lannarebirth

Bernie absolutely had the best chance of defeating Trump, but the "narrative" is that the guy who would leave things m/l as Trump has is the "electable" choice.

https://www.businessinsider.com/coronavirus-treatment-costs-america-expensive-2020-3

https://markets.businessinsider.com/news/stocks/medicare-for-all-leading-economists-sign-letter-massive-savings-cost-2020-3-1028982592

9 hours ago, Jingthing said:

Sounds like when Bernie loses there are going to be a lot of people feeling burned and reluctant to unite behind Biden to defeat the existential threat to democracy in the white house. That's a real shame but not worth nominating Bernie so that he can be labeled a commie by fox and 45.

People who buy into things like "labels" and "branding" are the problem. The country is inhabited by human beings who deserve to be served by their government. They are not merely economic inputs to be used to create "narratives" around. History will not be kind to all the idiots who traded in their humanity for politics as bloodsport.

9 hours ago, zydeco said:

One thing I do want to know is that if indeed they do pass some new stimulus bill that directs bailout money to businesses, will someone please check to see this time if the Trump family is among the beneficiaries? Until and unless that is cleared--no bill. And even if there is a bill, it should be accompanied with a rollback of the corporate/bankster tax cuts for the one percent Trump got in 2017.

 

Why wouldn't you just give the stimulus to people, including the people who own a business? How does this help people on disability or caregivers or the infirmed or people laid off from work? If the government doesn't exist to serve people why have it at al?

4 minutes ago, Berkshire said:

Interesting article.  So US shale companies were already losing money even when oil was $50+.  I just wonder if the US GOV will bail them out at some point to maintain oil producing supremacy....aka socialism.   

At the very least the US should vote to reinstitute the ban on US oil exports.

Though the pundits kept saying Warren was stealing votes from Bernie because she basically lifted his policies then ran them through a "lite" filter it was always clear she was the upper class white moderate choice. They supported her because they knew she had no real political convictions and their lives would pretty much go on as before.  For the very same reasons she failed to gain support with normal Americans.

1 hour ago, Stargrazer9889 said:

So these cruise ships could not even tie up at a dock and remain in total quarantine?

 I wonder about the intelligence of the authorities of keeping them at sea. I guess

less chance of anyone doing a runner.

Geezer

It is odd, as ships go into quarantine everytime they enter a new foreign port and no one is released until signed off on by local health officer.

3 minutes ago, timendres said:

Since oil is an input to many products, a lower price means lower prices and more demand - a good thing. However, at the moment, oil is an indicator of demand, and that makes a lower price a bad thing.

I understand the reasoning, but I don't understand why everyone should be made to care about it.

18 minutes ago, Berkshire said:

Hmmm....if CCL even survives.  The CDC just issued a recommendation against cruise ship travel.  This could linger for some time.  And if some of the passengers decide that the cruise ship contributed to them getting COVID....lawsuits galore.  I'd say there's plenty of downside left.   

Probably, but with pages and pages of disclaimers attached to every ticket, the need to be heard in Admiralty Court and your lawyer needing to have a good foundation in Rhodian Law I'd say lawsuits will be much fewer than you might suppose.

1 minute ago, Chomper Higgot said:

I really do hope so.

 

Trump and Barr will wish otherwise.

Klobuchar would be a better choice as AG. Having listened to Harris describe her AG tenure in California during the debates, I happen to be in a position to know that most of what she said was untrue.

14 minutes ago, Ricohoc said:

Each country has their own problems with the virus.

 

Trump's restricting incoming air travel early and quickly has been helpful to the US. 

 

The numbers aren't remotely close to influenza outbreaks in the US.  It's blown way out proportion in the media.  Gotta tank that stock market to blame Trump. 

No one is voluntarily selling stocks in an effort to embarass Trump. You see the oil futures today?

3 minutes ago, heybruce said:

Had you bothered to look at the link I provided, you would have read this:

 

" Deborah Sines, the U.S. federal prosecutor who was previously in charge of Rich's case, told Yahoo News the Russian foreign intelligence service (known as SVR) circulated a "bulletin" designed to look like a real intelligence report that falsely claimed Rich was an FBI informant. The document stated Rich was headed to inform the FBI about crimes involving Hillary Clinton on the night of his death, and was killed by a squad of assassins working for the former secretary of state. In reality, Rich was heading home late at night after a few drinks with colleagues. "

 

Obviously I did provide examples of Russian lies.  In this case the lies were promoted on Fox News by Sean Hannity, which gave them exposure and credibility that no amount of money could provide.

 

Regarding "you've really posted nothing not obviously false or substantive"; I have pointed out how your post was false.  Now why don't you try and post something substantive by giving examples of the lies you claim Bloomberg has been caught in.  Make them good lies, something on the order of one of Fox News' most popular pundits promoting an outrageous Russian lie and defamation of a Presidential candidate.

Just off the top of my head I'd say one of Bloomberg's more glaring lies is that Xi is not a dictator.

8 hours ago, Damrongsak said:

As of a few minutes ago, 472 cases in the U.S.   Earlier today:   Latest info for USA: https://www.nbcnews.com/health/health-news/coronavirus-u-s-map-where-virus-has-been-confirmed-across-n1124546

Here's a good website for staying up to date, whether it's in your hometown or globally.

https://www.arcgis.com/apps/opsdashboard/index.html#/bda7594740fd40299423467b48e9ecf6

I expect many will soon be pressed into service as quarantine places.  Probably not layed out appropriately to be used as hospital ships. US flagged and US owned, foreign flag ships may be pressed into service in times of declared national emergency.

58 minutes ago, Jingthing said:

Don't be ridiculous. If Biden is nominated which of course now seems likely Obama will both endorse him enthusiastically and also campaign for him tirelessly. The very future existence of American democracy rides on beating authoritarian anti rule of law 45.

The future of American democracy rides on taking it back from monied interests who have purchased what now passes for American democracy.

32 minutes ago, TheAppletons said:

  So which female running mate would you like on the ticket (either one)?  I ask because that's the trending theory - Biden runs with Klobuchar/Harris/Michelle Obama/Warren as VP candidate and Trump dumps Pence for Nikki Haley.  

I wouldn't like any of them, but if I had to choose, Klobuchar. If he gets through the primaries, Biden's got to drop this whole Obama redux schtick. Sure, accept his endorsement and let him stump for you in appropriate places, but let's not forget, Obama was not a good president. He just had the great fortune to be bookended by W and Trump. Harris embarrassed herself in the debates and Warren lowers the average age of the running mates on the ticket to 75.

I think Biden ought to flip the usual Democratic presidential nominee script if he's to win. Normally they run to the Left in the primaries and back to the center in the General. He should stay in the center now and if he gains the nomination he ought to run to the Left some or he's going to lose an awful lot of voter turnout. There's this presumption that turnout will be big, because we have to get Trump out. I'm not sure that's so. It could very well be low if people have the sense their vote never mattered in the first place and Trump isn't any worse than the candidate from the party that allowed a Billionaire to buy election outcomes.

1 minute ago, TheAppletons said:

  People won't vote for Biden because they like Biden.  They'll vote for Biden because he isn't Trump - just like they're voting for Biden in the primaries because he isn't a "Democratic Socialist" named Bernie Sanders.

That wouldn't be enough for me. It will depend on his running mate for me. It doesn't have to be who I wish he would choose but it has to be someone who can take over leadership over the party one day and turn it in a new direction. I have to laugh at those who think that Trump is a bad as it could get. It can always get worse and it always does when when we're forced to embrace the "least worst" voting rationale. I don't buy into that anymore.

*Removed post edited out*

There's really only one positive argument that could made for Biden. And that is that he has made so many bad calls throughout his career and because this is the absolute end of the line for him, he will be more concerned with his legacy, which needs a lot of sanitizing than caving to establishment interests. I'm not expecting this but I'm hopeful of it. It doesn't make for a positive feeling when casting your ballot.

8 hours ago, Crazy Alex said:

I prefer reality myself. "Could be as many as...." is NOT an estimate nor reality. Surely you can see this, yes?

 

The fact is, an American is far more likely to die from the common flu and 2,500 times more likely to die from a medical mistake. So yes, I do prefer reality, facts and statistics. I am not sure what you are talking about with random people and Trump promises. There is enough data available for a rational person to calculate what, if any risk, they are at.
 

Actually the figures were described as his "best guess", which of course is synonymous with an estimate. Of course it is his best guess given currently available information. He did say it is likely, even certain, that the information will change, in what ways we know not, and how that will affect his current best guess is unknown.

1 hour ago, Crazy Alex said:

Interesting position on Sanders. If he wasn't a strong candidate, the DNC wouldn't have needed to rig the primary against him and for the strong candidate Hillary Clinton in 2016. At least this year, their efforts are better concealed.

No comparison with 2016 where the primary WAS rigged against Sanders. It was not this year. The media, of course, was rigged against him this year, because those are the very corporations he would seek to rein in.

3 hours ago, legend49 said:

"We're doing very well," Trump said after signing the spending bill, which was approved by the Senate on Thursday. "But it's an unforeseen problem ... came out of nowhere, but we're taking care of it."

 

Must be hurting his ego, he only wanted to spend 25% of the new bill on the virus, but was forced into $8.3 billion.

https://www.businessinsider.com/presentation-us-hospitals-preparing-for-millions-of-hospitalizations-2020-3

9 minutes ago, Jingthing said:

Warren would be a good pick but the problem with her is that her state has a republican governor meaning she would be replaced with a republican senator. Hurts the chances of taking over the senate. 

 

I agree Yang no freaking way. 

Yeah, he and Bernie both are for democratic reforms and campaign finance reform. The horror!