How come there's never a candidate that finds homelessness and rampant mental illness unacceptable on the ballot? What kind of society do people want? A bad one or one slightly less bad?

5 minutes ago, bristolboy said:

We don't need to. Just consult what pollsters are finding.

https://www.latimes.com/business/story/2020-02-21/obamacare-popular-more-than-ever

https://khn.org/news/democrats-favor-building-on-aca-over-medicare-for-all/

 

Interesting.  But what's that got to do with the post I was responding to?  You trying to take advantage of the fact ThaiVisa only allows one quote?

41 minutes ago, bristolboy said:

You don't reply to specifics that I raised.  But instead resort to claims that I'm losing the war. Who appointed you the referee?  But what really condemns you is your use of personal insults: "I'm guessing you may be an aspie." People resort to that class of nonsense when they haven't got the facts on their side.

I'd be willing to put it to a vote.

21 minutes ago, spidermike007 said:

Hey, I would vote for a better person, if they were out there. But, in this day and age of sewer creature politics, I do not think a character of nobility will ever again rise to the task. It is a horrendous job, and only attracts those of marginal talent, those craving the limelight, those who are blinded by megalomania (Trump) or those who are deluded into thinking they can make a difference. 

 

Having said all that, Biden is 100 times the man Trump is, on a dozen different levels. Fairness, experience, smarts, dignity, a lack of seething hatred, a lack of putrid racism, a respect for the poor and middle class, integrity, ability to command respect from our allies, a willingness to select people of talent and wisdom to help within the administration, and so much more. It would be such a huge step up for America. And he may even be able to staunch the massive decline that Trump has precipitated. 

There were more than 6 better candidates running for the Democratic nomination, and that is excluding Kamala Harris and Elizabeth Warren, whose candidacy's were basically identity politics and/or vanity projects. 

Biden is the candidate currently, not because the primary process has run it's course, or that he has an insurmountable lead, but because the corporate funders came back in the fold after the DNC and their media arms denounced the more popular candidate as unelectable. Even though every poll said that he would defeat Trump. The DNC opted to wield their promise of Billions of dollars in advertising revenue to quash the candidacy of the more popular, grassroots funded candidate in favor of the left for dead corporate shill. And "make no mistake" (???? God I hate that phrase) Biden is a corporate shill. Obamacare is a travesty and he keeps talking it up as if it were something to be proud of, even though it will bankrupt many during this current pandemic.

Oh, and BTW, if you want better candidates, contribute your money to that outcome. In America it's always about the money. I personally contributed to 4 different Democrats running for the nomination. Bernie was a great example of grassroots money raising though IMO, all candidate should start with the same amount of money funded through taxe

15 minutes ago, spidermike007 said:

37 years in the US senate has to count for something. It sure beats 40 years of real estate development, and scamming of small contractors. Then 8 years as VP. He puts Trump to shame on a dozen different levels. And you talk about debt skyrocketing? Trump has done exactly that. A health care plan. What has Trump done in the way of introducing new ideas on that front? There is zero evidence of Biden ever taking any money from anyone. His son may be a different story. But when it comes to the discussions of sons, you really do not want to bring Trump's spawn into this. 

 

I would say a fall and winter of recovery, once Don Donald has been removed, in a rather humiliating fashion. Let's go baby. Lets make America better, without the incompetent. 

Don't you people ever get tired of being drawn into a blind alley? Yeah our guy's not good but he's better than the other guy. Then in 4 years the other side beats your guy with someone worse because your guy's not good, which you knew going in. Rinse and repeat, Worse >>Worse>>Worse. Don't you people ever recognize the pattern?

Quote

The 'democracy gap' in our politics and elections spells a deep sense of powerlessness by people who drop out, do not vote, or listlessly vote for the 'least worst' every four years and then wonder why after every cycle the 'least worst' gets worse. - Ralph Nader

Whenever you answer a question with a question, as is your wont,  I consider that a non response or rhetorical question.

No answer I have ever given here has been embarassing to me. I would only be embarrassed if I didn't change my answer if the facts changed but my answer didn't. That circumstance hasn't arisen yet, though it might.

I'm not engaging in what aboutism, it's more like same same but differentism. You are so engaged in the day to day battles, often defending the indefensible, you don't realize you are losing the war. I'm guessing you may be an aspie.

33 minutes ago, utalkin2me said:

If democrats cannot beat the worst president in history, they should blame themselves for nominating horrendous, unpopular candidates! 

They live under the delusion that horse <deleted> is much more palatable than bull <deleted>.

15 minutes ago, Crazy Alex said:

Those numbers aren't remotely close enough to make a Constitutional amendment at all realistic.

It is never ever going to happen, no matter how many links someone pulls up. Small states will not vote against their interest, period. I can't believe so many people let journalists do their thinking for them.  Their credibility ranks up their with Congress. As my grandfather used to say, "paper never refused ink".

7 minutes ago, bristolboy said:

On the one hand you blamed the "monied interests" for stifling electoral reform. On the other hand you refuse to acknowledge that there is a huge gulf between the 2 parties on this issue. A huge gulf.

Both parties pander to and are the hand maidens of monied interests. There were absolutely NO differences between the parties on the large corporation bailiout, save for the fake oversight the Democrats held out for. In fact, it pains me to say it, but it was the Proggressive Republicans (yes, they apparently exist) that fought harder for small businesses and the personal stipend, meager as it is.

1 hour ago, bristolboy said:

Nonsense. If healthcare concerns were only about Covid19 you'd have a better point. But do you think that this pandemic has only increased concern about Covid-19 or pandemics? Or about more general concerns? And who do you think is going to be held responsible for making Obamacare more expensive rather than less? And members owhat party is now trying to get rid of Obamacare altogether and replace it with exactly nothing? And why did the genius Trump have the justice dept join a lawsuit to invalidate Obamacare? Ya really think Americans trust Republicans more on healthcare?

And as I've pointed out earlier, Salt rollback actually helps those states that do most to protect their citizens. And as usual, you ignore the fact that Republicans exploited the tax bill of 2017 to give real wealthy estate owners another huge break on top of the ones they already got in the last tax bill. Quick! Name me one chief executive of the USA who stands to benefit from this?

It depends on how long of a memory voters have. If Democrats had not voted down what is now called Obamacare and UBI back when Nixon was president, things would probably look a whole lot better by now. I'd like to think that early 70's era "Obamacare" might have morphed into Universal healthcare by now.

Speaking of Chief Executives benefitting. I believe I read about a $170 Billion carve out for real estate developers. I think Trump got about 19 years of loss carry forwards last time something like that came around.  Oh, and he's administering the $500 Billion corporate slush fund personally he says. No quid pro quo I'm sure.

Don't be sucked into that narrative that assumes that just because the other side is bad it makes your side the good guys. That hasn't been the case for a very long time.

3 hours ago, Xavnel said:

You obviously have no clue as to the purpose of Electorals or how the system works.

It was set up do that every state counts.  If not for Electoral College,  then the President would be chosen ONLY by California and New York. No other state would matter. That is not a Democracy.

 

As far as the mail in votes....  WAY too much voter fraud. I could feasibly mail in my vote card, my wife's,  my daughter and my 2 sons without them even seeing it.... take it a step further...  I could feasibly mail in my neighbor's,  and his wife's... 

The  what happens when they go down to vote? Do they get busted for "trying to vote twice"  ?? Or does someone need to go find the mail in Vote Card and uncounted it ? .....  

Let's say, for example, the Mail Person is a Devote Republican, but his/her Route is in a very heavy Democrat area.... feasibly he/she could "accidentally"  misplace all those voter cards into the nearest dumpster fire?

Take only those 3 situations,   and multiple that by 5 million, 10 million, 20 million voters.... 

WAY , WAY  too much chance for Voter Fraud.

My state went exclusively to vote by mail almost 20 years ago. Little to none evidence of voter fraud. What is evident is that voter participation is much higher than other states and that scares the hell out of some monied interests and the stooges they would have stand for office..

31 minutes ago, Jingthing said:

Mark my words, the 2020 election will be about the blood on his hands issue and also of course, closely related, health care.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2020/04/06/susan-rice-trumps-coronavirus-response-he-has-cost-tens-thousands-american-lives/

 

 

Could be, but Trump promised to make healthcare related to Covid 19 free for all uninsured Americans and Obamacare people will be forced to pay thousands in deductibles, assuming they still have itafter losing their jobs, in which case Trump's $100 Billion to hospitals covers them. It looks like the Democrats are being outflanked AGAIN, while Nancy Pelosi is fighting tooth and nail to get SALT rollback in the next stimulus bill, A provision that only helps the rich.  And yeah, he's got a lot of blood on his hands but the numbers will come in lower than projections. Old Wall St. ploy of managing expectations.

3 minutes ago, pegman said:

No AOC. Think Dem  Mich Gov.

Probably, but the problem is, noone had ever heard of this woman a month ago outside Michigan By this time next year she's president if Biden wins. That feels like yet another person no one chose being crammed down the electorate's throat.

4 minutes ago, tropo said:

It's not quite that simple. The Democrats want to eliminate the Electoral College. They play dirty.

That's just throwing red meat to the base. The Electoral  College will never be eliminated, as they well know.

Never mind.

1 minute ago, Crazy Alex said:

You know.... imagine what the political hacks of both parties would do to an industry if that industry was controlled by two corporations as pathetic as our two parties. I say they'd be screaming from every roof top to dismantle such a duopoly and would have those two corporations blasted into bits in short order.

Hard to say given the incestuous nature of government and the corporatocracy.

1 minute ago, Crazy Alex said:

Really? Tell me more about this "article 25". Hint: there's no such thing. Therein lies part of the problem. You are clinging at some straw man that doesn't even exist! And what is this additional nonsense about "for a sitting and tweeting president"? Is this also covered by this mysterious "article 25"?

 

Wow. Just WOW.

Section 4, 25th Amendment.

13 minutes ago, bristolboy said:

What exactly does the 6 trillion consist of? I believe you are using that fact that 500 billion can be leveraged into 4 trillion in loans. Or am I mistaken?

 

Some of it will come from the FED to prop up companies that would otherwise go out of business, but I'll let Larry explain it:   

https://www.nationalreview.com/news/coronavirus-relief-white-house-adviser-larry-kudlow-projects-aid-package-to-reach-roughly-6-trillion/

17 minutes ago, stephenterry said:

It's a really great question with little current scientific evidence to support why New Orleans death rates materially exceeds New York.

 

On the assumption that both populations mostly follow the SAD diet and are similarly obese, it could come down to differing lifestyle habits. As an aside, rice and beans provide a complete protein source. Add green veggies, a few fruits, and cost of food for the poorest is low and should be manageable.

 

The three main USA killers are heart attacks, strokes and cancer, and obese people are at a high risk of blocked arterial plaque which the Covid19 virus could exploit on its journey to the lungs. Which still doesn't explain why New Orleans has a higher mortality rate. N.O. county also has a low smoking rate, so that's not an answer.

 

While race could be a genetic factor there are twice as many black americans in N.Y. state than in Louisiana. So no answer there.

 

i would suggest that the health care in N.Y. is far more capable of prolonging life than N.O. - and more financially accessible by the New Yorkers. Being poor in N.O. would hinder their recovery if they cannot afford the meds.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

   

New Orleans has a terribly corrupt government. I expect that contributes in some way to this outcome.  All my favorite places have corrupt governments. New Orleans, Italy, Thailand.

If it was my time and I had to go, New Orleans is the place I would choose. Most fun, and best food to be had on the American continent.  RIP Ellis Marsalis:

https://www.npr.org/sections/coronavirus-live-updates/2020/04/02/825717204/ellis-marsalis-patriarch-of-new-orleans-most-famous-musical-family-has-died

Everything Andrew Yang warned you about has come to pass. America is not a resiliant country in any way, shape or form. Your leaders are impotent, as are your institutions. America is a country of careerists in government as opposed to a country of committed professionals who see their role as a sacred duty for which they are well remunerated.