Rdskns2000

Presidential Election :11/3/2020- Putin's Impeachable Puppet vs The Rise of BootyWalker & some other Dems

Recommended Posts

48 minutes ago, bearrock said:

 

@Renegade7 I think the obamacare thread is as good a place as any to discuss the substantive merits of the competing proposals.

 

I just want to say this from the context of the 2020 election, which I think belongs here.  From the beginning, my point was that many voters don't trust the government to not screw up something this big.  A big part of that is the sudden and abrupt change MFA calls for.  Which is why Buttigieg and Klobuchar says they want MFA in the long term, but advocates for a more gradual approach. 

 

The question that I and a lot of voters are asking is not whether MFA is better than the current system.  It is whether it is better than the other competing proposals by people like Buttigieg and Klobuchar.  Warren and Sanders, to my knowledge, have not addressed it and the longer they go on without addressing it, more and more questions it will raise in the minds of the voters.  Warren is already getting some heat on the clarity of her positions regarding healthcare (not totally fair, but it's a perception issue).  It's only going to increase going forward.

 

I responded to you in the healthcare thread, I don't think your point can be dissected without it being a policy disucussion.  

 

If you want to say Warren and Sanders haven't defended the 4 year timeline well enough, I'd argue Buttigieg and Klobuchar haven't given enough details to why MFA shouldn't be a diffinitive goal.  Because their plans don't call for a phased in approach over a longer period of time, their plans are wait and see and let someone else push for it, if necessary, that's not the same thing.  Pete is arguing for competing models and it will work itself out and Klobuchar is all but saying she won't be the one to push for MFA during her presidency.  

 

I'm actually getting tired of the MFA term getting thrown around because Medicare for all who want it is not Medicare for All, its just making this whole conversation more confusing then it needs to be.  And actually, it bothers me even attaching MFA name to their plans that aren't MFA because it comes across like they want the attention of the name that sounds good then come behind and say its not that.  They know how popular this item is and trying to piggyback off of it while ripping it apart at the same time, it destroyed Harris campaign, she fell off tight rope on that one.

 

That's not helping the conversation at all, but we should keep that in the healthcare thread, that's another issue I have with their policies, and how they present it will come back to their policies so we shouldn't discuss it here.  Fair?

Edited by Renegade7

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

BTW, kudos on the thread title change.  I’m adding “Impeacho Cheeto” to my long list of Trump nicknames.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Momma There Goes That Man said:

honestly we aren’t even out of the woods yet. Who knows what happens with impeachment and if trump wins in 2020. That’s still very much on the table.

Trump getting re-elected is the most probable outcome at this point, IMO. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, hail2skins said:

Trump getting re-elected is the most probable outcome at this point, IMO. 

 

How? His approval numbers are in the gutter, and polls show him losing handily to every likely Dem nominee IIRC. Not to mention we have no clue how damaging to his overall approval some of the stuff that will likely come out during an impeachment inquiry will be. He won three of the states he had to have to win in 2016 by less than 80,000 votes combined and his support among blocs that helped him there (especially white suburban women) has basically gone down the tubes as evidenced by multiple polls as well as the analysis of voting done in 2018. He made 2018 a referendum on himself and got absolutely clobbered. And if the economy takes a downturn, which seems quite likely, it will make things even worse for him.

 

I'm not saying it's impossible that he'll get reelected, but where is this "most probable outcome" stuff coming from?

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Rdskns2000 said:

The next Dem debate, with 12 candidates,  is one night only. Tom Steyer and Tulsi Gabbard join this one.

Really, really idiotic decision by the DNC. Everyone hates 10 person debates, so let's make it much worse? Dumb.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Dan T. said:

BTW, kudos on the thread title change.  I’m adding “Impeacho Cheeto” to my long list of Trump nicknames.

How long will that name last though?  

 

 

6 minutes ago, Rufus T Firefly said:

Really, really idiotic decision by the DNC. Everyone hates 10 person debates, so let's make it much worse? Dumb.

CNN: October Democratic debate to take place on one night

 

 

 

Edited by Rdskns2000

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, mistertim said:

 

How? His approval numbers are in the gutter, and polls show him losing handily to every likely Dem nominee IIRC. Not to mention we have no clue how damaging to his overall approval some of the stuff that will likely come out during an impeachment inquiry will be. He won three of the states he had to have to win in 2016 by less than 80,000 votes combined and his support among blocs that helped him there (especially white suburban women) has basically gone down the tubes as evidenced by multiple polls as well as the analysis of voting done in 2018. He made 2018 a referendum on himself and got absolutely clobbered. And if the economy takes a downturn, which seems quite likely, it will make things even worse for him.

 

I'm not saying it's impossible that he'll get reelected, but where is this "most probable outcome" stuff coming from?

We all know the Senate will not vote to remove Trump.  Hell, I'm pretty sure Turtle will pull another Garland and not even allow a vote, if he can. 

 

All Trump's pending impeachment will do is excite the partisans on both sides.  Trump's voters will be energized.  Many Dem voters will be more energized.

 

Biden if he gets the nomination, will be worse than Hillary.  He'll won't motivate the younger set. He also, can't go toe to toe with Trump and the stuff with his son, while maybe alright; still appears a little shady.   Warren's policies will scare away some older voters and it's not a guarantee the young vote will make up the difference. 

 

Trump get reelected, even with him being impeached; is still a 50-50.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, mistertim said:

 

I'm not saying it's impossible that he'll get reelected, but where is this "most probable outcome" stuff coming

 

The fact that he's an incumbent President with a good economy?

 

Granted, Trump is unique in many ways (all of them undesirable). But when was the last time the US didn't reelect the incumbent with the good economy?  I sure don't think it's happened in my lifetime.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Rdskns2000 said:

We all know the Senate will not vote to remove Trump.  Hell, I'm pretty sure Turtle will pull another Garland and not even allow a vote, if he can. 

 

All Trump's pending impeachment will do is excite the partisans on both sides.  Trump's voters will be energized.  Many Dem voters will be more energized.

 

Biden if he gets the nomination, will be worse than Hillary.  He'll won't motivate the younger set. He also, can't go toe to toe with Trump and the stuff with his son, while maybe alright; still appears a little shady.   Warren's policies will scare away some older voters and it's not a guarantee the young vote will make up the difference. 

 

Trump get reelected, even with him being impeached; is still a 50-50.

 

I don't think McConnell can legally simply ignore an impeachment that has gone to the Senate for trial. What he can do, however, is basically set the rules and procedures for the whole trial in the senate (since the Constitution doesn't actually lay it out so it falls on the Majority leader mostly). Meaning he'll likely make it super short, hardly allow any witnesses, not permit much evidence to be presented, and curtail it in any other way possible. IMO McConnell in some ways an even more sinister character than Trump is. 

 

As far as exciting partisans on both sides, that's likely true. However, as hard as it is to believe, I think there are still independent voters who are still on the fence (possibly because of a good current economy). If the evidence against Trump is as bad as most of us think it likely will be, I think it could push them away from him. And yes, while Trump's most ardent and die-hard supporters will be more energized than ever to vote for him, some of the people who aren't quite as nuts, who voted for him before, and who still sort of support him might not like the Dem but will be turned off by most of Trump's behavior and elect to simply stay home and not vote. 

 

I think a Trump victory would likely hinge on several things happening together, many of them implausible (some more than others). 

 

1) Trump somehow manages to win back the voting blocs that help drive him to rust belt victories by the slimmest of margins in 2016. I say win back because polling and 2018 voting breakdown results show he's lost them...especially white suburban women. How exactly is he going to do that, by telling them they're dumb ****s if they don't vote for him again (which I wouldn't put it past him doing)? I think they're gone for good. Who exactly is he going to replace them with? He's lost most independents and there are only so many non-college educated white male voters. And his current strategy is simply to appeal purely to his most ardent supporters.

 

2) There's a Dem candidate as disliked as Hillary. Neither Biden or Warren are nearly as disliked....there's just no evidence for it. Hillary had high disapproval ratings from the moment she started her campaign (actually way before that. And compared to Trump's disapproval ratings, neither Biden nor Warren would be close.

 

3) The economy remains strong. It's possible, but most indicators are pointing to a downturn soon.

 

4) Trump getting incredibly lucky. Despite what some people (especially his supporters) say, Trump's win was the equivalent of successfully hitting a gut shot straight draw on the river. Or even getting dealt a straight flush. A bunch of things had to happen in concert, and they all happened.

 

5) The anti-Trump people losing their energy and becoming apathetic. I have no clue how it's possible for that to even happen. The Dems could nominate a cardboard box with a face drawn on it and they would still come out to vote in force. 

 

I'm not saying it's not possible for Trump to win. And @Larryis correct as far as him being an incumbent with a (currently) strong economy. But Trump is unlike any other POTUS and candidate in American history. He's never been above 50% approval, and his negative ratings are historically bad, especially for a guy with a good economy. Also, most polling I've seen doesn't show that most people actually give him credit for the economy, so that could potentially be  something of a non-starter when it comes to a positive for him. Especially if the Dems can hammer home how Trump's economy is only benefiting the few and the rest of the population is getting screwed over.

 

Edited by mistertim
  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There is still time for Hillary to jump in as Biden falters.

  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Renegade7 said:

9560960.jpg

Pfft... those losers are way behind. TWA made pretending you didn’t vote for Trump cool starting on the day of the election.

  • Haha 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Sacks 'n' Stuff said:

Pfft... those losers are way behind. TWA made pretending you didn’t vote for Trump cool starting on the day of the election.

 

In the future, this time period will be known as the 21st Century version of "the Civil War was about state rights"

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, twa said:

There is still time for Hillary to jump in as Biden falters.

The nomination is going to Warren.  Hillary got in, she would be crushed.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
47 minutes ago, Rufus T Firefly said:

???

 

Yes, and I said I thought that was a dumb decision. I don't get the point of your reply.

Just posting the link to an article that stated that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Biden is not a fan of history if he thinks telling networks they shouldnt have Rudy on tv will keep networks from booking him. How wal did it work for the Catholic church to come up with a banned list of books and movies? Same thing with Satanic Verses. 

 

So one of two things happens. Either people don't view him as an authority, or they book him just to see why he cares. On niether case does Biden come across as presidential.

 

Edited by gbear

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/29/2019 at 5:00 PM, gbear said:

Biden is not a fan of history if he thinks telling networks they shouldnt have Rudy on tv will keep networks from booking him. How wal did it work for the Catholic church to come up with a banned list of books and movies? Same thing with Satanic Verses. 

 

So one of two things happens. Either people don't view him as an authority, or they book him just to see why he cares. On niether case does Biden come across as presidential.

 

So, I don't think its a really good look, the way Biden did that. And I'm not a Biden fan by any means.

 

But, to compare a citizen saying the media should stop giving air time to a guy who's blatantly lying to the church banning books?

 

giphy.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

These are exciting times for all us of that vigorously oppose Trump and the current GOP.  But don’t lose sight of this absolute fact...

 

Right now, the Sanders campaign is prepping and stashing some extra-fringey, unpleasant and self defeating memes/social media campaigns about Biden and Warren and other reasonable candidates.  At their worst, it will be indistinguishable from that of the alt-right.

 

Just sayin’...

 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, TryTheBeal! said:

These are exciting times for all us of that vigorously oppose Trump and the current GOP.  But don’t lose sight of this absolute fact...

 

Right now, the Sanders campaign is prepping and stashing some extra-fringey, unpleasant and self defeating memes/social media campaigns about Biden and Warren and other reasonable candidates.  At their worst, it will be indistinguishable from that of the alt-right.

 

Just sayin’...

 

 

 

This trashing of Democrat opponents is why I don't like Sanders, either for 2016 or now. He's a mean little man who thinks he's entitled, even though he's not a Democrat.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.