1. #36991
    Unadjusted Human on CBR SUPERECWFAN1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Location
    CM Punk's House
    Posts
    21,350

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by babyblob View Post
    The problem is people's expectations were so high. The Dems controlled the House, Senate and the White House and people were ready for this golden age after Trump. Then The Dems had Some in fighting, Afghanistan happened, the supply issues and inflation. Biden being the guy in the White House bears most of the fault to most people dont see how some of it was not his fault, and how hard it is to get things done when everything goes right let alone when there are problems.
    The control of White House is kinda a stretch. As I explained to a friend (who repeatedly proclaims how Democrats should be doing EVERYTHING) , there is a 50/50 Congress. It doesn't work the way people expect unless you get rid of fillibuster which Manchin won't do. And its causing the issue. Its been explained a lot but somehow the Democrats can magically push stuff through he feels and explaining how they need Republican support on some bills in Senate right now process wise is ..."They need Biden to do it..." (He doesn't understand...it doesn't work that way)

    The supply issues has sadly caused some of the inflation issues. Where there isn't enough truckers to ship goods as we see. With retailers raising costs due to this. Its one of those supply chain causing the other part.

    In both cases the common every day person doesn't understand this. The Trumpsters would understand this and be hammering us about it if we did it. The biggest comedy was them putting out songs to swear at Biden in code and placing stickers on gas pumps because they feel he effected their fuel prices. (they obviously know better but they wanna do this)
    "The story so far: As usual, Ginger and I are engaged in our quest to find out what the hell is going on and save humanity from my nemesis, some bastard who is presumably responsible." - Sir Digby Chicken Caesar.
    “ Well hell just froze over. Because CM Punk is back in the WWE.” - Jcogginsa.
    “You can take the boy outta the mom’s basement, but you can’t take the mom’s basement outta the boy!” - LA Knight.
    "Revel in What You Are." Bray Wyatt.

  2. #36992
    Ultimate Member Mister Mets's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    18,910

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by JackDaw View Post
    How are you defining “trolling”?

    For me, its when some one pretends to have a view other than their true one just to irritate other people…I wouldn’t include other governments using various means (e.g. paid agitators) as trolling…it (organised external government interference) is more sinister. Because there are a lot of links to the Epoch Times, and people who appear on Lindelltv.com.

    But honestly don’t think either trolling or foreign interference had any significant impact on result of Brexit…David Cameron’s complacency was a much more significant factor, and that EU wasn’t that enthusiastic to actually keep UK in.
    A big part of trolling is saying things you don't believe in order to get a rise out of people.

    I don't know if the specific poster does that. He seems to express a real viewpoint, even if he's wrong. There is also the question of what standard we would expect to be held to when it's okay for the rest of us to be called trolls. Should anyone who ever says anything that is hard to take literally, which happens often enough when someone is frustrated by the news, be accused of trolling?

    Quote Originally Posted by Xheight View Post
    Beliefs don't quite work entirely on evidence, look at the belief in redistributive economics and socialism. Wildly incorrect according to whom?
    Continuing the specific discussion from earlier posts, it would be wildly incorrect according to the truth.

    Taking it out of the realm of politics, the last known tasmanian tiger (or thylacine) died in captivity in 1936. There are people who think the species is still alive. The truth is the truth. Whether someone is correct depends on whether any tasmanian tigers are alive or not.

    That example does have lower stakes than whether an election was stolen.

    Quote Originally Posted by Xheight View Post
    Yes certain kinds in certain cases - redlining for example but according to Mets are we to assume that if there is one kind of discrimination then there exists any and all kinds without falsifiable evidence? Suggestive evidence is used all the time is my point without it being conclusive and importantly it can be argued. Are we seeing that with the election materials? Nope. The discourse has been shut down and shouted down. Voting in the pandemic was the means to relax rules and introduce others in states where it hadn't existed before. Ridicule before proper argument characterizes so much of our society that it amounts to bias before thought and that can't be good for any ideology.
    The comparison between discrimination and claims of election fraud in 2020 isn't a great one. It's comparing a wide category to one situation.

    A proper comparison may be between examples of things classified as racism and claims of election fraud in 2020. There are going to be times that people say that something is racist when it really isn't. There will also be times when people say that something is racist and it is. Of course, discussions of racism are going to be complicated by different definitions of the term, which will require different levels of evidence.

    People who say that something is discriminatory will usually be able to describe how it works, which I'm not quite seeing from election truthers.

    Honestly, the people accusing Trump of organizing an attempted coup are usually able to explain how it would have worked, while Trump supporters saying the election is stolen are less able to make that case.

    Quote Originally Posted by Xheight View Post
    If you had been following the thread the evidence is suggestive and been made not unlike the some times academically disputed racial bias evidence. But here is a link again https://electionfraud20.org/
    Do you really think the people in charge of electionfraud20.org believe everything they cite? Or is it matter of throwing **** at the wall, and having limited editorial oversight? Because there are a lot of links to Epoch Times and people who appear on lindelltv.com.
    Last edited by Mister Mets; 11-28-2021 at 09:14 AM.
    Sincerely,
    Thomas Mets

  3. #36993
    Ultimate Member Mister Mets's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    18,910

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Malvolio View Post
    She's been called out for several other statements and didn't apologize. Why now? I'll tell you why. This time she said something that wasn't just an opinion, but something that could actually be proven one way or the other. She said that she was in an elevator with Ilhan Omar. There are cameras and there were witnesses who would say that Ilhan Omar definitely wasn't there, which would go towards Boebert thinking all dark skinned Muslim women look alike.
    This time was different because what she did in referring to a colleague as a member of the jihad squad was really bad. What statement has she previously made that is as nasty?

    There would be two specific problems with suing her for slander or libel. First, it doesn't matter if Omar was ever in an elevator with her because libel rules require that your lie be harmful. When National Enquirer reporting that Richard Simmons is transgender, a judge threw out his libel lawsuit because it's not bad to be transgender, so how can there be any reputational damage? Likewise, there's no reputational damage to being in an elevator with Lauren Boebert.

    https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/bu...uirer-1033833/

    Second, politicians have a lot of free speech protections for a reason. It's supposed to allow for robust discussion. If Ilhan Omar is allowed to sue Lauren Boebert, a lot of other politicians would respond in kind, in a way that will likely excite the bases. You'll see a lot of lawsuits, and Congress doesn't want that.

    Quote Originally Posted by babyblob View Post
    And sadly there will be soo many who will go "See she is not racist. She said sorry and feels so bad."
    I don't think there's overlap between people defending her, and people who care about that.

    Quote Originally Posted by Kirby101 View Post
    The Russian interference definitely had an effect here in 2016. Remember, Clinton won the majority vote and Trump got 3 States by a margin that would barely fill Wembly to take the Presidency.
    I am sure you are right about the Stay politicians blowing it, but on such a close vote, the interference had an impact.
    I also would not compare Obama making a public statement with Putin's troll farms and compromat.
    It's still not clear the Russian interference swung enough votes, because of the sheer amount of election spending. It's possible it tipped over enough voters in the swing districts, although that would suggest people in campaigns really messed up.

    How would compomat affect the election results?

    Quote Originally Posted by Tendrin View Post
    https://twitter.com/chris_notcapn/st...99980609769475

    He's tried to walk it back, but he essentially said 'if it helps fix our democracy I don't need to know about the things I disagree with them on'.

    He definitely doesn't want to alienate his long-standing alt-right fans.

    Obviously, his position here is deeply flawed.
    The specific context is that he believes there is an existential threat to the country, and that we can have the other discussions when that is resolved.

    If he really believes it's an existential threat, his willingness to get anyone's support (with the proviso that they know his views on other issues) is understandable. It's certainly possible he's wrong, although the question would be how. Is he wrong to say it's an existential threat, which means unsavory political allies aren't needed? Or is he correct in identifying the seriousness of the problem, but wrong to accept these potential allies, as they would unable to help and would only hinder things?
    Last edited by Mister Mets; 11-28-2021 at 09:08 AM.
    Sincerely,
    Thomas Mets

  4. #36994
    Ultimate Member Tendrin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    14,330

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mister Mets View Post
    If he really believes it's an existential threat, his willingness to get anyone's support (with the proviso that they know his views on other issues) is understandable. It's certainly possible he's wrong, although the question would be how. Is he wrong to say it's an existential threat, which means unsavory political allies aren't needed? Or is he correct in identifying the seriousness of the problem, but wrong to accept these potential allies, as they would unable to help and would only hinder things?
    They are the existential threat and any support they offer will be the same poison that's killing us now.

  5. #36995
    Astonishing Member JackDaw's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    4,348

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by babyblob View Post
    The problem is people's expectations were so high. The Dems controlled the House, Senate and the White House and people were ready for this golden age after Trump. Then The Dems had Some in fighting, Afghanistan happened, the supply issues and inflation. Biden being the guy in the White House bears most of the fault to most people dont see how some of it was not his fault, and how hard it is to get things done when everything goes right let alone when there are problems.
    In UK today the Daily Telegraph ran a story suggesting that Kamala Harris’s performance to date, and doubt whether or not Joe B will seek a second term is to some extent draining public support.

    (It was part of an article covering rumours that some hope Kamala could be placed on Supreme Court and replaced as Vice President, should a court place become available.)

  6. #36996
    Ultimate Member babyblob's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2018
    Location
    New Richmond Ohio
    Posts
    12,246

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by JackDaw View Post
    In UK today the Daily Telegraph ran a story suggesting that Kamala Harris’s performance to date, and doubt whether or not Joe B will seek a second term is to some extent draining public support.

    (It was part of an article covering rumours that some hope Kamala could be placed on Supreme Court and replaced as Vice President, should a court place become available.)
    I dont know if Biden seeks a second term. I dont know if he would win if he did. I dont think Harris would win if she ran. Biden and the Dems kind of painted themselves in a corner with Harris. he wanted to show he is more progressive then Trump and better with women and POC so Harris was his pick. There were better qualified people for the VP pick.

    Now she has nit done much and hasnt really been out there (Her fault or the White Houses I am not sure who to blame) She doesnt seem well liked and doesnt seem to have a huge amount of excitement and support.

    Biden and the White House need to do more to get her out there and improver her image other then just having her in the background when he has a press conference or signs a bill. So yes part of it is on Biden and his team. VP has always seemed to be presented as the next in line and that is not how she is being presented or presenting herself at all.

    So if Biden doesnt run it will pretty much all be on Harris because The Dems care way more about optics then the GOP so I dont see them dropping The first Woman POC Vp to run someone else. They would be worried about angering and turning away voters.

    I wouldnt Mind Harris running. I would vote for her. But I just dont see her doing much in 2024 if she does run.
    Last edited by babyblob; 11-28-2021 at 10:36 AM.
    This Post Contains No Artificial Intelligence. It Contains No Human Intelligence Either.

  7. #36997
    Astonishing Member JackDaw's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    4,348

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by babyblob View Post
    I dont know if Biden seeks a second term. I dont know if he would win if he did. I dont think Harris would win if she ran. Biden and the Dems kind of painted themselves in a corner with Harris. he wanted to show he is more progressive then Trump and better with women and POC so Harris was his pick. There were better qualified people for the VP pick.

    Now she has nit done much and hasnt really been out there (Her fault or the White Houses I am not sure who to blame) She doesnt seem well liked and doesnt seem to have a huge amount of excitement and support.

    Biden and the White House need to do more to get her out there and improver her image other then just having her in the background when he has a press conference or signs a bill. So yes part of it is on Biden and his team. VP has always seemed to be presented as the next in line and that is not how she is being presented or presenting herself at all.

    So if Biden doesnt run it will pretty much all be on Harris because The Dems care way more about optics then the GOP so I dont see them dropping The first Woman POC Vp to run someone else. They would be worried about angering and turning away voters.

    I wouldnt Mind Harris running. I would vote for her. But I just dont see her doing much in 2024 if she does run.
    A few of the UK papers (including a couple of the usually reliable ones) have reported that Joe B has said he will seek re-election, but in spite of that few people are really convinced he will.

  8. #36998
    Ultimate Member babyblob's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2018
    Location
    New Richmond Ohio
    Posts
    12,246

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by JackDaw View Post
    A few of the UK papers (including a couple of the usually reliable ones) have reported that Joe B has said he will seek re-election, but in spite of that few people are really convinced he will.
    With his age and the way people go on and on about his mental flubs I dont know if he will win even if he does run. He didnt crush Trump the first time around and that was with out the ammo Trump and the GOP will have after 4 years of Biden in the White House.
    This Post Contains No Artificial Intelligence. It Contains No Human Intelligence Either.

  9. #36999
    Invincible Jersey Ninja Tami's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    32,107

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by JackDaw View Post
    A few of the UK papers (including a couple of the usually reliable ones) have reported that Joe B has said he will seek re-election, but in spite of that few people are really convinced he will.
    At minimum Biden has to say he will run again so that he isn't regarded as a Lame Duck. There haven't been many Presidents who intentionally don't run for a second term.

    In the current political environment, ,Biden needs to consider everything he can possibly do to keep Democrats in power as long as possible. If it turns out that running for a second term is the best way to achieve that goal, he'll do it even if it is reluctantly.
    Original join date: 11/23/2004
    Eclectic Connoisseur of all things written, drawn, or imaginatively created.

  10. #37000
    Invincible Jersey Ninja Tami's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    32,107

    Default

    Maybe this guy reads too many DC Comics

    MORE: In lengthy weekend court filing, accused Jan 6 OathKeeper conspirator argues the US Justice Dept is focused on..... Capitol riot defendants who will "not KNEEL BEFORE ZOD"... and is demanding "loyalty oaths that the election was perfect"

    "Busting down doors".. etc, etc
    Twitter Link

    Original join date: 11/23/2004
    Eclectic Connoisseur of all things written, drawn, or imaginatively created.

  11. #37001
    Ultimate Member Malvolio's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Location
    Freeville, NY
    Posts
    12,152

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Tami View Post
    Maybe this guy reads too many DC Comics

    Twitter Link

    The most convenient of conspiracy theories. When asked for proof, they answer, "I can't show the proof or they'll throw me in jail or kill me."
    Watching television is not an activity.

  12. #37002
    Invincible Member numberthirty's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    24,858

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Tami View Post
    At minimum Biden has to say he will run again so that he isn't regarded as a Lame Duck. There haven't been many Presidents who intentionally don't run for a second term.

    In the current political environment, ,Biden needs to consider everything he can possibly do to keep Democrats in power as long as possible. If it turns out that running for a second term is the best way to achieve that goal, he'll do it even if it is reluctantly.
    Past that, who looks even sorta like they can take the ball and run with it if it's not him?

    Not his Vice President or any of his cabinet. Not too many folks from Congress.

  13. #37003
    Ultimate Member Mister Mets's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    18,910

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by babyblob View Post
    I dont know if Biden seeks a second term. I dont know if he would win if he did. I dont think Harris would win if she ran. Biden and the Dems kind of painted themselves in a corner with Harris. he wanted to show he is more progressive then Trump and better with women and POC so Harris was his pick. There were better qualified people for the VP pick.

    Now she has nit done much and hasnt really been out there (Her fault or the White Houses I am not sure who to blame) She doesnt seem well liked and doesnt seem to have a huge amount of excitement and support.

    Biden and the White House need to do more to get her out there and improver her image other then just having her in the background when he has a press conference or signs a bill. So yes part of it is on Biden and his team. VP has always seemed to be presented as the next in line and that is not how she is being presented or presenting herself at all.

    So if Biden doesnt run it will pretty much all be on Harris because The Dems care way more about optics then the GOP so I dont see them dropping The first Woman POC Vp to run someone else. They would be worried about angering and turning away voters.

    I wouldnt Mind Harris running. I would vote for her. But I just dont see her doing much in 2024 if she does run.
    Harris seems to be a weak general election candidate, but it's going to be very hard in an open primary for Democrats to oppose a woman of color elected to national office.

    She is different from many previous Vice Presidents. One issue that she doesn't help the Biden administration navigate Washington. In recent years, it's been rare to have Vice Presidents with less Washington experience than the President. Exceptions like Agnew or Quayle were not taken seriously.

    Perhaps from a governing position it was a mistake to pick her, and Biden should've gone with Karen Bass (who is a major figure in the House of Representatives and had led a state legislature; two areas where Biden has no experience) or Susan Rice.

    However, what's done is done. The best for Democrats may be to figure out how to use Kamala Harris effectively and publicly. One argument is that she's underrated in one on one settings behind the scenes, but she's unlikely to get much recognition for this.

    The left has praised her as a lawyer, although these skills may not be a great fit for a VP. She can't be placed on special commissions in the department of justice because the Attorney General wants to make it clear that he is separate from the White House.

    Maybe the best approach would be to send her out internationally to bolster her foreign policy experience. Hillary Clinton had great approval ratings when she was Secretary of State. Nikki Haley's reputation increased as the result of her work as UN Ambassador, and she certainly did not start that job with serious foreign policy credentials.

    Quote Originally Posted by Tendrin View Post
    They are the existential threat and any support they offer will be the same poison that's killing us now.
    He takes white supremacy less seriously than you do, and probably takes the need to reform democracy more seriously than you do.

    He doesn't offer any policy concessions to get white supremacists to support democratic reforms, so there is that.

    If white supremacy is the existential threat we're facing right now, what compromises are necessary to stop it? What should people looking to reform systems of democracy be willing to give up to stop the more important problem?

    Quote Originally Posted by numberthirty View Post
    Past that, who looks even sorta like they can take the ball and run with it if it's not him?

    Not his Vice President or any of his cabinet. Not too many folks from Congress.
    There are some Democrats who would be taken seriously if they didn't have to run against a woman in color in national office.

    In a presidential primary without a sitting President or Vice-President, Buttigieg, Warren, Klobuchar, and Newsom could all be serious contenders. The 2022 elections can also change things. If Nikki Friend, Val Demmings, Stacey Abrams or Beto O'Rourke win their bids for statewide office, they would be major presidential contenders.
    Last edited by Mister Mets; 11-28-2021 at 12:55 PM.
    Sincerely,
    Thomas Mets

  14. #37004
    Invincible Jersey Ninja Tami's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    32,107

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by numberthirty View Post
    Past that, who looks even sorta like they can take the ball and run with it if it's not him?

    Not his Vice President or any of his cabinet. Not too many folks from Congress.
    That will be sorted out in 2023, at least 2 years from now. Until then, I'm not going to make any predictions.
    Original join date: 11/23/2004
    Eclectic Connoisseur of all things written, drawn, or imaginatively created.

  15. #37005
    Unadjusted Human on CBR SUPERECWFAN1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Location
    CM Punk's House
    Posts
    21,350

    Default

    We have to be honest here , Biden will be 82. He's gonna be an in unheard of age as President then. Given the toil physically the job takes (look at how it aged Clinton , GW Bush and Obama in 8 years) this is not an easy job. Even with best healthcare on the planet there. He will have to check and see if he can handle another possible 4 years physically. With the very likelyhood he may end up under huge stress in his 80's and that isn't good.

    I'd want Biden to stay and try to fix the country as long as possible. But we have to be serious its not an easy , he should do it. This isn't a typical job we can say this about.
    "The story so far: As usual, Ginger and I are engaged in our quest to find out what the hell is going on and save humanity from my nemesis, some bastard who is presumably responsible." - Sir Digby Chicken Caesar.
    “ Well hell just froze over. Because CM Punk is back in the WWE.” - Jcogginsa.
    “You can take the boy outta the mom’s basement, but you can’t take the mom’s basement outta the boy!” - LA Knight.
    "Revel in What You Are." Bray Wyatt.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •