Presidential Election: 11/3/20 ---Now the President Elect Joe Biden Thread

[No Excuses]

On second thought, liberal dystopia looks dope. Pot stores on every corner AND a 24/7 cloning service. The possibilities are limitless.

[PleaseBlitz]

16 hours ago, Renegade7 said:

 

Fair question, but which do you think isnt true? That they are splitting the progressive base or that people are leaving Bernie for Warren?

 

Interesting article to your point, even if they a very similar platform a represent the same base, different demographics in that base support each for different reasons.

 

https://www.politico.com/story/2019/07/12/sanders-warren-voters-2020-1408548

 

I dont agree with questioning if Sanders supports will go to Warren supporters will go to Sanders.  Their platforms are so similar that it's not like when Sanders base virtually abandoned Hillary in 2016, I dont see that happening, especially in light of Trump being in office and most if not all the other candidates being centrists or pretending not to be.

 

I think that Warren and Bernie aren't necessarily appealing to the same people (i.e., they aren't splitting the progressive base).  I mean, they are to an extent for sure, but it's more complicated than that.  For example, I am an establishment Democrat, yet Warren is my first pick and Bernie is my last pick among the for-real contenders.  I also think that the people who have Biden/Bernie as their #1 and #2 (in either order) are just going for the old white guy and don't much care about policy.  Basically, I think you are weighing policy too heavily and persona too lightly in terms of what a lot of voters base their vote on. 

[PleaseBlitz]

Who needs to pay for porn when you have hot chicks making out on a bench in a public park?

 

[DogofWar1]

34 minutes ago, PleaseBlitz said:

For example, I am an establishment Democrat, yet Warren is my first pick and Bernie is my last pick among the for-real contenders.  

 

Are we the same person?

[skinsmarydu]

Like I've said before, Warren/Buttigieg. 🤓

[Momma There Goes That Man]

Warren/Beto

Beto/Abrams

Beto/Gillum

 

Though we will probably get Biden and he will bring someone he thinks is progressive to fire the base up which means we will have a nice Biden/Dulaney ticket. 

[NoCalMike]

12 hours ago, No Excuses said:

On second thought, liberal dystopia looks dope. Pot stores on every corner AND a 24/7 cloning service. The possibilities are limitless.

 

Maybe the cloning service was for strains of pot?

[Barry.Randolphe]

1 hour ago, PleaseBlitz said:

Who needs to pay for porn when you have hot chicks making out on a bench in a public park?

 

 

Scissor me timbers!

[Cooked Crack]

2 hours ago, PleaseBlitz said:

Who needs to pay for porn when you have hot chicks making out on a bench in a public park?

 

Republicans confirmed to be 100% lame. They can go hang out with Mother. I'm going to chilling in the park after hitting up Pot Mart.

[88Comrade2000]

30 minutes ago, Momma There Goes That Man said:

Warren/Beto

Beto/Abrams

Beto/Gillum

 

Though we will probably get Biden and he will bring someone he thinks is progressive to fire the base up which means we will have a nice Biden/Dulaney ticket. 

Abrams will be the veep to whoever the nominee is. Beto is going nowhere but back to Texas.

There's plenty of time for Biden's support to implode. Each day he makes the case, he's mentally unfit for the job. He's too old and is out of touch with today's democratic party.

[Renegade7]

I know this may sound crazy, but I dont want Abrams or Gillum in White House yet.  We need to be flipping states blue, Obama proved jus having the White House in this political climate is not enough to get anything done.  They need to fix Georgia and Florida first, and the people came extremely close to letting them do that, even Senate is better then making them most powerful no power person in the world as VP.

[PleaseBlitz]

3 minutes ago, Renegade7 said:

I know this may sound crazy, but I dont want Abrams or Gillum in White House yet.  We need to be flipping states blue, Obama proved jus having the White House in this political climate is not enough to get anything done.  They need to fix Georgia and Florida first, and the people came extremely close to letting them do that, even Senate is better then making them most powerful no power person in the world as VP.

 

Totally agree.  VP is a pointless job.  Better to have some of the folks named above win some swing Senate seats, of which there are only a few in play.  

[FanboyOf91]

Well, that's not good.

[Cooked Crack]

 

[PleaseBlitz]

14 minutes ago, FanboyOf91 said:

Well, that's not good.

 

No.  In the past month, the discussion has abruptly turned to when the next recession will start.  

 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/powerpost/paloma/daily-202/2019/08/14/daily-202-clouds-of-economic-uncertainty-loom-despite-temporary-reprieve-from-trump-on-china-tariffs/5d53837388e0fa79e5481f7a/

 

Quote

The fundamentals have not changed. In fact, they continue to worsen. And stocks tumbled this morning when the markets opened. For the first time since 2007, the yields on short-term U.S. bonds eclipsed those of long-term bonds. This phenomenon, called the inverted yield curve, has preceded every recession in the past 50 years.

 

Bigger picture, the United States remains engaged in a trade war with China, the world’s second-largest economy, with no end in sight. Trump’s insistence that he still plans to impose all the previously announced duties on Dec. 15 forces corporate chieftains to prepare for more troubled waters ahead. Many analysts said the delay does nothing to mitigate the ominous clouds of uncertainty that hang over the economy. “Trade wars are good and easy to win,” Trump said last year. That was wrong.

 

Beyond the inverted yield curve, economists are pointing to a litany of other early warning signs that indicate a recession looms, despite the Federal Reserve’s recent decision to cut interest rates. There’s already been a decline in business investment, and some companies are pulling back on hiring.

 

Yesterday, Trump came closer than he has before to acknowledging that his tariffs on Chinese imports are really taxes on American consumers. He’s been falsely claiming that the Chinese are paying the full price of his tariffs. “We are doing this for the Christmas season, just in case some of the tariffs would have an impact on U.S. consumers,” the president told reporters, as he prepared to fly to a speech in western Pennsylvania.

 

It’s no coincidence that the products that got a carve-out from the planned 10 percent tariff on $300 billion worth of imports are consumer goods such as cellphones, laptops, strollers and sneakers. Higher prices might have caused sticker shock over the holidays. The prior tariffs, which have gone into effect, mostly increased the price of component parts that companies use to assemble something else. These new tariffs would hit finished goods such as iPhones, which are assembled in China, making it more likely that the higher costs are passed on to consumers.

 

U.S. businesses have begun taking down job listings because of the uncertainty caused by the trade war: “Win Cramer had big plans to hire several new employees this summer for his company, including a chief operating officer, but he took the job listings down after Trump tweeted that more tariffs would hit Chinese goods in September,” our economics correspondent Heather Long reported yesterday. “‘It’s the most frustrating time I’ve ever had running a business, and I’ve been doing this for 20 years,’ said Cramer, chief executive of JLab Audio, which makes wireless earbuds and headphones sold at Best Buy, Target and elsewhere.

 

“The United States had 7.3 million job openings in June, down from a peak of 7.6 million in November. … While the decline is modest, economists are concerned hiring could dry up quickly as companies see no end in sight to Trump’s trade war and they look to cut costs. The reduction in job openings is also widespread across many industries, signaling how cautious companies are becoming. A decrease in job openings has tended to be a signal of economic trouble. … Job openings peaked in April 2007, for example, nine months before the start of the Great Recession. Job openings in many industries have declined since November, including the information sector, financial services, transportation and warehousing, and hotels and food service, suggesting wide concern about future growth. Actual hires also have slowed this year, with average monthly job gains falling to 165,000 a month, down from 223,000 a month last year.”

 

[Springfield]

A recession might be the only thing that Dems have to root for in defeating Trump.

[Renegade7]

1 minute ago, Springfield said:

A recession might be the only thing that Dems have to root for in defeating Trump.

I'm not rooting for a recession.  If it gets out of hand, federal government is in no position to deal with it.  Say what you want about Bush, but he didnt have the pressure of needing re-election in his decision making in 07. Anyone here trust Trump to do what best for the country instead what's best for him?

[No Excuses]

14 minutes ago, Springfield said:

A recession might be the only thing that Dems have to root for in defeating Trump.

 

A recession will tank him but the fundamentals of the economy aren’t that different for the people who voted for him for economic reasons (minus the rich who wanted tax breaks). They haven’t seen any substantial improvements.

 

There’s a reason the GOP didn’t run on the economy in 2018 and why they likely won’t in 2020. Their two major economic policies are the tax cuts, which majority disapproves of, and a dumb trade war that people are starting to negatively feel the effects off.

[Llevron]

Trump said, I believe when he was running for POTUS, that a man like him would have and should have taken better advantage of the recession to make a huge profit. I would be watching his moves closely if this happens.  

[PleaseBlitz]

16 minutes ago, Renegade7 said:

I'm not rooting for a recession.  If it gets out of hand, federal government is in no position to deal with it.  Say what you want about Bush, but he didnt have the pressure of needing re-election in his decision making in 07. Anyone here trust Trump to do what best for the country instead what's best for him?

 

*Checks notes*  No.  

[NoCalMike]

A recession is inevitable though. 10 straight years of growth.  The cycle always repeats. It isn't a matter of if a recession happens, it's a matter of if it hits hard enough during the 2020 election season for it to translate at the ballot box.   I believe it was a Forbes article (which is no bastion for liberal ideology) that showed growth is down 15% in the first two (almost three years of Trump's administration) compared to the final 2 years of the Obama administration.   The slow down has already begun, however because the numbers were trending so positively for so long, 15% slowdown just isn't enough for the masses to pay attention and view it as the beginning of things to come.  

 

Recessions happen after long periods of growth, regardless of who is in the White House.  The question is what you do to prepare, and what you do in response.  Obama enacted a stimulus package.  Conservatives tend to favor austerity and further cuts to programs.  On top of likely proposing more tax cuts (if Trump gets a 2nd term).   Obama's recovery was far from perfect but it debunked the "can't spend your way out of a recession."  That stimulus package, which is really a lot less than Obama originally wanted, stopped the bleeding and got the ball back on the right track.   I don't even want to wonder about what Trump's response to it would be if things go south. 

 

Whoever ends up running against Trump in 2020, needs to hit Trump hard on his two big moves thus far on the economy: Tax cuts primarily for the wealthy, and a trade war.  Neither of which have helped the middle class. 

[Renegade7]

3 minutes ago, Llevron said:

Trump said, I believe when he was running for POTUS, that a man like him would have and should have taken better advantage of the recession to make a huge profit. I would be watching his moves closely if this happens.  

 

There will be an article within a month about him sabotaging attempts to prevent total collapse in real estate market to help him buy cheap property as a private citizen again, watch.

[PleaseBlitz]

3 minutes ago, NoCalMike said:

A recession is inevitable though. 10 straight years of growth.  The cycle always repeats. It isn't a matter of if a recession happens, it's a matter of if it hits hard enough during the 2020 election season for it to translate at the ballot box.   I believe it was a Forbes article (which is no bastion for liberal ideology) that showed growth is down 15% in the first two (almost three years of Trump's administration) compared to the final 2 years of the Obama administration.   The slow down has already begun, however because the numbers were trending so positively for so long, 15% slowdown just isn't enough for the masses to pay attention and view it as the beginning of things to come.  

 

Recessions happen after long periods of growth, regardless of who is in the White House.  The question is what you do to prepare, and what you do in response.  Obama enacted a stimulus package.  Conservatives tend to favor austerity and further cuts to programs.  On top of likely proposing more tax cuts (if Trump gets a 2nd term).   Obama's recovery was far from perfect but it debunked the "can't spend your way out of a recession."  That stimulus package, which is really a lot less than Obama originally wanted, stopped the bleeding and got the ball back on the right track.   I don't even want to wonder about what Trump's response to it would be if things go south. 

 

Trump has taken a lot of undeserved credit for a very long period of good economic performance.  Now, hopefully he'll take a lot of undeserved blame for it starting to go downhill (although his trade war has exasperated things quite a bit).

 

Of course, he'll now blame the inevitable downturn on the threat of a Democrat President, and a lot of idiots will believe him.    

[Larry]

1 hour ago, FanboyOf91 said:

Well, that's not good.

 

Don't forget getting rid of the post-crash banking regulations, and we've had a post in another thread about changing the rules to help low income people buy real estate.  

 

Oh, and intentionally driving up the deficit before the recession, too.  

 

[NoCalMike]

4 minutes ago, PleaseBlitz said:

 

Trump has taken a lot of undeserved credit for a very long period of good economic performance.  Now, hopefully he'll take a lot of undeserved blame for it starting to go downhill (although his trade war has exasperated things quite a bit).

 

Of course, he'll now blame the inevitable downturn on the threat of a Democrat President, and a lot of idiots will believe him.    

 

True, which is why this BS about "Trump isn't a politician, he's a real guy like you and me" is just ridiculous.  He ran on the same nonsense that most politicians say about the economy.  Politicians know the masses respond to fantasy and not reality on certain issues.  People love speeches about jobs and how much you are going to do etc etc etc....when in reality, if the 2020 candidates were honest, they would specifically say, "Look we have had nearly a decade of growth, almost unprecedented, it is normal that a slow down is going to eventually happen, but here are our policies that will take aim to reduce the impact to everyone as much as possible" but no one will ever talk like that because the American people for the most part don't want the truth.