villakram Posted March 7, 2020 Share Posted March 7, 2020 All this and more happened during Occupy protests a few years back too and then go all the way back to the 70s and long before that for rampant infiltration of political and union groups with any inkling of left type ideas. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Davkaus Posted March 8, 2020 Share Posted March 8, 2020 It's basically just "pick which senile person you want to run things". This guy isn't all there. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sne Posted March 8, 2020 Share Posted March 8, 2020 Has Trump tweeted anything about Gov. Andrew Cuomo declaring a state of emergency in New York? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
El Zen Posted March 8, 2020 Share Posted March 8, 2020 10 minutes ago, Davkaus said: It's basically just "pick which senile person you want to run things". This guy isn't all there. Biden’s not the most eloquent of speakers, but what he said there was perfectly fine. To paraphrase: ‘Getting bogged down in a negative primary campaign only serves to reelect Trump’. Nothing wrong with that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xann Posted March 8, 2020 Share Posted March 8, 2020 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bickster Posted March 8, 2020 Moderator Share Posted March 8, 2020 So both Trump and Pence were at CPAC Along with quite a few other cabinet members, White House Staffers etc and now someone who interacted with the organiser (who then interacted with Trump et al) has tested positive for CoVId-19 If both Trump and Pence cark it, that means... Step forward President Pelosi doesn't it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sne Posted March 8, 2020 Share Posted March 8, 2020 Apparently Trump is a massive germaphobe (among other things) who always carries hand sanitizer and alcogel with him at all times even before this. Almost at a Howard Hughes level obsessed with it. He's apparently known as "The Purell President" Would be a shame if he somehow avoids this but on the other hand his paranoia must be at an all time high. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Seat68 Posted March 8, 2020 Share Posted March 8, 2020 How will this play into rally's. He loves a rally, will he avoid them? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sne Posted March 8, 2020 Share Posted March 8, 2020 5 minutes ago, Seat68 said: How will this play into rally's. He loves a rally, will he avoid them? Quote The White House said neither President Trump nor Vice President Pence had been in close proximity to the infected person while attending the conference. “I’m not concerned at all,” the president said Saturday when asked about the coronavirus getting closer to the White House. “We’ll hold tremendous rallies,” he added when asked if he’ll continue big campaign events https://nypost.com/2020/03/07/cuomo-declares-state-of-emergency-as-new-york-state-coronavirus-cases-soar-to-76/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snowychap Posted March 8, 2020 Share Posted March 8, 2020 36 minutes ago, bickster said: Step forward President Pelosi You seem to have misspelt Putin. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chrisp65 Posted March 8, 2020 Share Posted March 8, 2020 Being heathens, I think you’re all forgetting the viral shield of sincere prayer. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sne Posted March 8, 2020 Share Posted March 8, 2020 19 minutes ago, chrisp65 said: Being heathens, I think you’re all forgetting the viral shield of sincere prayer. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chindie Posted March 11, 2020 VT Supporter Share Posted March 11, 2020 Biden with another winning round of primaries. Looks increasingly likely he's the nominee. Couple that to the fact the US very rarely ditches a President after 4 years unless the economy is struggling, and Trump looks ever more likely... Better hope the virus buggers the US. Or Trump at least. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LondonLax Posted March 11, 2020 Share Posted March 11, 2020 Well I was also thinking Trump was going to be a shoe in but with Corona Virus taking hold I’m now no so sure. If it runs anything like it has in Italy (and there’s no reason why it won’t) I reckon Trump will get some backlash. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
villakram Posted March 11, 2020 Share Posted March 11, 2020 The truth as to the actual moral and ethical position of all those dems protesting Trump based on a moral/ethical argument is now made clear. Sad. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blandy Posted March 11, 2020 Moderator Share Posted March 11, 2020 On 05/03/2020 at 16:49, HanoiVillan said: Saw this today and found it interesting: This is an extremely dumb thing for 'voters' to do, but obviously being angry at 'voters' is like being angry at the weather, so No, it isn't. It's exactly right, and exemplifies exactly what's wrong, IMO, with the Corbynite, Bernie-ite type of approach and mindset, in terms of winning elections. If the most important thing to a voter is some kind of idealistic moral purity, the true faith, the only enlightened path, then that's entirely their right to hold that view. But. But, it doesn't ever win elections. It can't. Because in places like the US, the UK etc there is a broad split between two parties - Dems and GOP or Tories and Lab. With a major chunk of the population always voting for "the other lot" in part because they are totally opposed to "your lots" policies and ideals, , "your lot" can only ever win by being able to appeal to the near edge of "the other lot" and pull them over to "our lot" . Going for a bloke (or woman) who tends to the Corbynite/Bernie-ite/Faragist/ extrme edge always repels too many persuadables so it can't win. That the voters with a magic wand would pick Warren shows them up well. They have the same ideals as her, but they know she can't win, so pragmatically they'd rather have a Biden, or another Dem than have more Trump. So it's a really bright thing for voters to do. They get a better outcome. Their party is much much more likely to win. They won't get all their wish list, but they'll get more of it than if Trump stays in place. I hope I explained that coherently. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HanoiVillan Posted March 11, 2020 Share Posted March 11, 2020 49 minutes ago, blandy said: No, it isn't. It's exactly right, and exemplifies exactly what's wrong, IMO, with the Corbynite, Bernie-ite type of approach and mindset, in terms of winning elections. If the most important thing to a voter is some kind of idealistic moral purity, the true faith, the only enlightened path, then that's entirely their right to hold that view. But. But, it doesn't ever win elections. It can't. Because in places like the US, the UK etc there is a broad split between two parties - Dems and GOP or Tories and Lab. With a major chunk of the population always voting for "the other lot" in part because they are totally opposed to "your lots" policies and ideals, , "your lot" can only ever win by being able to appeal to the near edge of "the other lot" and pull them over to "our lot" . Going for a bloke (or woman) who tends to the Corbynite/Bernie-ite/Faragist/ extrme edge always repels too many persuadables so it can't win. That the voters with a magic wand would pick Warren shows them up well. They have the same ideals as her, but they know she can't win, so pragmatically they'd rather have a Biden, or another Dem than have more Trump. So it's a really bright thing for voters to do. They get a better outcome. Their party is much much more likely to win. They won't get all their wish list, but they'll get more of it than if Trump stays in place. I hope I explained that coherently. The point I'm making is that it isn't 'a bright thing to do', because if you constantly reject the person you want to win, you never get the person you want. I'm not talking about individual voters making their decision, I'm talking about the decision en masse. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blandy Posted March 11, 2020 Moderator Share Posted March 11, 2020 1 minute ago, HanoiVillan said: The point I'm making is that it isn't 'a bright thing to do', because if you constantly reject the person you want to win, you never get the person you want. I'm not talking about individual voters making their decision, I'm talking about the decision en masse. Equally, if the Dem voters selected Warren in large numbers (like Labour ones selected Corbyn) then the result is....Trump and Tories, because not enough tories not enough Rep.s will ever vote for the more extreme, or even moderately extreme (if there is such a thing) ends of their opponents spectrum. Right now, Dems and Labourites absolutely have to pick the person most likely to beat the devil in charge. That they (at least in america) are starting to wise up to that is a good thing. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HanoiVillan Posted March 11, 2020 Share Posted March 11, 2020 1 minute ago, blandy said: Equally, if the Dem voters selected Warren in large numbers (like Labour ones selected Corbyn) then the result is....Trump and Tories, because not enough tories not enough Rep.s will ever vote for the more extreme, or even moderately extreme (if there is such a thing) ends of their opponents spectrum. Right now, Dems and Labourites absolutely have to pick the person most likely to beat the devil in charge. That they (at least in america) are starting to wise up to that is a good thing. You're discussing your view on 'electability'. That's fine, I don't agree with it, but whatever. That's not what I'm talking about though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
villakram Posted March 11, 2020 Share Posted March 11, 2020 (edited) @blandy That kind of thinking and voting strategy has lead to a steady move to the right by the US electorate over the past 50yrs. The "center" over here now lies to the right of the actual center. Of course, neo-liberal policies benefit those with, at the expense of those without, so there's that at least. The UK is doing likewise. Imho, allowing ourselves to be told about the electability of so and so by media organs owned and operated by those in the status quo doesn't quite make sense. Edited March 11, 2020 by villakram 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts