US Politics XIX: Just an Echo Chamber Living In Your Heads

The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
Status
Not open for further replies.
Warren killed it. For real.
Pete has a good first half before he got hung up on Amy.

Bernie was... Bernie. Funny that he NOW says that whoever has the most delegates at the convention, even if it’s not the winning number, should be the nominee, when he said the exact opposite last time. But he’s been saying the same thing for 40 years man, he’s so authentic!! Bulllllshit.

Bloomberg was slaughtered.

Which brings me to again, people writing off Biden too soon. He had a good night, and because his support has been lost mainly to Bloomberg, any one that was on the fence between the two, now has their answer.
 
Warren killed it. For real.

Pete has a good first half before he got hung up on Amy.



Bernie was... Bernie. Funny that he NOW says that whoever has the most delegates at the convention, even if it’s not the winning number, should be the nominee, when he said the exact opposite last time. But he’s been saying the same thing for 40 years man, he’s so authentic!! Bulllllshit.



Bloomberg was slaughtered.



Which brings me to again, people writing off Biden too soon. He had a good night, and because his support has been lost mainly to Bloomberg, any one that was on the fence between the two, now has their answer.



You bring up a good point. I wouldn’t be surprised to see a Biden surge.

I really read the Bloomberg hype wrong. I thought he might have a little rust bit he was downright awful. And how comments about a joke being taken wrong might be one of the worst blunders ever. I’d rather him drop out tomorrow and still go after Trump with his ads.
 
The Socialist from Vermont worth 3million says “billionaires shouldn’t exist.” What’s the cut off Bern? 3.5 million? 5? Or is it a sliding scale depending on the size of your bank account?

This is who we want keeping those suburban voters that will ensure Trumps defeat? Jesus
 
I don't think anyone is catching Bernie in Nevada. His lead is big and early voting is over (which, frankly, is kinda horse shit that the Nevada debate takes place after early voting closes. alas)

But it'll be very interesting to see how Liz and Pete do now.

Biden didn't kill himself, but he didn't do enough to raise himself up either.

Bloomberg had a horrible performance early. His second half was better, but nothing could overcome the trouncing he got in the open. He had to have known this was coming and he shit the bed big time. It he performs well next time he can claim a rebound, but man that Liz Warren shot and his response is going to be played forever.

But I also think we saw the first salvos, from Bloomberg and Buttigieg and slightly by Biden, or the war chest of opposition research against Bernie being opened up. The knives will be soley focused on him now. Blaming the harassment of the culinary Union on Russia was a doooooozy. The communism shot might be a cheap shot, but it has legs - as does Pete's shots about not being a democrat and his wanting to burn the house down.

Man this is going to get ugly. I honestly don't see how we don't end up with a contested convention in Milwaukee.
 
This may shock you, but I completely agree with you on this. The deal is though , most of the posters on here don’t seem to really care about how the Democrats talk about women, minorities, etc, because they never respond to it.



It’s the same with the majority of Democrat politicians. They say what they need to say, and do what they need to do to get elected. That’s why “suddenly” all the Dems went from being anti gay marriage, to pro gay marriage, at the same time, what a coincidence! They go where the PC police send them, that’s liberalism.



That’s why guys like Biden, Bloomberg, Warren , etc make so many gaffes about the African American community, white privilege, how women are treated....because they don’t really know or care, they just want control and want to win.



It’s funny how you keep pretending that some Democrats being moderates on social issues is somehow an indictment of liberalism but the outright hostility of the GOP to LGBTQ people, Black people, etc. is better.

I’ve yet to hear you explain why, if Democrats are so terrible for minorities and LGBTQ people and treat them worse than Republicans, minorities and LGBTQ people continue to vote overwhelmingly for Democrats?
 
I’m not convinced Bloomberg is a racist either. At least, not in the intentional sense. I do believe his rhetoric is clearly that of one who must atone for his words.

A lot of his policy seems like it was aimed at rationalism, not racism. Unfortunately, sometimes those two can clash, because feelings aren’t rational. Nor are subordinates. Sometimes, they’re racist. Also, systematic racism is real. Also... If you maybe sound racist, you probably should reconsider what you’re about to say, because it’ll be perceived that way even if that’s not the intention.



Uhhh it doesn’t matter if he’s personally a racist, he continued and defended an extremely racist policy of stop and frisk, and another extremely racist policy of surveilling mosques. If you implement and defend racist policy you’re a racist.
 
Uhhh it doesn’t matter if he’s personally a racist, he continued and defended an extremely racist policy of stop and frisk, and another extremely racist policy of surveilling mosques. If you implement and defend racist policy you’re a racist.



I clearly called out systematic racism that you’re alluding to. Don’t come at me like I’m defending Michael Bloomberg. I’m clearly not. I was differentiating his terrible policies that have logic and emotion intermixed (ex. surveilling a mosque because on paper it superficially makes sense even though in real numbers it does not and is incredibly offensive and hurtful).

What’s weird about your response to me is that I literally called the man some form of a racist and you’re coming at me... telling me he’s a racist. Ok.
 
The Socialist from Vermont worth 3million says “billionaires shouldn’t exist.” What’s the cut off Bern? 3.5 million? 5? Or is it a sliding scale depending on the size of your bank account?

This is who we want keeping those suburban voters that will ensure Trumps defeat? Jesus


Billionaires shouldn't exist. This is common sense.
 
I’ve yet to hear you explain why, if Democrats are so terrible for minorities and LGBTQ people and treat them worse than Republicans, minorities and LGBTQ people continue to vote overwhelmingly for Democrats?


It’s the gay plantation.

Warren/Pete is not a combo I ever gave any thought to but they certainly gave a 1-2 performance yesterday.

Now that Liz has basically killed off Bloomberg, the next debate will be a full on pile on against Bernie. My guess is Klobuchar will be gone by then.
 
I clearly called out systematic racism that you’re alluding to. Don’t come at me like I’m defending Michael Bloomberg. I’m clearly not. I was differentiating his terrible policies that have logic and emotion intermixed (ex. surveilling a mosque because on paper it superficially makes sense even though in real numbers it does not and is incredibly offensive and hurtful).

What’s weird about your response to me is that I literally called the man some form of a racist and you’re coming at me... telling me he’s a racist. Ok.

pretty sure that guy literally did not read past the first sentence of your post lol
 
Last edited:
It’s funny how you keep pretending that some Democrats being moderates on social issues is somehow an indictment of liberalism but the outright hostility of the GOP to LGBTQ people, Black people, etc. is better.

I’ve yet to hear you explain why, if Democrats are so terrible for minorities and LGBTQ people and treat them worse than Republicans, minorities and LGBTQ people continue to vote overwhelmingly for Democrats?

Explain the “outright hostility “ of Republicans versus the soft bigotry of low expectations for Democrats.

Obviously there’s lots of variance within the groups, but Democrats consistently overpromise “free stuff” and don’t deliver. Most of them know they won’t or can’t deliver, but many Dems (unfortunately not too much deep thinking put into it) feel that victim mentality that the party pushes, and then feel that whatever group you’re talking about (women, people of color, gays) don’t have the same chance at leading a successful life without the almighty government’s help, which is a lie, and has been since Lyndon Johnson’s Great Society.

The Democratic Party keeps poor people poor, by incentivizing welfare, free, free , free stuff, and all other government control.

And they don’t like when women , African Americans, Hispanics, Gays, etc, realize they can live a more abundant , successful life, without the Democratic Party , and step out of line.

To answer your question, many Democrats like their free stuff(which isn’t really free, other people have to pay for it), or want to pretend to be compassionate by supporting these policies, which won’t spend THEIR own money, but other peoples money. It’s easy to be “compassionate “ with other people’s money. That’s your Democrat Party, and why so many still follow
 
So I’m feeling a bit down about the Presidential race and a bit defeated as I think Trump is going to get re-elected, especially if Bernie is the nominee.

But then I started thinking about the Senate, and I think there’s a real opportunity to pick up enough seats to take the Senate. We should almost make the McGrath vs McConnell the 1b to the Presidential race. Having the majority in both Congress and Senate could allow another impeachment (because we know Trump will shoot himself in the foot again), this time with an actual “trial” and witnesses. They would make Trump’s life a living hell.
 
So I’m feeling a bit down about the Presidential race and a bit defeated as I think Trump is going to get re-elected, especially if Bernie is the nominee.

But then I started thinking about the Senate, and I think there’s a real opportunity to pick up enough seats to take the Senate. We should almost make the McGrath vs McConnell the 1b to the Presidential race. Having the majority in both Congress and Senate could allow another impeachment (because we know Trump will shoot himself in the foot again), this time with an actual “trial” and witnesses. They would make Trump’s life a living hell.

It really shouldn't be this difficult to beat Donald Trump, but apparently our best bet is to nominate a Socialist to do it.

He's going to get absolutely destroyed in the general election. Won't matter if he gets every vote in CA, NY, and WA. A Socialist isn't winning PA, FL, or OH. Trump and the GOP have been using socialism as a scare tactic forever, but it never stuck because it just wasn't true and moderates/independents could see through it.

That won't be the case with Bernie.

And the bigger issue is the down ticket races. Bernie has shown zero interest in BUILDING, it's just about him (not us). Even if he does somehow pull off the win in the GE, there's a good chance he'll be faced with a GOP Senate + House.

Think the GOP will hesitate on impeachment?
 
How anyone can support Sanders when you have Warren as the other progressive option is mind-boggling.

Someone needs to do something bold, right now.
Headaches idea of a Warren/Pete ticket is intriguing. I also know that Castro is her main supporter and would be a strong running mate as well. Hello AZ, FL, TX, NV...
She should come out and announce a vp pick now. Do it today or Friday, and see how it shifts her NV standing on Saturday. No matter what I think of Pete, he's done better in each race so far than I ever expected. Word is that he is getting a lot of people showing up at his events in NV. If Warren and he combined their support, and also pick up some Bloomberg leaners that were scared away last night... It could be just the thing to put her in a good position. Playing it safe at this point, or waiting and seeing how it goes is not going to be the winning strategy... It will be too late very soon.

I found it a little puzzling that Pete was the one that said, Hey, we gotta wake up and consolidate this field quickly or we or going to have a nominee that will not do well in the general. I totally agree with him. But what was he trying to say? Just that Amy should drop out? or Amy and Steyer? Or was he floating something out there, suggesting he would drop out if others did as well, and all of the "moderate" candidates agree on backing someone?

I dunno. thoughts?
 
At the very least the candidates need to start going after Sanders NOW, so that he's prepared for what's to come from the GOP later.
 
At the very least the candidates need to start going after Sanders NOW, so that he's prepared for what's to come from the GOP later.

I agree with that, but this is all too late.
Unless something aggressive and attention grabbing happens now, It's Sanders and probably Bloomberg at the end of super tuesday.

Look at the polls in NV and SC...

NV - Sanders is at about 30. If Warren and Pete joined, their support adds up to 27. I think it would cause Amy, Biden and Bloomberg supporters to shift to what they see as a strong, progressive ticket that would have some pretty wide appeal.

SC - Sanders is at about 22. Warren and Pete would be at about 23. Again, throw in some more for the Amy/Mike/Joe, possibly Steyer supporters that would shift.

They both have good ground operations in super tuesday states.

I just think at this point, a shake up is the only way to knock the race off balance and then reshape into something different.
 
What is scary is how good the GOP is at gaming the system. They are full on Trumpists now. They have tons of $$$, they are amoral, and will do whatever it takes to stay in power.

To be honest I don't know if anyone on that stage, save an Obama, would have the resources.

I read a comment a while back that the Trump Presidency ended with the acquittal. the Trump Reign began. He's only gotten worse since then.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom