Rdskns2000

Presidential Election:11/3/20- On to Iowa 2/3 & New Hampshire 2/11

Recommended Posts

4 hours ago, Springfield said:

 

Was watching Real Time yesterday.  Bill Maher made a great point regarding past history.  

Oh yeah, Bill Maher.  Thanks for reminding me that I wanted to post this earlier.  😉

 

 

 

Edited by visionary

Share this post


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

Except yes it does. I mean, is it OK that someone's position evolved over the years? Absolutely. It's a sign of intelligence to be able to change one's view based on information.

 

However, there's no way of knowing what new challenges will come up during a President's term, so you have to be able to trust their judgement. Can I trust Joe's? He was wrong about busing, he was wrong about women's right to earn a living, he was wrong about the crime bill, he was wrong about Clarence Thomas,  he was wrong about NAFTA, he was wrong about Glass-Steagall, he was wrong about the bankruptcy bill, he was wrong about the Iraq war.....

 

Dude has been wrong an awful lot and almost always it seems like the "this will work better for me politically" brand of being wrong. So no, I don't really trust his judgment. And that's a real reason not to support him in the primary.

 

For the record, the issue really wasn't that he worked with segregationists 40 something years ago, the real issue was he was bragging about doing it in the present. 

 

A tangent from this post.

 

Perhaps this is the reason why nominees with little experience tend to to better in the general election.  Obama, (especially) Trump both weren’t 30-40 year congressional officials.

 

Its one reason why I like a guy like Buttigueg over a Harris, Warren, etc.  He’s smart and can form a position but doesn’t have a history of skeletons following him around.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, Renegade7 said:

, its not just that there's a different approach from different people down there but a situation where Trump is turning off people that would normally pull the lever for R no matter what, Hispanics included.  

 

Trump turns me off too. but I'm not stupid.

 

People from up North explaining Hispanics and Texas politics to me is cute.:pint:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, twa said:

 

Trump turns me off too. but I'm not stupid.

 

People from up North explaining Hispanics and Texas politics to me is cute.:pint:

Pfft...if these were jus opinion peices versus interviews with politicians from Texas and people doing politics in Texas, I'd understand.  Not making **** up, posting what they are saying since they are in the ground down there.  Respect your perspective actually being down there as well, but cmon... you laugh it off so much I have trouble telling if your in denial or acceptance, you keep bouncing between the two 

Edited by Renegade7

Share this post


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

Wait, has Biden said he can do what Obama can't?

When he says he will work with Republicans and they will be amiable, he is saying just that. He said they will work with him once Trump is out of office.

 

Meanwhile Warren is Talking about ending the filibuster if she wins and the Dems take the senate.

 

2 hours ago, PleaseBlitz said:

I mean, any more than every candidate running that is saying they will go beyond what Obama accomplished, which is like, how all campaigns function unbound by the actual process of governing.

 

Except he isn’t running on any policy. His policy is Obama chose me.

 

2 hours ago, PleaseBlitz said:

100% lazy and "that's always been mentioned about him."  Okay, anything to back that one up?  He's doing less public events, sure.  Is that lazy, or is that smart campaign strategy for a frontrunner?  Undisciplined, yes, for certain he is that, at least with his mouth. 

The plagiarism scandal that ended his campaign in the ‘88. His environmental plan that was a policy paper from an environmental organization.

 

3 hours ago, PleaseBlitz said:

Every major decision Biden supported hurt the working class (including "ending" Welfare).  These are just uncut Bernie talking points that distills a very long (and complicated) history in the Senate down into something that a typical Bernie person can digest.  Talk about lazy. 

Tbf, I was writing lazy. I’m also not running for President.

 

What I meant to say is he backed a lot of the policies that hurt the working class.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Something must change. That is why I am now calling on the Senate to abolish the filibuster in all its forms. And I am calling on candidates seeking the Democratic nomination for president to do the same.

Any candidate who isn't talking about changing the filibuster is not a serious candidate. Can't pass anything substantial when you've got to get 60 votes just to vote on something.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Simple roundup:  Why do we want to end the filibuster?  Potential complications?

 

Is this something that wants to be done because the republicans will likely always have a 60 vote majority going forward?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, Springfield said:

Simple roundup:  Why do we want to end the filibuster?  Potential complications?

 

Is this something that wants to be done because the republicans will likely always have a 60 vote majority going forward?

The Senate isn't going to have 60 Democrats anytime soon. If you actually want to pass something you're going to have to get rid of this imposed limitation. Any meaningful gun control, health care, or immigration measure is dead on arrival. There are ways to get past 60 but you can only do it like once a year and it has to for under strict rules.

 

If Moscow Mitch thought it was a winner he'd have already ended it. It's useful for them not to actually govern and maintain the status quo.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, Springfield said:

Simple roundup:  Why do we want to end the filibuster?  Potential complications?

 

Is this something that wants to be done because the republicans will likely always have a 60 vote majority going forward?

 

Filbuster made sense in an idealistic vacuum, this level of gridlock was an inevitable growing pain of our democratic system.  I don't like that we seemingly have to do this now, it was supposed to force us to find middle grounds for important items, but that's not happening anymore.

Share this post


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

Meanwhile Warren is Talking about ending the filibuster if she wins and the Dems take the senate.

 

Thought they already did.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

how many votes are needed to end the filibuster?

 

Reid is just playing games 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Larry said:

 

Thought they already did.  

 

just on judicial and cabinet nominees

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bernie is a whiny loser. It's very likely that he will (a) once again keep on going until the very end even if he has no chance of winning, (b) whine and poison the well by declaring that the system was rigged against him.

  • Sad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, No Excuses said:

Bernie is a whiny loser. It's very likely that he will (a) once again keep on going until the very end even if he has no chance of winning, (b) whine and poison the well by declaring that the system was rigged against him.

 

I hate it when you're right.  I mentioned before about Bernie and Warren competing for votes, there's no doubt in my mind if he dropped out right now, Warren would be leading the polls because they are splitting the same base, but he won't do it.  Word on the street a lot of his supports are jumping ship anyway, slowly.

Edited by Renegade7

Share this post


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

Trump turns me off too. but I'm not stupid.

 

People from up North explaining Hispanics and Texas politics to me is cute.:pint:

 I live in Texas. Trump is still a ****ing idiot down here.

 

Let’s not pretend that any of trumps immigration policies were well-thought-out or based on consultation with experts in the field.  Let’s not pretend that anyone ever wanted a wall before one of the fireflies in his head farted and that bug **** is what came out of his mouth. He’s just playing to the racism of his voting base. It’s exactly what it appears to be. Nothing more.

Edited by Sacks 'n' Stuff
  • Like 3

Share this post


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

 I live in Texas. Trump is still a ****ing idiot down here.

 

Nothing new there.:pint:.....we shoulda had a Cruz.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Sacks 'n' Stuff said:

 He’s a piece of **** too.

 

But much more eloquent.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, Sacks 'n' Stuff said:

 He’s a piece of **** too.

He seems to have a knack for thinking idiots would make good leaders.

  • Like 1

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.