Election 2020

[Teenwolf]

Wow, a quick read up on Strom Thurmond is fascinating.

During his 1948 Presidential campaign, Thurmond said the following in a speech, being met with loud cheers by the assembled supporters:

"I wanna tell you, ladies and gentlemen, that there's not enough troops in the army to force the Southern people to break down segregation and admit the Nigra [sic] race into our theaters, into our swimming pools, into our homes, and into our churches."

Biden supported Thurmond's position on segregation, with almost as ugly language about "forcing our children to sit next to...". Then in 2003, gave the eulogy at Thurmond's funeral... how do you think any of that plays in the general election? I know I'm not supposed to bring it up now because you all want to avoid damaging the candidates, but pretending these issues won't be blown up and exploited in the general would be foolish.

From Paste magazine this past march:

Throughout the 1970s and 1980s, Biden sponsored anti-busing legislation and even said he would support an anti-busing constitutional amendment. He supported an anti-busing amendment to a federal bill, proposed by the segregationist (aka racist) Sen. Jesse Helms of North Carolina, in September of 1975. The former vice president also threw his weight behind an anti-busing amendment by West Virginia’s Sen. Robert Byrd, a Democrat and former recruiter for the Ku Klux Klan who claimed to have left his racist past behind him.

All that hasn’t kept the 76-year-old from trying to paint his own narrative, tooting his own horn about a single busing vote plucked from his overall anti-busing record. Biden told Pod Save America in March 2018:

"I have never, ever, ever voted for anything I thought was wrong…In the middle of the single most extensive busing order in all the United States history, in my state, I voted against an amendment, cast the deciding vote, to allow courts to keep busing as a remedy. Because there are some things that are worth losing over."

I think it bothers me most that he can't own up to his past mistakes, he just fucking lies and says he supported the opposite. Same thing with his non-apology to Anita Hill where he stated aloud that he "wishes there was something I could have done." His unaccountability is so gross.

[Kevin Seitzer]

I know I'm not supposed to bring it up now because you all want to avoid damaging the candidates, but pretending these issues won't be blown up and exploited in the general would be foolish.

You actually have a lot of interesting and valuable stuff to contribute to the discussion. I would encourage you not to go down the martyr complex route that GITH took. Nobody discussing candidates in the RJ sports bar is going to either vet or damage a candidate. It's interesting to learn about the candidates and people's perspectives on them. Being lectured about our moral shortcomings like GITH likes to do is just annoying and doesn't help anyone grow or get better or learn more or contribute more to their community.

I don't mind you telling me what you think the candidates shortcomings are. I don't appreciate being told what they are as if I were a child or a political incompetent.

[DMT]

You actually have a lot of interesting and valuable stuff to contribute to the discussion. I would encourage you not to go down the martyr complex route that GITH took. Nobody discussing candidates in the RJ sports bar is going to either vet or damage a candidate. It's interesting to learn about the candidates and people's perspectives on them. Being lectured about our moral shortcomings like GITH likes to do is just annoying and doesn't help anyone grow or get better or learn more or contribute more to their community.

I don't mind you telling me what you think the candidates shortcomings are. I don't appreciate being told what they are as if I were a child or a political incompetent.

Hear hear.

[Teenwolf]

You actually have a lot of interesting and valuable stuff to contribute to the discussion. I would encourage you not to go down the martyr complex route that GITH took. Nobody discussing candidates in the RJ sports bar is going to either vet or damage a candidate. It's interesting to learn about the candidates and people's perspectives on them. Being lectured about our moral shortcomings like GITH likes to do is just annoying and doesn't help anyone grow or get better or learn more or contribute more to their community.

I don't mind you telling me what you think the candidates shortcomings are. I don't appreciate being told what they are as if I were a child or a political incompetent.

I've been told over and over again that I'm producing smears against the Dem candidates, so excuse my premature defensiveness.

I also think you and DMT and B-Fly (and others) are putting out extremely thoughtful posts, whenever you aren't spending your time policing my tone. If you feel disrespected or talked down to, I apologize.

[Kevin Seitzer]

I've been told over and over again that I'm producing smears against the Dem candidates, so excuse my premature defensiveness.

I also think you and DMT and B-Fly (and others) are putting out extremely thoughtful posts, whenever you aren't spending your time policing my tone. If you feel disrespected or talked down to, I apologize.

Thank you.

I guess what I am trying to say is that the main I reason I come to this thread in particular is to educate myself about the candidates and issues. You talk about sharing negative things about the non-Bernie candidates in order to expose their weaknesses before the general election. I don't understand what the purpose of that approach is. I mean, I understand wanting to learn about their weaknesses. But I also want to learn about their strengths, and in understanding both, to form a full picture of the candidates. I feel like I almost have to discount anything you say about a candidate because you are just coming to tear them down and are trying to blind me to the full truth about a candidate. If you expose every one of their weaknesses here, what have you accomplished? You have not made the Democratic field any stronger. None of the candidates or their campaign staff are participating in this forum (as far as I know). The candidates aren't going to change their campaign strategies because you exposed their weaknesses here. The party elites/bosses aren't going to change who they favor because they came to this forum and were made aware of weaknesses. The media isn't going to change how they cover the candidates because they learned something from what you said here. What you can change here is the hearts and minds of the people participating. But I don't think you're very effective at that, or at least you are not with me, when your coverage of the non-Bernie candidates is so slanted. I distrust a slanted source.

I know you are smart and bring valuable perspective, but I personally am finding it hard to engage and get that value that I know is there because I don't sense you being even-handed and thus am looking for the gotcha or the missing information every time you post something negative about a candidate.

That doesn't mean I expect you to post positive things about candidates you detest. But if I feel like you are just here giving me Bernie's PR slant on everything like a Baghdad Bob, I'm going to write off what you say, and I think that would be unfortunate.

[Teenwolf]

Thank you.

I guess what I am trying to say is that the main I reason I come to this thread in particular is to educate myself about the candidates and issues. You talk about sharing negative things about the non-Bernie candidates in order to expose their weaknesses before the general election. I don't understand what the purpose of that approach is. I mean, I understand wanting to learn about their weaknesses. But I also want to learn about their strengths, and in understanding both, to form a full picture of the candidates. I feel like I almost have to discount anything you say about a candidate because you are just coming to tear them down and are trying to blind me to the full truth about a candidate. If you expose every one of their weaknesses here, what have you accomplished? You have not made the Democratic field any stronger. None of the candidates or their campaign staff are participating in this forum (as far as I know). The candidates aren't going to change their campaign strategies because you exposed their weaknesses here. The party elites/bosses aren't going to change who they favor because they came to this forum and were made aware of weaknesses. The media isn't going to change how they cover the candidates because they learned something from what you said here. What you can change here is the hearts and minds of the people participating. But I don't think you're very effective at that, or at least you are not with me, when your coverage of the non-Bernie candidates is so slanted. I distrust a slanted source.

I know you are smart and bring valuable perspective, but I personally am finding it hard to engage and get that value that I know is there because I don't sense you being even-handed and thus am looking for the gotcha or the missing information every time you post something negative about a candidate.

That doesn't mean I expect you to post positive things about candidates you detest. But if I feel like you are just here giving me Bernie's PR slant on everything like a Baghdad Bob, I'm going to write off what you say, and I think that would be unfortunate.

Okay, so when I posted today about Kamala Harris, let's just peek at my biased and unfair and slanted take on her from today:

Did Kamala Harris jump back ahead of Beto and Buttigieg after the CNN debate marathon? I'm hearing she had a good performance...

I wouldn't mind if Harris rose to 2nd, and Sanders/Harris was the ticket, if Bernie adopting a centrist is the only path to the WH. I think Harris is a phony on major issues, but she wouldn't find it so easy to backpedal if she were Bernie's VP. How is that for pragmatism? Oh, and she has that pigmentation you're all so eager for the Dem ticket to have. Even if most of the black voters turned on her the minute she claimed to listen to Snoop Dogg & 2Pac while smoking weed in college... in the 80's. Let's stick to the important issues. If you're going to talk hip-hop, do a little more prep work to avoid looking dumb. (I'm mostly joking, but it is a symbol of her phony facade that she made such a dumb mistake and blatant lie about a non-issue)

I admit that the stuff I post about is often silly, because silly shit often decides elections. Did it matter that Weiner's laptop had some HRC emails on it? No. But absolute fluff and nonsense decides elections all of the time because the media is garbage. So I try to keep my eyes open for the next swift-boat type of BS. That's part of why I expose these dubious issues with candidates, to anticipate the style of the general election BS to come.

How about the article I posted about Bernie's weaknesses from Ryan Grim at The Intercept? Or how I called out Bernie for staying silent on Assange's arrest? Or how about the positive posts I've had about Tulsi in the last few days? Or today's praise for Harris? Why are you presenting an inaccurate representation of my political content? Did you miss these posts?

[revo]

Joe Biden with a $6.3m haul on day one of his campaign, highest first day total of any of the declared candidates.

[DMT]

Joe Biden with a $6.3m haul on day one of his campaign, highest first day total of any of the declared candidates.

He also called marijuana a "gateway drug".

[Teenwolf]

He also called marijuana a "gateway drug".

Wow. I thought this was a joke and had to google it. How much more out of touch can you be than calling marijuana a gateway drug in 2019?

Or how clueless can you be to host your day 1 fundraiser at the home of a Comcast exec? So he's immediately indebted to Comcast to kill net neutrality. Cool.

[onejayhawk]

Bernie and Biden is going to be interesting and probably a bit vicious. Neither has much chance in the general, but Biden is the best shot at actually winning. Sorry, but those are the facts.

J

[revo]

Bernie and Biden is going to be interesting and probably a bit vicious. Neither has much chance in the general, but Biden is the best shot at actually winning. Sorry, but those are the facts.

J

Where do you come up with this stuff?

[revo]

Latest poll - Texas, a state Trump won by 9% in 2016. Last Democrat to win Texas was Jimmy Carter in 1976. A shocker as of right now:

Texas: Trump vs. Biden	Emerson	Trump 49, Biden 50	Biden +1
Texas: Trump vs. Sanders	Emerson	Trump 51, Sanders 49	Trump +2
Texas: Trump vs. Harris	Emerson	Trump 54, Harris 46	Trump +8
Texas: Trump vs. Buttigieg	Emerson	Trump 54, Buttigieg 46	Trump +8
Texas: Trump vs. Warren	Emerson	Trump 53, Warren 47	Trump +6
Texas: Trump vs. O'Rourke	Emerson	Trump 50, O'Rourke 50	Tie

[B-Fly]

Where do you come up with this stuff?

Sorry, revo, but the facts are just the facts. lol

[revo]

[fuhrdog]

Alternative facts?