Election 2020

[GwynnInTheHall]

That's my boy. Just the response I expected. Thanks for not dissapointing.

BTW, you're pretty good at that low blow thing yourself.

Kudos

Have a great day.

[Ken]

That's my boy. Just the response I expected. Thanks for not dissapointing.

BTW, you're pretty good at that low blow thing yourself.

Kudos

Have a great day.

“Boy” eh? Classy.

So I guess your answer is a) no interest in using a PM to continue the discussion, you still have more blows you want to make public, b) still no contrition for your out of the blue vitriol and c) no you don’t have anything to discuss on the election other thank making sure people know you want their wives and daughters assaulted if they don’t agree with you politically.

Love the whataboutism here though! Maybe that was your political point (we are reaching here).

[GwynnInTheHall]

You got me all figured out.

[heyelander]

Thank god we have you to fight the good fight GITH. I don't know how we can be worthy.

[Sour Masher]

Thank god we have you to fight the good fight GITH. I don't know how we can be worthy.

I am having flash backs to the 2016 election, when he was certain he was the only one here with any morality at all, because he threaded the needle of both reviling Trump and also not voting for HRC, AND hoping the world would burn, to teach everyone a lesson. GITH, you had the foresight to see what was coming, and you knew it would be bad, but you still wished for it to happen, because of how Sanders was treated by the DNC. You lashed out at Art, but he at least thinks Trump is a net positive. You knew Trump was a negative, but still wished him upon us and wanted the pain he'd cause people as punishment for a corrupt system, even though that pain would be inflicted on many of those you say you want to help. Basically, the same sort of "karmic" retribution you wished upon Art. All the while, saying you were morally pure and anyone who voted for HRC was a garbage person. I didn't get it then and I don't get it now.

[DMT]

I am having flash backs to the 2016 election, when he was certain he was the only one here with any morality at all, because he threaded the needle of both reviling Trump and also not voting for HRC, AND hoping the world would burn, to teach everyone a lesson. GITH, you had the foresight to see what was coming, and you knew it would be bad, but you still wished for it to happen, because of how Sanders was treated by the DNC. You lashed out at Art, but he at least thinks Trump is a net positive. You knew Trump was a negative, but still wished him upon us and wanted the pain he'd cause people as punishment for a corrupt system, even though that pain would be inflicted on many of those you say you want to help. Basically, the same sort of "karmic" retribution you wished upon Art. All the while, saying you were morally pure and anyone who voted for HRC was a garbage person. I didn't get it then and I don't get it now.

Truth.

[Sour Masher]

Bernie just lost his daughter-in-law, who was 48 and whose illness came out of nowhere.

[Art Vandelay]

First, I'm not really a moderator at all. I have the title, but outside of editing posts I have NO actionable powers. Having been asked not to delete or edit posts, I really an Mod in name only. I asked to become one when revo was getting hot under the collar simply as a jest. Having the title is cool because it pisses some people off, but outside that it makes no difference to me one way or the other.

Second, I haven't "held it together" because I was a mod, I usually hold it together, but a person can only take so much and I do/will lash out at those who I believe are complicit in the bullshit of this world, whichever form it takes.

As for Art, it's been building and it's solely about his support for Trump--I believe Trump supporters are complicit and should suffer in the manner Trump causes others to suffer. If it hits home maybe they'll stop their idiotic support. Ken and I have personal shit, we always will, as long as he stays in his lane I'll stay in mine. And he has, so I have. I won't apologize for what I said--I do wish those complicit in tis bullshit to suffer, be punished for the harm they've supported and helped actualize.

Do what you will remove me as Mod, Ban me, chastise me--but it's how I feel and on occasion I will express my anger. FWIW, some in here agree with me--I got Rep points for that post.



And no I don't think offering the ignorant an equal platform to share their views is what this forum is about. There are some viewpoints that have no rights.


Have a great day.

I typed as I read through the messages since last on rj...

For the goof:

lol. I am not a trump supporter but I do think the left - dems are insane when it comes to PRESIDENT Trump. he won. period. fact. I honestly think I am pragmatic when it comes to president Trump and the attacks coming from the left. he is going to win AGAIN because of alt - left supporters like gith.

as for certain viewpoints have no rights, this is exactly what RIGHT leaning organizations are talking about, ie. "left = speak as long as you say what I agree with". you are a good little boy gith, keep up the fight.

you call me a bad person. lol then wish ill upon my family. pathetic and what I expect of alt - left antifa members. wear your mask, enjoy the anonymity.

and you are correct about karma. she is unavoidable. I hope her visit doesn't hurt too much.






revo polls: I wasn't (or it wasn't intended) calling revo's polls silly. I used an example of a hillary win poll, and may have tried to say polls in general are silly (the post was several days ago, I can't remember exactly what I was feeling) but I do feel it seems so many polls are wrong since 2016 (U.S. and Canada and europe), which is when I first began watching politics more closely.

this was the poll (or something similar) I thought I had linked: https://www.reuters.com/article/us-u...-idUSKBN1322J1

as for trump, the difference I see in his presidency vs recent other president's is social media and msm. lots of 'media' outlets, and specifically cnn are heavy left leaning/Trump hating. some(?)/many(?) on here believe all that is written or spoken. cnn 24 hours a day, all day, hate hate hate. it can not be healthy...

[Sour Masher]

Art, I think you are reading the situation wrong. I think if you looked closely at Trump, you would see that he has made catastrophically bad decisions for the American people, and has lied to us more than any president ever. A reckoning is coming. My only hesitancy in taking your bet (assuming you still want to bet on Trump) is that I always fear the Democrats will somehow blow the easy lay up, and because I'm a scratch off tickey kind of guy--I want instant gratification and cannot make/wait for a bet a year out. But the opportunity is there. Trump is a fraudulent huckster who cares not a whit for our constitution or our institutions of government. His time is nearly up.

[GwynnInTheHall]

So Art, tell me exactly why you do NOT support Trump.

All the things he's done to lose your respect.

The list should be easy and lengthy, but hey I'll leave it up to you to prove I'm the bad guy in this scenario.

[nots]

So Art, tell me exactly why you do NOT support Trump.

All the things he's done to lose your respect.

The list should be easy and lengthy, but hey I'll leave it up to you to prove I'm the bad guy in this scenario.

This is what you should have posted instead of what you did previously post.

[B-Fly]

Hmm, that is a good point I had not considered. Revo or Frae or B-Fly someone else who knows polls more than me, how do they typically work? Do pollsters get all kinds of voters to participate, or do those who participate in early polls fit in the extreme ends of the spectrum? If that latter is true, that certainly limits their usefulness.

ETA: Biden's continued strong support would suggest that at least a large minority of polled voters are moderates.

My understanding of political polling at this stage is that every effort is made to draw a sample reflective of either registered voters or "likely voters", with the latter based on past electoral participation models, so polling should not under-represent moderates. That said, most polling is telephone based and requires someone to answer the phone and then to stay on the phone long enough to answer the question(s). And one of the answers that can be given is "undecided". Moderates are presumably more likely to be undecided, although not necessarily. Maybe they would say they support Biden in the primary but say they're undecided for the general, or to say they would support Biden over Trump but are undecided on a Trump vs. Sanders or Trump vs. Warren matchup. And many pollsters have been slow to adapt to cell-phone-only folks, who in turn are far less likely to answer a call from an unrecognized number, let alone to stay on the line after picking up and learning that the caller is a pollster. It is generally assumed that those cell-phone-only folks likely skew younger and since younger voters skew more liberal/progressive, the polling may undercount progressives. But there's also a narrative out there that many Trump supporters don't trust the media or the pollsters and will either lie or refuse to answer, whether just to screw with hated pollsters/media companies, or because they fear being stigmatized as racists/sexists/xenophobes because of MSM narratives about Trump supporters, and that they are therefore undercounted, as well.

[Sour Masher]

I'm not a fan of Gabbard's strategy of calling the DNC debate process a "rigged" system. I get she is frustrated by arbitrary benchmarks, but there is a logic behind them, especially with a field as big as it is. I think it is a strategic mistake if she skips the next debate (assuming she meets the thresholds to even make the stage, which so far she has not), and a mistake to use such language about the process, given how that will just be used by Trump down the road. She can voice these concerns, and point out how arbitrary polling and early fund raising benchmarks are, without using such loaded terms. Fox News is running with her comments, one of which is below. I know TW and others may agree with these comments, and I too see some truth in them, but I think they represent a strategic error on her part. She is just hurting her party and future prospects by phrasing her frustrations like this:

“They are attempting to replace the roles of voters in the early states, using polling and other arbitrary methods which are not transparent or democratic, and holding so-called debates which are not debates at all but rather commercialized reality television meant to entertain, not inform or enlighten,” Gabbard said. “In short, the DNC and corporate media are trying to hijack the entire election process.”

[DMT]

Tulsi also was quick to criticize the impeachment inquiry. Her candidacy was DOA from day one and she's just whining about it like a pathetic child.

[Teenwolf]

First off, I need to correct Sour Masher. Gabbard has made the 4th debate qualifications, she's one of 12 to make the 4th, which is the same as the 3rd plus Gabbard and Tom Steyer. From what I understand, Steyer and Yang have made the 5th, while Gabbard, Castro, Booker, Klobuchar, and Beto are all on the outside looking in, as the qualifications get tougher for the 5th and 6th debates.

I've been up and down on Tulsi. She seems to be trying really hard to appeal to Republicans, so as to do well in open primary states. She posted a "this is what America needs" video regarding Ellen's backlash to being pals with GW Bush, and statement about being kind to people you don't agree with. She got ratio'd like crazy on it, and I read 100 comments all with some variation of "Tulsi, NOOO!!"... so she's having some ups and downs among her entire base, not just with me.

On the issue of the DNC tipping the scales, I've heard that they keep a large set of qualifying polls, from 27 organizations, but in the first 4 debates, the DNC would choose from 17 of the 27 to cherrypick the candidates, but they've since changed it to 15 polls. It sounded very shady to me, but I do understand how it comes across as whiny. I think she has the least fucks to give, and if she decides to stay in the 4th debate she has the best shot at dropping some bombs and extending her campaign.