Looking very much you Yanks are going to have Mr Trump for another 4 years. 

A troll post and a reply has been removed. 

1 hour ago, jcsmith said:

Let's not pretend that higher taxes on the wealthy are something from the distant future. They are not. But what has happened in the past forty years is that the rich have gotten richer and everyone else has flatlined. 

Actually, I have to disagree with you on that. This is from the Manhattan Institute, a right wing think tank. They use a measurement called the Cost of Thriving Index. Basically it doesn't just measure income but also what it takes for a family of 4 to afford the basics. 

"In 1985,[2] the COTI stood at 30—it would require 30 weeks of the median weekly wage to afford a three-bedroom house at the 40th percentile of a local market’s prices, a family health-insurance premium, a semester of public college, and the operation of a vehicle. By 2018, the COTI had increased to 53—a full-time job was insufficient to afford these items, let alone the others that a household needs."

https://www.manhattan-institute.org/reevaluating-prosperity-of-american-family

3 hours ago, TallGuyJohninBKK said:

Lots of labeling going on here, as befits derisive Republican electioneering strategy under Trump. Crazy Bernie, Sleepy Joe, Pocahontas, Fake News, Far Left, etc etc...

 

Rather than calling someone a Trotskyite (which I'm pretty sure has absolutely no basis in fact based on Sanders's record), why not look at the things he's actually proposed as a presidential candidate and judge him on whether they'd be good or not good for America.

 

But no, none of the Trump fans here actually want to talk about the issues that matter to Americans, because both they and Trump have a record of nothing to talk about.

 

Right because the left is too dignified to hurl childish insults. Have you actually read the things said? Trump seems to be the only man on the planet that forum rules don't need to be adhered to. 

13 hours ago, bristolboy said:

Actually, I have to disagree with you on that. This is from the Manhattan Institute, a right wing think tank. They use a measurement called the Cost of Thriving Index. Basically it doesn't just measure income but also what it takes for a family of 4 to afford the basics. 

"In 1985,[2] the COTI stood at 30—it would require 30 weeks of the median weekly wage to afford a three-bedroom house at the 40th percentile of a local market’s prices, a family health-insurance premium, a semester of public college, and the operation of a vehicle. By 2018, the COTI had increased to 53—a full-time job was insufficient to afford these items, let alone the others that a household needs."

https://www.manhattan-institute.org/reevaluating-prosperity-of-american-family

Pew Research is considered the least biased research on things like this. Here's an in depth article from them covering all topics there:

https://www.pewsocialtrends.org/2020/01/09/trends-in-income-and-wealth-inequality/

A baiting flame and several quoted replies have been removed

Crazy Bernie will struggle to get swing voters that will be needed to win. Also, the Democrat/Bilderberg Group elite are not a fan of him really. You need to win the electoral college, not the popular vote. The US does not elect on proportional representation for a very good reason, and that is that the electoral college system forces politicians to go out and engage everyone everywhere and not just the population hot-spots on the coasts. Otherwise, it would be California, Florida, New York and the likes that decide everything whilst the other 45 states look on powerless. Wake up and smell the coffee. The Democratic field is weak really and I'm not sure if any of them have the sand to make it as they are either too far left, too disorganized or too unable to attract the swing voters. Also, Bernie is like 78, even older than Trump and I don't think some guy who fermented his political ideals in the 60s is the way forward. There is an age restriction on how old you need to be before you can be president and I think there should also be an age limit on those who seek presidency too (maybe 65).   

Edited February 29, 20206 yr by Brigand
Typos

8 hours ago, Brigand said:

Crazy Bernie will struggle to get swing voters that will be needed to win. Also, the Democrat/Bilderberg Group elite are not a fan of him really. You need to win the electoral college, not the popular vote. The US does not elect on proportional representation for a very good reason, and that is that the electoral college system forces politicians to go out and engage everyone everywhere and not just the population hot-spots on the coasts. Otherwise, it would be California, Florida, New York and the likes that decide everything whilst the other 45 states look on powerless. Wake up and smell the coffee. The Democratic field is weak really and I'm not sure if any of them have the sand to make it as they are either too far left, too disorganized or too unable to attract the swing voters. Also, Bernie is like 78, even older than Trump and I don't think some guy who fermented his political ideals in the 60s is the way forward. There is an age restriction on how old you need to be before you can be president and I think there should also be an age limit on those who seek presidency too (maybe 65).   

 

Make the age limit apply to the house and senate while you are at it. Also make it so you have to be out of those offices for a certain period before running for pres. That would eliminate some conflicts of interest. You can not for example sit on the senate while impeaching the president you are currently running against. 

 

You wouldn't be able to push through election year vote buying projects. You would also have to plan to run for the Whitehouse years earlier that way. I don't know just an idea I thought of. Also make it so you have to actually live somewhere for a longer period of time before you pick up stakes in Arkansas and become a "New Yorker". Maybe again a period of five years. 

On 2/29/2020 at 2:16 AM, Cryingdick said:

 

Right because the left is too dignified to hurl childish insults. Have you actually read the things said? Trump seems to be the only man on the planet that forum rules don't need to be adhered to. 

Whataboutism is no excuse for trump's very poor demeaning behaviour.

9 minutes ago, simple1 said:

Whataboutism is no excuse for trump's very poor demeaning behaviour.

 

Whataboutism is no excuse for the entire democratic parties behavior either. I you consistently claim to be the moral compass you are held to higher standards.

Edited February 29, 20206 yr by Cryingdick

On 2/27/2020 at 4:51 PM, Berkshire said:

Regarding your last sentence, I was thinking the same thing.  Bernie as the Dem nominee will not only be a gift to Trump, but it will probably take down the entire Democratic Party.  Just when the Republican Party itself was basically dying (replaced by the Trump Party). 

 

What's crazy is that all this doom and gloom is the result of just 3 primaries in 3 tiny states.  And the media wants to anoint Bernie already. 

 

I believe Biden will win big in South Carolina.  Joe B. will restore a bit of sanity in the Democratic Party. 

Like I said, Biden will win big in South Carolina.  And if he does well on Super Tuesday (more likely now), you will see Trump et al start getting really nervous.  You will know when they aggresively do these two things: 1.  Go after Hunter Biden  2.  Start the nutty narrative that the Dem establishment is trying to rig the primaries against Bernie.

 

I hope the Bernie-backers don't fall for the latter nonsense. 

2 minutes ago, Berkshire said:

Like I said, Biden will win big in South Carolina.  And if he does well on Super Tuesday (more likely now), you will see Trump et al start getting really nervous.  You will know when they aggresively do these two things: 1.  Go after Hunter Biden  2.  Start the nutty narrative that the Dem establishment is trying to rig the primaries against Bernie.

 

I hope the Bernie-backers don't fall for the latter nonsense. 

 

Nice after the fact prediction. It's already been called.

1 minute ago, Cryingdick said:

3 minutes ago, Berkshire said:

Like I said, Biden will win big in South Carolina.  And if he does well on Super Tuesday (more likely now), you will see Trump et al start getting really nervous.  You will know when they aggresively do these two things: 1.  Go after Hunter Biden  2.  Start the nutty narrative that the Dem establishment is trying to rig the primaries against Bernie.

 

I hope the Bernie-backers don't fall for the latter nonsense. 

 

Nice after the fact prediction. It's already been called.

Geez man, I just quoted my prediction from 3 days ago.  What the heck is wrong with you?

1 minute ago, Berkshire said:

Geez man, I just quoted my prediction from 3 days ago.  What the heck is wrong with you?

 

It wasn't clear. You said Biden will win. You could have said Biden has won.

1 minute ago, Cryingdick said:

3 minutes ago, Berkshire said:

Geez man, I just quoted my prediction from 3 days ago.  What the heck is wrong with you?

 

It wasn't clear. You said Biden will win. You could have said Biden has won.

I didn't want to be too presumptive.  Biden has won, but the numbers haven't all come in yet as of this writing.  I predicted he would win big.  Everybody else was sweating Bernie. 

Just now, Berkshire said:

I didn't want to be too presumptive.  Biden has won, but the numbers haven't all come in yet as of this writing.  I predicted he would win big.  Everybody else was sweating Bernie. 

 

Fair enough. You would have to be delusional to think Bernie would take SC. 

A post that had a link to a Twitter post has been removed as this is not a Twitter site. 

1 hour ago, Berkshire said:

I didn't want to be too presumptive.  Biden has won, but the numbers haven't all come in yet as of this writing.  I predicted he would win big.  Everybody else was sweating Bernie. 

The closest Bernie ever came to Biden's poll numbers in SC was - 5 points on February 23rd. I think it's fair to say the Clyburn endorsement was instrumental in adding at least 10% to Joe's 30% margin. I thought Joe gave a very good victory speech. It is the most coherent and energized he has looked in some time.

This is potentially very good news. Everyone should drop out now leaving unelectable Bernie vs. electable Biden. 

 

Bloomberg should accept that. 

 

The main thing of course is to beat 45 but first Bernie must be beaten. 

 

The only hope for that is uniting against Bernie. 

 

Biden will be fine for that. 

 

Sure he may not be exciting but so what? 

 

A Biden Abrams ticket please. She'll add the excitement. 

 

If I was Biden I would go unconventional and commit to Abrams before super Tuesday. Of course Abrams would need to agree to that. 

Edited March 1, 20206 yr by Jingthing

3 hours ago, Jingthing said:

A Biden Abrams ticket please. She'll add the excitement. 

 

If I was Biden I would go unconventional and commit to Abrams before super Tuesday. Of course Abrams would need to agree to that. 

 

Or Biden-Amy Klobuchar, to help solidify the mid-west.

 

So much noise about these elections when in reality its all about money.