Obama, I feel he's often unfairly maligned for his lack of action which is due in no part to an extremely hostile house that he endured for six years, but his presidency had a minimal impact on the outcomes of most americans and that was a big factor in why anti-establishment candidates suddenly became vogue in 2016.

Obama is not responsible for Trump. That's a jarring over-simplification.

 

[Cooldude]

An establishment wet dream. They'd wait til the second round and launch Bloomberg or Biden in to the nomination, guaranteeing Trump a second term.

Anything to avoid Sanders.

They spent 4 years whinging about an independent "taking over their party", but now they're okay with a Republican being their nominee

Oh wait, the republican billionaire would give them millions and millions of dollars

So that's what it's all about in the end, $$$$, that's all the DNC cares about

 

[Financialpanther]

If they ever get you in front of a firing squad, simply kick the incoming bullets away with your high quality genuine leather steel-capped aussie made Blundstones. Once they're out of ammo, you know what to do.
#ROADHOUSE

View attachment 823372

Sorry to break it to you but Blunnies aren’t Aussie made anymore.

 

[pjcrows]

They spent 4 years whinging about an independent "taking over their party", but now they're okay with a Republican being their nominee

Oh wait, the republican billionaire would give them millions and millions of dollars

So that's what it's all about in the end, $$$$, that's all the DNC cares about

That's all both party's establishments care about. Keep the gravy train rolling.

 

[Chameleon75]

They spent 4 years whinging about an independent "taking over their party", but now they're okay with a Republican being their nominee

Oh wait, the republican billionaire would give them millions and millions of dollars

So that's what it's all about in the end, $$$$, that's all the DNC cares about

Wait until the libs that jumped on the me too movement get behind the guy with dozens of sexual harassment and toxic workplace suits.

 

[Sweet Jesus]

They spent 4 years whinging about an independent "taking over their party", but now they're okay with a Republican being their nominee

Oh wait, the republican billionaire would give them millions and millions of dollars

So that's what it's all about in the end, $$$$, that's all the DNC cares about

Who is "they"? Clearly there are Democrats uncomfortable with Bloomberg's candidacy. To suggest otherwise is obviously misleading/dishonest.

 

[EasternTiger]

If they ever get you in front of a firing squad, simply kick the incoming bullets away with your high quality genuine leather steel-capped aussie made Blundstones. Once they're out of ammo, you know what to do.
#ROADHOUSE

View attachment 823372

Those blundstones have held me in good stead during fights against antifa operatives.

This thread is going well. It's like watching a group of hillbillys argue over which one of the 3 stooges they'd prefer to bed their sister.