US Politics VI - Page 35 - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Lypton Village > Free Your Mind > Free Your Mind Archive
Click Here to Login
 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 03-26-2018, 02:42 AM   #681
Refugee
 
kiwilad's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Malmsbury Villa
Posts: 1,474
Local Time: 12:54 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by DaveC View Post
i'm glad i was wrong about this.
But the fact it was a legitimate fear is just wonderful isn't it? Amazing what 70000 votes can do to the world...
__________________

kiwilad is offline  
Old 03-26-2018, 10:46 AM   #682
Refugee
 
ImOuttaControl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Land of 10,000 Lakes
Posts: 1,454
Local Time: 06:54 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by kiwilad View Post
But the fact it was a legitimate fear is just wonderful isn't it? Amazing what 70000 votes can do to the world...
But is a "gut feeling" based on nothing but a "sense of foreboding" a legitimate fear? I would say no.
__________________

ImOuttaControl is offline  
Old 03-26-2018, 12:21 PM   #683
Blue Crack Addict
 
DaveC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: nazi punks fuck off
Posts: 21,956
Local Time: 06:54 PM
i don't know where the notion came from that i was actually fearful. all i said was that i had the feeling something major was going to happen with the administration, like someone getting fired or news from mueller or something, not that i was actually scared of anything really bad happening.
DaveC is online now  
Old 03-26-2018, 01:23 PM   #684
Rock n' Roll Doggie
FOB
 
Danny Boy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Harvard Supermodel Activist of the Decade Runner-Up
Posts: 9,562
Local Time: 03:54 PM
Putin seems pretty pissed about his diplomats being expelled. Do we get to see the piss tape now?
Danny Boy is offline  
Old 03-26-2018, 01:43 PM   #685
Blue Crack Addict
 
Moonlit_Angel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: In a dimension known as the Twilight Zone...do de doo doo, do de doo doo...
Posts: 20,716
Local Time: 05:54 PM
Regarding all the talk about that infamous "pee pee tape" that's been going around for months now, I can safely say that I would be totally fine with never having to see or hear about anything related to it. Thanks to all the news coverage and discussion of his affairs and such, I've already got enough creepy images related to Trump's sex life that I've been trying to clear out of my mind. I really don't need any more images of that sort added in there.

If the news wants to share anything about whatever financial/political dirt Putin may have on Trump, however, that I will be interested in hearing.
Moonlit_Angel is offline  
Old 03-26-2018, 03:23 PM   #686
Blue Crack Addict
 
PhilsFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: South Philadelphia
Posts: 19,218
Local Time: 07:54 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Headache in a Suitcase View Post
Message or no message, I'm ready to take a pass on celebrity candidates with minimal experience for a while.
I certainly don't think the lesson with Trump has to do with his lack of experience.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Irvine511 View Post
But that was a really good commercial.

Progressive legislation passes itself!
Progressive legislation requires the votes, and getting the votes requires running candidates with real vision. Are you going to defend Andrew Cuomo because of some vague notion of pragmatism?

Quote:
Originally Posted by DaveC View Post
this. it unnerves me a bit how fast and hard the left latched on to "oprah 2020" based on one inspiring speech.
The difference between Oprah Winfrey as a candidate and Cynthia Nixon as a candidate is very simple: one has laid out a platform of things they stand for, and one has not.

I also think the fact that the moderate wing of the party jumped onboard with Winfrey and has been tsk-tsking Nixon speaks volumes.
PhilsFan is offline  
Old 03-26-2018, 03:27 PM   #687
Blue Crack Addict
 
PhilsFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: South Philadelphia
Posts: 19,218
Local Time: 07:54 PM
Also, remember that the pee tape is supposed to be Trump watching a couple of prostitutes pee on an empty bed as some sort of protest against Obama (because Obama had slept there once or something), it's not supposed to be him getting peed on.

If there's going to be any unnerving footage of Trump, it's probably going to come from Stormy Daniels.
PhilsFan is offline  
Old 03-26-2018, 03:39 PM   #688
Blue Crack Addict
 
Moonlit_Angel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: In a dimension known as the Twilight Zone...do de doo doo, do de doo doo...
Posts: 20,716
Local Time: 05:54 PM
Oh, yeah, I totally understand the significance of the tape itself and its meaning, and what was rumored to happen in it.

Just that unfortunately, since Trump supporters clearly didn't give a shit about the fact that Trump disrespected Obama by harassing him about his birth certificate and claiming for so many years that he wasn't born here, I don't think the pee tape is going to matter to them, either. They'll either laugh it off or find a way to claim it was doctored, even if they have the evidence right before their very eyes.

And even if there was a chance seeing that tape could change people's minds in regards to just how far his disrespect for Obama really went, and how pathetic it makes Trump look, sadly, I think the salacious nature of the tape and the jokes one could spin from it would be the bigger story at the end of the day, and not the serious, disturbing nature of the message Trump is sending with the women peeing on the bed.

If that tape is released and other people want to see it, that's their choice. But I will pass. I don't need to be convinced of Trump's assholish behavior, obviously, and I don't need to see him with prostitutes, even if all he's doing is just sitting there watching them as they do whatever.
Moonlit_Angel is offline  
Old 03-26-2018, 03:51 PM   #689
Blue Crack Addict
 
PhilsFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: South Philadelphia
Posts: 19,218
Local Time: 07:54 PM
It goes back to a point I have made about how the Democrats are always so worried about what the right will say about them despite the fact that nothing they do will ever please them. They move farther and farther right with each passing year in an attempt to get out ahead of criticism ... and then get called treasonous socialists anyway.

Pointing out hypocrisy doesn't work. It may have worked once, but it doesn't anymore. You can't message or govern based on trying to catch them being hypocritical.
PhilsFan is offline  
Old 03-26-2018, 04:03 PM   #690
Blue Crack Addict
 
Moonlit_Angel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: In a dimension known as the Twilight Zone...do de doo doo, do de doo doo...
Posts: 20,716
Local Time: 05:54 PM
I'll agree on that, definitely. I will always support compromise if and where possible, but yeah, if the Democrats feel strongly enough about an issue, own it and fight for it. Don't cower in the face of whatever BS spin the right tries to put on their stances and beliefs. Whether or not their doing that helps them in terms of winning elections, it can be hard to say, depending on the situation and whatnot (I think it wouldn't hurt, but I can also see where there's areas where they might still have an uphill battle of sorts), but at least their stance is clear as day.

It also helps make it much easier to disprove the "both sides are bad" comments people like to throw around. Just one look at the Democratic platform as a whole in comparison to the Republican one should be enough to prove that's not true, but people still believe otherwise anyway, so seeing the contrast made more sharply might help dispel that belief a little more.
Moonlit_Angel is offline  
Old 03-26-2018, 04:13 PM   #691
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 33,457
Local Time: 07:54 PM
Quote:
Progressive legislation requires the votes, and getting the votes requires running candidates with real vision. Are you going to defend Andrew Cuomo because of some vague notion of pragmatism?

progressive legislation requires winning elections. it wasn't long ago that NY had a Republican governor. a comparatively moderate one, but Manhattan and Brooklyn are not all of New York. i'm going to defend Cuomo based on his ability to win elections. there's also his legislation on same-sex marriage, gun control, and college tuition. i understand that we might want more, and we might want more now, but sometimes small steps must be taken at first.

if Cynthia Nixon proves herself a capable candidate and can unseat Andrew Cuomo and then win a statewide election, more power to her, and i will be happy about that because, yay, it's still a Democrat.

for now, it seems that the support her candidacy is receiving is because not only does she ride the subway but there are some people out there who don't like Andrew Cuomo (who is obviously looking at 2020). i'm fairly certain that these same people will like a Republican governor even less, but perhaps not? perhaps it would be more fun for Cynthia Nixon to run against a moderate Republican and lose?

there are people in here far more knowledgable about NY state politics than i, so i don't have too much more to offer than these cursory observations. so we'll wait and see. but the idea of always primarying from the Left seems like a great way to lose the suburban voters (the people who actually do vote, rather than the ones we keep wishing would) that 2018 and 2020 are going to be all about.

and when 2020 comes around, we're going to be told just what a progressive liberal Cuomo is in the minds of swing voters across the rust belt (which is what upstate NY often looks like). places like Elmira are as shattered as any town along the Ohio river.



Quote:
The difference between Oprah Winfrey as a candidate and Cynthia Nixon as a candidate is very simple: one has laid out a platform of things they stand for, and one has not.
another difference is that Oprah isn't running for anything.


Quote:
I also think the fact that the moderate wing of the party jumped onboard with Winfrey and has been tsk-tsking Nixon speaks volumes.
you're doing the Nick strawman thing here -- "people i wish to differentiate myself from are saying certain things" -- no one i know wants Oprah to run for anything, pointing out that celebrity isn't a qualification for office.

i have no desire for an Oprah candidacy.
Irvine511 is offline  
Old 03-26-2018, 05:24 PM   #692
Rock n' Roll Doggie
ALL ACCESS
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: The Rum Tum Tugger is a Curious Cat...
Posts: 6,663
Local Time: 12:54 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Irvine511 View Post
you're doing the Nick strawman thing here -- "people i wish to differentiate myself from are saying certain things" -- no one i know wants Oprah to run for anything, pointing out that celebrity isn't a qualification for office.
Well, I guess because "no one you know" wants Oprah to run for anything, it must mean no one wants Oprah to run for anything.

You're doing the Irvine511 thing here -- assuming that the people you know represent all people.
Nick66 is offline  
Old 03-26-2018, 05:28 PM   #693
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 33,457
Local Time: 07:54 PM
US Politics VI

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nick66 View Post
Well, I guess because "no one you know" wants Oprah to run for anything, it must mean no one wants Oprah to run for anything.



You're doing the Irvine511 thing here -- assuming that the people you know represent all people.

Well, no, it doesn’t mean that “no one wants Oprah to run for anything” so I’ll take those words out of my mind ugh and hand them back to you. It means that mainstream Democrats haven’t jumped on Oprah’s nonexistent campaign for President.

Could you please point me to all the moderate Democrats who are begging for Oprah to run for office when she herself has said that she isn’t running for office?

Random twitter accounts and your breathless anecdotes about your online encounters with “the Resistance” (all soon to be catatonically depressed when Mueller doesn’t deliver the goods) don’t count.

Let’s start with mainstream journalists and elected Democrats.
Irvine511 is offline  
Old 03-26-2018, 05:35 PM   #694
Rock n' Roll Doggie
ALL ACCESS
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: The Rum Tum Tugger is a Curious Cat...
Posts: 6,663
Local Time: 12:54 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Irvine511 View Post
Well, no, it doesn’t mean that “no one wants Oprah to run for anything” so I’ll take those words out of my mind ugh and hand them back to you. It means that mainstream Democrats aren’t begging Oprah to run for President.

Could you please point me to all the moderate Democrats who are begging for Oprah to run for office when she herself has said that she isn’t running for office?

Random twitter accounts and your breathless anecdotes about your online encounters with “the Resistance” (all soon to be catatonically depressed when Mueller doesn’t deliver the goods) don’t count.

Let’s start with mainstream journalists and elected Democrats.
I don't believe I said moderate Democrats were "begging" Oprah to run for office. Indeed, I specifically said I didn't think she should run (I think she'd lose). So that's a strawman. I'm simply pointing out that just because no one you know wants her to run, doesn't mean no one does.

And I never said Mueller wouldn't "deliver the goods"...so that's a strawman as well.

Finally, I'm not sure why you feel the need to throw shade my way in a conversation that I'm not even a part of.
Nick66 is offline  
Old 03-26-2018, 05:40 PM   #695
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 33,457
Local Time: 07:54 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nick66 View Post
I don't believe I said moderate Democrats were "begging" Oprah to run for office. Indeed, I specifically said I didn't think she should run (I think she'd lose). So that's a strawman. I'm simply pointing out that just because no one you know wants her to run, doesn't mean no one does.



And I never said Mueller wouldn't "deliver the goods"...so that's a strawman as well.



Finally, I'm not sure why you feel the need to throw shade my way in a conversation that I'm not even a part of.


We weren’t talking about you and Oprah, you’re right that this wasn’t a conversation about you.

Your strawmen tendencies are well established in here, and youve been called out frequently for your reporting on “the Resistance” you see online innovations Eder for you to make a point that no one in here disagrees with (like how no one in here wants Oprah to run for President). It is a little bit of shade thrown, you’re right. But the point has been made.
Irvine511 is offline  
Old 03-26-2018, 05:45 PM   #696
Blue Crack Distributor
 
Headache in a Suitcase's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: DC
Posts: 68,132
Local Time: 06:54 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Irvine511 View Post
progressive legislation requires winning elections. it wasn't long ago that NY had a Republican governor. a comparatively moderate one, but Manhattan and Brooklyn are not all of New York. i'm going to defend Cuomo based on his ability to win elections. there's also his legislation on same-sex marriage, gun control, and college tuition. i understand that we might want more, and we might want more now, but sometimes small steps must be taken at first.

if Cynthia Nixon proves herself a capable candidate and can unseat Andrew Cuomo and then win a statewide election, more power to her, and i will be happy about that because, yay, it's still a Democrat.

for now, it seems that the support her candidacy is receiving is because not only does she ride the subway but there are some people out there who don't like Andrew Cuomo (who is obviously looking at 2020). i'm fairly certain that these same people will like a Republican governor even less, but perhaps not? perhaps it would be more fun for Cynthia Nixon to run against a moderate Republican and lose?

there are people in here far more knowledgable about NY state politics than i, so i don't have too much more to offer than these cursory observations. so we'll wait and see. but the idea of always primarying from the Left seems like a great way to lose the suburban voters (the people who actually do vote, rather than the ones we keep wishing would) that 2018 and 2020 are going to be all about.

and when 2020 comes around, we're going to be told just what a progressive liberal Cuomo is in the minds of swing voters across the rust belt (which is what upstate NY often looks like). places like Elmira are as shattered as any town along the Ohio river.





another difference is that Oprah isn't running for anything.




you're doing the Nick strawman thing here -- "people i wish to differentiate myself from are saying certain things" -- no one i know wants Oprah to run for anything, pointing out that celebrity isn't a qualification for office.

i have no desire for an Oprah candidacy.
Trump won Suffolk County, one of the two suburban counties on Long Island just outside the city proper, but very much inside the metro area. He almost won Nassau, the county that borders Queens.

The majority of the state populations live in NYC, which is obviously very blue. But the rest of the state, as you've said, is very red. It's why candidates with crossover appeal often win. Go too far to the left and you'll lose the suburbs and rural areas, go too far to the right and you'll lose NYC.

I will say that these will not be ordinary elections - and I'd there were ever a time where someone further left than the normal NYS candidate could win, it's now.

But in normal years, the candidates that win are very much purple.
Headache in a Suitcase is offline  
Old 03-26-2018, 07:02 PM   #697
Blue Crack Addict
 
DaveC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: nazi punks fuck off
Posts: 21,956
Local Time: 06:54 PM
i really don't understand what the big deal is with this stormy daniels thing other than the salaciousness of it.

sure it's a juicy gossipy story but where's the actual wrongdoing? she's a porn star but there's nothing illegal or inherently wrong about sleeping with a porn star. he didn't force himself on her in any way, she herself said repeatedly that even though she didn't really want to fuck him all that much that she still fully consented to it and doesn't consider herself a victim and doesn't want to be seen as one. maybe she has pictures or video of him, but who cares? does anyone really want to see that? unless he was doing something like hurting her or she was saying no and he's ignoring that (which she explicitly said was not the case), there's nothing illegal about that either. as long as capable and consenting adults are involved, even if one or more of those people is in a relationship that is truly nobody else's business outside of those people's. melania might be totally okay with him sleeping around and that's totally fine. if she's not, then that is gross and reprehensible, but also not illegal and 100% between the two of them to resolve within the context of their marriage.

the only real illegal acts here that are alleged to have been committed are by the lawyer trying and failing to bury the story, as far as i can tell. he may or may not have illegally used campaign funds but that sounds like it was done entirely by the lawyer and not at trump's direction and maybe not even to his knowledge at all - in any case the penalty for that is not going to be very big even if he is guilty of it. there may or may not have been a veiled threat made in a vegas parking lot but that's almost certainly impossible to prove. maybe she also broke an NDA, but that's about it.

i can't see how this leads to anything more than a minor charge for the lawyer and maybe the world is subjected to a video of donald trump getting spanked by a fake magazine cover. so to me this entire thing just seems like a whole lot of sizzle with little to no steak. am i wrong?
DaveC is online now  
Old 03-26-2018, 07:10 PM   #698
ONE
love, blood, life
 
iron yuppie's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Chicago
Posts: 10,574
Local Time: 05:54 PM
The man openly boasted about being a sexual assailant and faced little to no consequence for it, so yeah, I don't think the Stormy stuff will amount to anything.
iron yuppie is online now  
Old 03-26-2018, 07:38 PM   #699
Blue Crack Addict
 
DaveC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: nazi punks fuck off
Posts: 21,956
Local Time: 06:54 PM
i'm not suggesting that he should face consequences for the stormy daniels affair - in fact quite the opposite. unless he actually did something illegal or directed the lawyer to do something illegal, which by the accounts of everyone involved on all sides he did not, i'm failing to see how this is *anything* (aside from the possible illegal payment made by the lawyer), much less something he needs to answer for to anyone but melania.
DaveC is online now  
Old 03-26-2018, 08:01 PM   #700
Blue Crack Distributor
 
Headache in a Suitcase's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: DC
Posts: 68,132
Local Time: 06:54 PM
I think the big question is where did the payments come from... i.e. did he use campaign funds to pay off his porn star mistress?
__________________

Headache in a Suitcase is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:54 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com
×