Democrat Warren takes step to challenge Trump in 2020

[lannarebirth]

31 minutes ago, bendejo said:

I hear ya, I tried watching his standup, never got a laugh.  I tried watching that show he had, was that supposed to be comedy?

But I listened to this thing mentioned in the news today, recorded by someone in the audience, and admit I got a few chuckles.  He has this "I've got nothing to lose now" manner, and at one point says something like "what you gonna do, revoke my birth certificate?"  Some good slams against the millennial generation.

His fetish about whipping it out in front of women and wanking it, I can't relate to that at all.  Maybe you have to be a red haired guy from Boston to understand.

 

What Liz is basically about is the role private $$$ plays in gov't, and I agree.  It's time for the new breed of Dems to start coming up with visions and strategies and not be distracted by the attention-getting antics of the orange demon.

 

 

I agree, the "leaked tape" was actually kinda funny, because unless you're Henny Youngman or Rodney Dangerfield the stuff that's a little too (uncomfortably) close to the truth is the funniest of all.

 

Well, she's not wrong about the money, and of course that's the whole problem with everything isn't it? The thing is, I don't see her walking away from the money. You've got to start there IMO.

[bristolboy]

4 hours ago, TonyClifton said:

Use your words correctly.   The word to be used is not "racist."  You apparently don't know the meaning of this word.  Had you used bigoted or prejudiced, I might give you some credence.  

If race is a real thing, then, yes, your remarks were racist. Ascribing a certain way of cliched and false way of speech to Native Americans is just as racist as ascribing a different cliched and false way speech to African Americans. We have seen such racism in action via alleged ghetto speak ascribed to Barack Obama. 

[lannarebirth]

7 minutes ago, bristolboy said:

If race is a real thing, then, yes, your remarks were racist. Ascribing a certain way of cliched and false way of speech to Native Americans is just as racist as ascribing a different cliched and false way speech to African Americans. We have seen such racism in action via alleged ghetto speak ascribed to Barack Obama. 

Is it also racist to ascribe a certain way of speech to crackers / rednecks ?   I prefer to think that some people are just uncultered regardless of ethnicity.

Edited January 1, 2019 by lannarebirth

[bristolboy]

5 hours ago, TonyClifton said:

Use your words correctly.   The word to be used is not "racist."  You apparently don't know the meaning of this word.  Had you used bigoted or prejudiced, I might give you some credence.  

Actually, it's you who are not familiar with the meanings of the word. That's right, "meanings". In Europe, including the UK, racism is now used to described disparagement of cultures and nationalities as well as of races. And before you start playing naive etymological games, consider "antisemitism". Or do believe that since Arabs are Semites, that they can't be antisemitic? 

Edited January 1, 2019 by bristolboy

[bristolboy]

1 minute ago, lannarebirth said:

Is it also racist to ascribe a certain way of speech to crackers / rednecks ?

But people who those terms might be applied to are only a subset of white people. So that would be bigoted speech, not racist. Whereas Tony Clifton's refers to a generalized cliche about Native Americans who generally are considered a race. Now, as to the reality of such a thing as race, it's a much vexed question. But the belief is widespread if not nearly universal.

[keemapoot]

13 minutes ago, Jingthing said:

Just because you don't like the massive results of the Mueller investigation (much more to come) doesn't make it a fraud. 

Parroting the racist taunts of a criminally corrupt illegitimate president doesn't make Senator Warren a fraud. 

 

1. If you believe the Mueller investigation is a fraud, then you must necessarily by legal definition believe the Clinton impeachment investigation and the Nixon impeachment investigations were frauds. Clinton impeachment resulted in acquittal. Nixon resulted in resignation. Trump will likely result in resignation prior to impeachment.

 

2. If you applied that same level of critical thought to the argument with Warren..., well what you have is your typical Trump supporter.

[lannarebirth]

Just now, bristolboy said:

But people who those terms might be applied to are only a subset of white people. So that would be bigoted speech, not racist. Whereas Tony Clifton's refers to a generalized cliche about Native Americans who generally are considered a race. Now, as to the reality of such a thing as race, it's a much vexed question. But the belief is widespread if not nearly universal.

 

OK, I'll buy that. Personally I tend to let a lot of stuff slide (though not unnoted) due to Hanlon's Razor and the fact that a great many people are just uncultured.

 

[bristolboy]

4 hours ago, GalaxyMan said:

She's a total flake. I hate Trump -- I can't think of a stronger term than hate -- but she is an idiot. Says that she wants the employees of corporations to run them. Tail wagging the dog. I've owned businesses in the US, managed others. I am viscerally against the idea of tail wagging the dog. You don't want to work for my business in the way I want it run, built on my money, there's the door. Don't let it hit you in the ass on the way out. I absolutely hate unions. An idea that's seen its time and usefulness and that should be relegated to the graveyard of once-okay ideas. She's all about unions. Communism in another guise. Another bad idea for the graveyard of bad ideas.

 

Is there any such thing as an honorable politician? The very concept seems oxymoronic to me, sort of mutually exclusive terms.

Which raises this question: Is UPS (United Parcel Service) run by Karl Marx?

And it's not a coincidence that in Northern Europe, where unions are strong, the middle class is a lot better off than in the USA. While worker productivity in the USA has advanced strongly since 1990, virtually all the benefits have accrued to the top 10% and dis proportionately at a  much higher level to the 1 percent. And even more disproportionately to a fraction of that. Social mobility in the USA is actually worse than it is in the so-called socialist states of northern Europe.

[bristolboy]

5 hours ago, TonyClifton said:

I had a customer in North Philadelphia.  It was a family run business that had seen two generations.  It was in a dangerous neighborhood.  I parked my car on the sidewalk by the front door when I went to service them, with gun out and in my hand.  

 

They employed people in the neighborhood providing jobs to people who had little choice in good jobs as there weren't many.  The good citizen employees unionized.  

 

There is no more business at this location and those people have no jobs, not there at least.

 

They milked that tit too much.  

This is a compelling case  that you, an anonymous poster, presented complete with no names and no description of the business except for it being a factory. That narrows it down. Of course, even if you had named it, are unions the only reason companies go out of business? Familiar with the logical fallacy of "post hoc ergo propter hoc" which literally means "after this therefore because of this"?

Edited January 1, 2019 by bristolboy

[melvinmelvin]

8 hours ago, keemapoot said:

I agree that the Muller investigation seems ready to drop a bombshell by about February. But, nobody can predict what this will be or the political effects yet. Let's keep our fingers crossed.

 

What the Dems need is a reverse Ronald Reagan type character who can somehow keep the democrat base, and also consolidate and capture the middle right (independents and traditional republicans). Trump will continue to have a lock on his base, but traditional Republicans despise the man privately, even though showing party support. 

Regarding the Muller investigation;

 

As I understand it the recipient of Muller's finding will be the Secretary of the justice dept.

Who has been critical and negative to the investigation since its conception.

I have read that Muller's material and findings will be classified.

 

What would stop the Secretary from just chucking the reports into a drawer and forget about them?

[bristolboy]

4 hours ago, TonyClifton said:

Hillary and the DNC cheated Bernie SANDERS from the nomination.  Ask Donna Brazille.

As anyone actually familiar with the details of the case know, while Debbie Wasserman Schulz did try to aid Clinton, her attempts were entirely inept. And in fact, most the delegates that Sanders got were from caucuses, which are a far less democratic way of choosing a candidate than are primaries. For more details exploding this oft-cited lie, read this:

The DNC’s Leaked Emails Show It Had No Idea How to Rig an Election

 "Rather than proving that the primary was deviously rigged by Clinton’s cronies—as many Sandernistas clearly believe—the WikiLeaks emails suggest the opposite. The party didn’t seem to have very many ideas at all for meddling with Sanders’ candidacy. And the ones they cooked up were weak and quickly forgotten."

https://slate.com/business/2016/07/the-dncs-emails-show-it-had-no-idea-how-to-rig-an-election.html

 

Edited January 1, 2019 by bristolboy

[keemapoot]

1 minute ago, melvinmelvin said:

Regarding the Muller investigation;

 

As I understand it the recipient of Muller's finding will be the Secretary of the justice dept.

Who has been critical and negative to the investigation since its conception.

I have read that Muller's material and findings will be classified.

 

What would stop the Secretary from just chucking the reports into a drawer and forget about them?

Yeah, Mueller team is aware of the danger of only disclosing to the Justice Dept., and will likely proffer a complete briefing to both houses of Congress is an effort to eliminate any funny business. Furthermore, the salient points will be leaked most likely, so that there will be no way to do a Nixon-type Watergate coverup.

[melvinmelvin]

9 hours ago, quandow said:

Quite the contrary. Trump has some frightening voodoo mojo that enables him to say and do outlandish things and his supporters eat it up. ANY other human being who had said the things during the primaries as Trump did about Senator McCain would have been an INSTANT outcast, yet we see where THAT went, and Trump says and does similarly embarrassing/abhorent things DAILY. There are a number of Republicans who have stated publicly how Trump needs replacing and some are "exploring" the possibilities of running in the Republican primaries - Mitt Romney for one, John Kasich for another, and the list is growing. Understand there is NO ONE on the planet who hates Trump more than I, and I hope in my heart of hearts he is taken out in handcuffs, the sooner the better, but don't underestimate him, blight on the face of politics as he is.

 

 

yes, definitely a man not to be underestimated,

there does not seem to be any limit to the abuse he can exert almost on a daily basis

and easily get away with

strange really

under normal circumstances, such persons would be up to their neck in legal difficulties

 

[Grouse]

1 hour ago, oldrunner said:

Mueller's investigation is a FRAUD, Pocahontas, aka Sen. Warren is equally a fraud. Anti-Trump "contributers" are as ignorant as my spelling.

I'm anti Trump; so I am ignorant am I?

 

obnoxious, arrogant and pompous yes but ignorant? I don't think so!

 

I call you!

 

Any American who is not a millionaire but voted Trump has been had, taken round the corner, conned and made to look extremely silly ????. That realisation must be awful for you. Never mind, things will get better I'm sure! ????

 

 

[Grouse]

56 minutes ago, lannarebirth said:

Is it also racist to ascribe a certain way of speech to crackers / rednecks ?   I prefer to think that some people are just uncultered regardless of ethnicity.

I found out the origin of the term red neck from Fahrenheit 11/9. America needs far more red necks. I do hope the "Democrats" wake up soon.

 

http://www.wvpublic.org/post/do-you-know-where-word-redneck-comes-mine-wars-museum-opens-revives-lost-labor-history#stream/0

 

BTW isn't the term Fahrenheit just slightly retarded?

 

Kelvin is much more sensible. Why? Has ANYONE even heard of -460F? ????

Edited January 1, 2019 by Grouse

[melvinmelvin]

Obama was one exception, Kennedy another,

 

but there are too many POTUS hopefuls that are way past retirement age

look at Warren Sanders Clinton

gosh

about 220 years experience in between them - approaching Methusalem

 

should be possible to find runners that are not old enough to be grandmother/father to the

majority of US voters

 

 

 

[Grouse]

1 hour ago, bristolboy said:

Actually, it's you who are not familiar with the meanings of the word. That's right, "meanings". In Europe, including the UK, racism is now used to described disparagement of cultures and nationalities as well as of races. And before you start playing naive etymological games, consider "antisemitism". Or do believe that since Arabs are Semites, that they can't be antisemitic? 

Correct

 

It is not sensible of course, but one can't control the misappropriation of language

 

I am a bigot as I am anti Muslim but I am not a racist (common usage not withstanding)

[Grouse]

14 minutes ago, melvinmelvin said:

Obama was one exception, Kennedy another,

 

but there are too many POTUS hopefuls that are way past retirement age

look at Warren Sanders Clinton

gosh

about 220 years experience in between them - approaching Methusalem

 

should be possible to find runners that are not old enough to be grandmother/father to the

majority of US voters

 

 

 

Queen Elizabeth II is going to be the next "POTUS". Shocking behaviour ever since Roosevelt.

[Grouse]

1 hour ago, lannarebirth said:

 

OK, I'll buy that. Personally I tend to let a lot of stuff slide (though not unnoted) due to Hanlon's Razor and the fact that a great many people are just uncultured.

 

Who is Hanlon? Occam?

[sirineou]

9 hours ago, OneMoreFarang said:

So how can rational thinking people predict who irrational people will vote for?

Excellent observation, yet people in the right try to make the case that it is irrational to think Warren  can be elected. 

If the above applies, and I think it does then I think it applies to anyone.

   As far as trump is concerned I think he is toast for many reasons.

( A), his legal problems

(b)   Political as it pertains to impeachment 

(c) Age , and age related problems if he decides to run in 2020 he will be 74.and he is not in the best physical and mental shape now.

(d) I don't think he really wants to be president, even when he was running for president he did not really think he would be elected , his plan was to be defeated with a base that believed unfairly so, and monetise such base, he can still do that if he does not run in 2020.

(e) he won by a razor thin margin and against a flawed candidate such as Hillary. I can believe that after knowing what we know now, and after the trump fatigue of four years his  margin will remain or increase, 

 

Having said that, I should also say that if a deal is not reached where he can resign or not run in exchange of immunity, he might have to run to keep his "get out of jail free" card and keep his children from going to jail. 

 

 

 

 

[lannarebirth]

23 minutes ago, Grouse said:

Who is Hanlon? Occam?

Quote

Hanlon's razor is an aphorism expressed in various ways, including: Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity.

I think Napolean said something along the same lines.

[keemapoot]

1 minute ago, sirineou said:

 Having said that, I should also say that if a deal is not reached where he can resign or not run in exchange of immunity, he might have to run to keep his "get out of jail free" card and keep his children from going to jail. 

Sorry for only quoting the above of your post but I only wanted to respond to this. It appears that the biggest impetus for resignation will be to save his favorite daughter and husband from prosecution as well. If packaged with a promise of immunity for him too, (or a pre-arranged pardon by Pence upon his resignation) I think he will take that deal. If it's just him alone, he might fight the entire thing through impeachment as well as he doesn't really care about the Republican party getting trashed as he is not a long time Republican party loyalist.

 

Again, complete speculation until we see the Mueller report in February, but many experts (including those involved with both Clinton and Nixon impeachments have weighed in with this view).

[Grouse]

1 hour ago, bristolboy said:

This is a compelling case  that you, an anonymous poster, presented complete with no names and no description of the business except for it being a factory. That narrows it down. Of course, even if you had named it, are unions the only reason companies go out of business? Familiar with the logical fallacy of "post hoc ergo propter hoc" which literally means "after this therefore because of this"?

Excellent 

[TonyClifton]

2 hours ago, Jingthing said:

Just because you don't like the massive results of the Mueller investigation (much more to come) doesn't make it a fraud. 

Parroting the racist taunts of a criminally corrupt illegitimate president doesn't make Senator Warren a fraud. 

Do tell us about the "massive results."  

[Jingthing]

Do tell us about the "massive results."  

Not your Googlebot. Any informed person would know already.

Sent from my Lenovo A7020a48 using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app

[sirineou]

2 hours ago, bristolboy said:

7 hours ago, TonyClifton said:

I had a customer in North Philadelphia.  It was a family run business that had seen two generations.  It was in a dangerous neighborhood.  I parked my car on the sidewalk by the front door when I went to service them, with gun out and in my hand.  

 

They employed people in the neighborhood providing jobs to people who had little choice in good jobs as there weren't many.  The good citizen employees unionized.  

 

There is no more business at this location and those people have no jobs, not there at least.

 

They milked that tit too much.  

This is a compelling case  that you, an anonymous poster, presented complete with no names and no description of the business except for it being a factory. That narrows it down. Of course, even if you had named it, are unions the only reason companies go out of business? Familiar with the logical fallacy of "post hoc ergo propter hoc" which literally means "after this therefore because of this"?

Edited 1 hour ago by bristolboy

I am sure that the fact (if indeed is a fact) that one had to go in to the business with a gun at hand had nothing to do with the business's demise .

Unions made the middle class and made America. Was there abuse? sure there was, but the benefits outweigh the problems. 

Producers need a consumer to sell their products too, You heard of "trickle down economics" well, try "float up economics"!! 

    By the way I just coined the  term "Float Up economics" and will expect a residual every time it is used 

Edited January 1, 2019 by sirineou

[TonyClifton]

As an adversary, I have no use for you.  You just took up space that I had to skip over.  No more.

 

[TonyClifton]

6 minutes ago, sirineou said:

I am sure that the fact (if indeed is a fact) that one had to go in to the business with a gun at hand had nothing to do with the business's demise .

You would be wrong.  The business was not so slowly strangulated by the employees as they unionized.  They took a family business and destroyed it.  

 

No one will rebuild there.

 

When my client's father first built the business, the area was not dangerous.

Edited January 1, 2019 by TonyClifton

[riclag]

The last person that won anything big  from the Dem party from Massachusetts was a moderate Dem,J. Kennedy, all the others failed miserably! Ms Warren is no match,to far left

 

A smart candidate running against PT will need to persuade and gain the trust of supporters of change . If they use the deplorable/sick name calling  to go after change supporters they will be going to the same place expecting different results ,only to find the same outcome!

 

 

Edited January 1, 2019 by riclag

[TonyClifton]

17 minutes ago, riclag said:

A smart candidate running against PT

Can you give me an example of a smart candidate?  Please exclude all triggered, lunatic candidates.