Election 2020

[Teenwolf]

Didn't Biden say he wanted to challenge Trump to a fight?

He actually said he would challenge Trump to a pushup contest... because that's how you recapture the soul of America!

[revo]

Latest Nat'l poll shows only the top 2 able to beat Trump within the margin of error, but it's a sound beating nonetheless:

General Election: Trump vs. Biden	SurveyUSA	Biden 50, Trump 42	[B]Biden +8[/B]
General Election: Trump vs. Sanders	SurveyUSA	Sanders 50, Trump 42	[B]Sanders +8[/B]
General Election: Trump vs. Warren	SurveyUSA	Warren 46, Trump 44	Warren +2
General Election: Trump vs. Harris	SurveyUSA	Harris 45, Trump 44	Harris +1
General Election: Trump vs. Buttigieg	SurveyUSA	Buttigieg 42, Trump 44	Trump +2

[Sour Masher]

I am coming around on the idea that Biden has lost something. How can he have thought he was VP during Parkland? It is worrying.

Also, Musk endorsed Yang. Don't think that gives him enough of a bump to stay in it long term, but maybe.

[Teenwolf]

I am coming around on the idea that Biden has lost something. How can he have thought he was VP during Parkland? It is worrying.

Also, Musk endorsed Yang. Don't think that gives him enough of a bump to stay in it long term, but maybe.

Wow, the statement on Parkland should be enough at this point. He's clearly confused, bumbling, and deteriorating rapidly, every single appearance making one or more major gaffes. I hope he would get so bad as to drop out, as he's clearly incapable of doing the job, but apparently people like frae, and Hornsby and revo need more evidence.

As for Yang, I fucking hate that he's gaining. He's the real fauxgressive trojan horse, and he and Sanders' voters are the most loyal, so they'll cling to his $1k/mth bullshit until he goes out. He's only in it to siphon votes from actual progressives. He became the 9th confirmed for September debates. Hopefully Tulsi makes it 10 and they lock the door.

[Sour Masher]

As for Yang, I fucking hate that he's gaining. He's the real fauxgressive trojan horse, and he and Sanders' voters are the most loyal, so they'll cling to his $1k/mth bullshit until he goes out. He's only in it to siphon votes from actual progressives. He became the 9th confirmed for September debates. Hopefully Tulsi makes it 10 and they lock the door.

Do you think he is consciously trying to undermine Sanders and Warren with his candidacy and that is his primary aim? He seems like he really wants to be president. What evidence is there that he is in the race just to hurt the chances of Sanders and Warren? It is troubling that alt-righters seem to like him, but I'm not sure why they do.

[Teenwolf]

Do you think he is consciously trying to undermine Sanders and Warren with his candidacy and that is his primary aim? He seems like he really wants to be president. What evidence is there that he is in the race just to hurt the chances of Sanders and Warren? It is troubling that alt-righters seem to like him, but I'm not sure why they do.

His interview on Dave Rubin's show was extremely revealing. I do think he's consciously courting the alt-right with statements about white birth rates and such. I believe he's more in line with Biden on the economy than most people realize. Cutting entitlements is a Biden thing.

As far as purposely undercutting Sanders and Warren, I'm not sure his exact intentions. But if you were someone who believed in extreme measures to cut social programs, it seems like stopping Sanders and Warren would be the primary objective. Marianne Williamson "really wants to be President" too, but I don't think either her or Yang are delusional enough to believe they could win. It's all PR for them, not sure what Yang is trying to set up for himself. Media talking head?

[revo]

The always popular, but very unscientific Iowa State Fair Corn Kernel poll results:

Dems 51%, GOP 49%

Biden 24%
Mayor Pete 16%
Warren 15%
Harris 11%
Sanders 9%
Booker 4%
Gabbard 4%
Klobuchar 3%
Steyer 3%
Yang 2%
O'Rourke 2%

[Teenwolf]

Apparently Tom Steyer is saying he's passed the threshold to make the 3rd debate stage. That would make him the 10th. If Tulsi Gabbard could make it, maybe 1 or 2 more, then you would get 2 debate nights with 6-7 candidates. But if Steyer is 10th, I'd rather they get Tulsi +1 and split into 2 nights. Would lead to much more substantive conversation with 6 candidates per debate night.

Tulsi has been smeared non-stop. Twitter highlighted a story on her from Feb about David Duke endorsing her, for a full week in August. Any interview has been about Assad. I think she's done well pushing back, but we'll see.

[Judge Jude]

https://www.factcheck.org/2019/08/ha...rown-shooting/

Harris and Warren both claiming that the guy in Ferguson, Mo. was "murdered" by a cop 5 years ago.

Now, if someone still believes that, that's fine.

if a Presidential candidate wants to say, "Of course we all know that an African-American President's African-American Attorney General concluded the following - but I don't care. They covered the whole thing up and lied about the evidence. I still call it murder," that's fine, too.

when they forget that last part - well, if I didn't know any better, I'd think they were pandering for votes, since I'm pretty sure the majority of Democrats never read a word of the blocks below (but maybe you can talk me out of that one).

the worst part is what they DID find was incredibly disturbing in its own right: a systemic harassment of people of color by the police department over many years, making their lives a living hell. that's the real takeaway. but maybe it didn't test well in focus groups?

"the Obama administration investigation, conducted by the Criminal Section of the Department of Justice Civil Rights Division, the United States Attorney’s Office for the Eastern District of Missouri and the FBI, found that “the evidence does not support an indictment of [officer] Darren Wilson.”

"the evidence does not establish that the shots fired by Wilson were objectively unreasonable under federal law. The physical evidence establishes that Wilson shot Brown once in the hand, at close range, while Wilson sat in his police SUV, struggling with Brown for control of Wilson’s gun. Wilson then shot Brown several more times from a distance of at least two feet after Brown ran away from Wilson and then turned and faced him. There are no witness accounts that federal prosecutors, and likewise a jury, would credit to support the conclusion that Wilson fired at Brown from behind. With the exception of the two wounds to Brown’s right arm, which indicate neither bullet trajectory nor the direction in which Brown was moving when he was struck, the medical examiners’ reports are in agreement that the entry wounds from the latter gunshots were to the front of Brown’s body, establishing that Brown was facing Wilson when these shots were fired. This includes the fatal shot to the top of Brown’s head. The physical evidence also establishes that Brown moved forward toward Wilson after he turned around to face him. The physical evidence is corroborated by multiple eyewitnesses.

Those eyewitnesses “stated that Brown appeared to pose a physical threat to Wilson as he moved toward Wilson.”

"Multiple credible witnesses corroborate virtually every material aspect of Wilson’s account and are consistent with the physical evidence. Even if the evidence established that Wilson’s actions were unreasonable, the government would also have to prove that Wilson acted willfully, i.e. that he acted with a specific intent to violate the law. As discussed above, Wilson’s stated intent for shooting Brown was in response to a perceived deadly threat."

"The DOJ investigation found: “Witness accounts suggesting that Brown was standing still with his hands raised in an unambiguous signal of surrender when Wilson shot Brown are inconsistent with the physical evidence, are otherwise not credible because of internal inconsistencies, or are not credible because of inconsistencies with other credible evidence.”

[B-Fly]

Sanders is rising in some of the polling now, pulling (back) into second place in national polling and solidly ahead in New Hampshire.

[GwynnInTheHall]

https://www.factcheck.org/2019/08/ha...rown-shooting/

Harris and Warren both claiming that the guy in Ferguson, Mo. was "murdered" by a cop 5 years ago.

Now, if someone still believes that, that's fine.

if a Presidential candidate wants to say, "Of course we all know that an African-American President's African-American Attorney General concluded the following - but I don't care. They covered the whole thing up and lied about the evidence. I still call it murder," that's fine, too.

when they forget that last part - well, if I didn't know any better, I'd think they were pandering for votes, since I'm pretty sure the majority of Democrats never read a word of the blocks below (but maybe you can talk me out of that one).

the worst part is what they DID find was incredibly disturbing in its own right: a systemic harassment of people of color by the police department over many years, making their lives a living hell. that's the real takeaway. but maybe it didn't test well in focus groups?

"the Obama administration investigation, conducted by the Criminal Section of the Department of Justice Civil Rights Division, the United States Attorney’s Office for the Eastern District of Missouri and the FBI, found that “the evidence does not support an indictment of [officer] Darren Wilson.”

"the evidence does not establish that the shots fired by Wilson were objectively unreasonable under federal law. The physical evidence establishes that Wilson shot Brown once in the hand, at close range, while Wilson sat in his police SUV, struggling with Brown for control of Wilson’s gun. Wilson then shot Brown several more times from a distance of at least two feet after Brown ran away from Wilson and then turned and faced him. There are no witness accounts that federal prosecutors, and likewise a jury, would credit to support the conclusion that Wilson fired at Brown from behind. With the exception of the two wounds to Brown’s right arm, which indicate neither bullet trajectory nor the direction in which Brown was moving when he was struck, the medical examiners’ reports are in agreement that the entry wounds from the latter gunshots were to the front of Brown’s body, establishing that Brown was facing Wilson when these shots were fired. This includes the fatal shot to the top of Brown’s head. The physical evidence also establishes that Brown moved forward toward Wilson after he turned around to face him. The physical evidence is corroborated by multiple eyewitnesses.

Those eyewitnesses “stated that Brown appeared to pose a physical threat to Wilson as he moved toward Wilson.”

"Multiple credible witnesses corroborate virtually every material aspect of Wilson’s account and are consistent with the physical evidence. Even if the evidence established that Wilson’s actions were unreasonable, the government would also have to prove that Wilson acted willfully, i.e. that he acted with a specific intent to violate the law. As discussed above, Wilson’s stated intent for shooting Brown was in response to a perceived deadly threat."

"The DOJ investigation found: “Witness accounts suggesting that Brown was standing still with his hands raised in an unambiguous signal of surrender when Wilson shot Brown are inconsistent with the physical evidence, are otherwise not credible because of internal inconsistencies, or are not credible because of inconsistencies with other credible evidence.”

I put very little into any investigation which looks into an officer related shooting death no matter who's doing the investigating.

It's been abundantly clear throughout history (and even more evident today) that there are different issuances of Justice between the Rich and powerful and the poor and non influential, between people of color and white america and between the police and those they are sworn to protect and serve.

There are those in this country who deify members of the police force, give them absolute benefit of the doubt. This exists throughout the system regardless of color.

I believe there are many persons of color who've been murdered or at least killed in a manner which should be considered homicide, by police officers that were not found guilty by a judge or jury. In fact I believe there have been less than a handful of convictions of manslaughter in the numerous incidents of Police vs people of color which ended up in the civilians death.

I don't believe Brown should have been killed, I believe the officer lied and frankly this whole--I feared for my life--defense is bullshit--I attended a police training academy when I was young (I was thinking about a career in the Highway patrol) and we were taught that you had to be shot at, swung at or attacked before discharging your firearm. Now you can shoot for whatever reason and say you were scared--These kinds of cops should not wear a badge let lone wield a gun.

While I wouldn;t have used the term Murderer, Warren and Harris are spot on in their assertion that law enforcement have indeed killed persons of color for no good reason other than the color of their skin

[Judge Jude]

you believe the officer lied, even though all of the evidence backs his version of events, per the report.

honestly, that's fine. but it doesn't address my central point: both Harris and Warren are chickenshit for claiming this guy was "murdered" while not addressing the facts laid out in Eric Holder's report.

call out Holder as a liar, by all means. but don't pander by trying to have it both ways. either call out Obama's AG, or STFU. and these are probably the two most likely candidates. we're going to improve race relations in the U.S. this way?

"Warren and Harris are spot on in their assertion that law enforcement have indeed killed persons of color for no good reason other than the color of their skin"

that's a VERY different discussion, and it's fair to say. right church, wrong pew.

[Teenwolf]

Apparently Tom Steyer has met the donor threshold, needs 1 more poll at 2%, ditto for Castro. They would be 10th and 11th to qualify for debate #3. Tulsi Gabbard isn't getting the polling, but might try to stay in to make a later debate if she doesn't make this one.

Steyer has spent more money on digital ads than anybody, including Trump. I wonder if he sees Biden slipping and wants a shot at taking over the centrist lane. Looks awful for Dems, letting some rich guy buy his way into the debate. But I guess if he wants to burn a pile of cash to siphon voters from Biden while providing another punching bag for Sanders and Warren, that isn't the worst scenario.

If 11 qualify, I hope they still split into 2 nights for more substantive discussions.

[GwynnInTheHall]

you believe the officer lied, even though all of the evidence backs his version of events, per the report.

honestly, that's fine. but it doesn't address my central point: both Harris and Warren are chickenshit for claiming this guy was "murdered" while not addressing the facts laid out in Eric Holder's report.

call out Holder as a liar, by all means. but don't pander by trying to have it both ways. either call out Obama's AG, or STFU. and these are probably the two most likely candidates. we're going to improve race relations in the U.S. this way?

"Warren and Harris are spot on in their assertion that law enforcement have indeed killed persons of color for no good reason other than the color of their skin"

that's a VERY different discussion, and it's fair to say. right church, wrong pew.

STFU? Well I can't be too hard on you for that as I've posted the same thing on occasion over the years, but what I will say is this. I find it terribly sad how your posts/PMs devolved into nothing more that Whataboutisms and Gotcha moments. I don;t know how you've gotten here, but I hope you find your way back soon. I miss that JJ.

I HAVE called out and voices my disappointment with Obama and his administration on multiple occasions, do I need to address every one of my disappointments specifically so that you'll be satisfied? If so, here's a blanket admonishment of anything you might believe I'd be disappointed in so I'm covered from you calling me chickenshit.

To your point.

Did you read all the supporting articles regarding the brown/wilson shooting? I have, Ivé read the DOJ report, the county coroner's autopsy report PLUS her follow up where she said that she things in her report were taken out of context. The EVIDENCE? You just mentioned that you agreed there was systemic racism found in that area, do you really think it was only in the police force? Context--is EVERYTHING in this case. Murder is predetermined, well if an officer knows he can create a situation and use deadly force to get himself out of it--is that predetermination when he does start something and then kills someone? That's debatable--Like I said--I'd have convicted the guy of manslaughter--he's like Zimmerman--A guy who created a situation because he thought he was the man and when it looked like he was getting his ass kicked (deservedly so) he kills the guy he provoked in the first place.

Yes walking in the middle of the street is a crime in Ferguson, one that's been argued against for decades, the Walking Black moniker it's brought about is because it's a vague law law enforcement uses to harass people of color as can be seen in the fact that %95 of all sightings of that violation are persons of color.

The things we know for sure which everyone agrees on. Brown and Jefferson were walking in the street, Wilson drove by and yelled at the to get out of the street, Brown responded with a vulgarity at which point Wilson throws the SUV in revers and starts the confrontation. From there it's a he said/ he said with the DOJ and people like you giving the Officer, the witnesses and evidence ,which was anything but absolute the benefit of the doubt, when there were as many witnesses who refuted Wilson, the other witnesses, the ëvidence'could has been presented in ways to convict Wilson as well. BUT as you stated, the system in that area is corrupt?racist. As I've sadi, the system is slanted in favor or Law enforcement over civilians and white over black.

Do I think he lied--Absolutely. Wilson has nothing to lose by lying and nothing to gain by being honest.

As for Warren and Harris, Until YOU start admonishing every GOP leader, including Trump for EVERY bullshit thing they say, as for your obsession with us calling out Jessie when he gets off base, Until YOU start calling out OneJay for every idiotic thing he posts.

Well then, take your own advice and STFU.

[Judge Jude]

"STFU?"

if you read a but more closely, you'll see I am talking about Warren and Harris - not you. same goes for "chickenshit," as you can see. I think you got stuck on a narrative about me and inadvertently morphed the post into it.

meanwhile, there is zero "whataboutism" in my post. it's not in response to any daily dopey Trump did, so that seems like an odd response to me.

finally, you missed the entire point of my post.

we both know that relatively few Democrats are aware that Obama's Attorney General's report didn't back up most of the popular narrative about this tragedy. Harris knows it. Warren knows it. so when they conveniently avoid challenging that report, they are full of shit. either argue that the report is bogus/corrupt/whatever - as I believe you are doing - or, well.... but don't ignore the report, ladies, to try to have it both ways. tell Democrats that you think Obama's AG was in on a coverup, or something. I would think that you would want a candidate to have those kind of stones, and be disappointed with this shameless pandering.

you have claimed that anyone of any particular political stripe can be reasonably called out for crappy behavior. well, that's what happened.

I hope you'll re-read my post, and choose another response. thanks.
in golf, they call that a "mulligan."