US POLITICS XX: Stuck In a Caucus You Can't Get Out Of

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.
I mean, we've seen what's happened when they've issued subpoenas thus far. Either people feel they don't have to honor them or they're intimidated into not abiding by them.

And unfortunately at this point any hearings are likely just going to be white noise to most people, given how the impeachment trial played out. This administration, and those connected to them, have already made it clear they don't have to do shit in regards to laws and demands. So I really don't know what more the Democrats could do at this point.

I'm fully with you that they should happen, but I don't think the reason the Democrats aren't doing it is because they somehow think things will just return to normal. I think a lot of them are well aware that things aren't normal. Just that it's hard to know what to do when you've got an administration that refuses to play by any of the rules, and for whatever reason, anytime you try and fight back, somehow it winds up backfiring on you.
I tend to agree here. Still.... maybe I'll give my Rep a ring to subpoena Bolton. It really is frustrating to try and angle the best approach.

Regardless of who the nominee is, and Bernie certainly has all the advantage as of now, the Democratic turnout has to be absolutely enormous to have a fighting chance against all manner of election theft.

That means Obama needs to be on the campaign trail, and I mean both Barack and Michelle, Bruce Springsteen doing free shows all over the place in PA, OH, MI, etc., Oprah stumping if they can get her and so on. + Bloomberg committing a billion would be really nice. None of this is funny anymore.
It really has to be an all out effort as much as possible by everyone.

I've designed, drawn, then xeroxed posters for my neighborhood and also put them up in other areas like colleges against Republican candidates since 2000. I'm a professional Graphic Designer. I've done other GOTV efforts off and on since the late 60's.

One year I specifically did one poster about the more we turn the less chance they can cheat us out of a Dem win (if we really win). So thanks, anitram - by reminding me of this I'm going to think how I can make a better poster with this theme for Nov.

rot in hell (aka riker's island), harvey weinstein :wave:

Buh, byyyeeee - Harvey Wenstein.

It's good to get some kind of win and acknowledgement about just how serious, how damaging in many different ways this vile behavior is.
 
Honestly I don't feel that passionately about this election.

I don't think 4 years of a Sanders presidency of 4 more of Trump will do irreparable harm.



also, I don't think Trump easily beats Sanders.
This is a lot like 2016, where the party establishment panicked with each Trump win, the Dems were gleeful.
 
Last edited:
That’s because people are too stupid to realize a politician finds it hard to push disavow interference in their favor. Caring Stein or Gabbard or Trump an “asset” because Russia prefers Trump to win is stupid. Don’t undermine interference, here or there.



What about when they openly solicit favors and then make key concessions after having won?

Asking for a friend.
 
What about when they openly solicit favors and then make key concessions after having won?

Asking for a friend.



To be an asset implies you’re either actively working in the interests of the other party either as a double agent or as a hostage or whatever.

Trump’s collusion with Russia was in his own interest. It just so happens that interests aligned with Russia. There’s no evidence that he’s in any way a Russian asset (though sure the speculation is fair if pee tapes are there [emoji23][emoji23][emoji23]).
 
I believe the 2016 Russian interference in the election was intended to create chaos.
Everyone predicted Hillary to win. Even Trump was expecting to lose. That he won by a few thousand voted in 4 or 5 states, is truly a fluke. To say that the Russians were able to mastermind that is silly.

The Russians hoped to have the Tea Party types and avid Trumpers shut down the country calling for Hillary's impeachment. Instead they got the opposite, but got the chaos they wanted. A bitterly divided county.
 
To be an asset implies you’re either actively working in the interests of the other party either as a double agent or as a hostage or whatever.

Trump’s collusion with Russia was in his own interest. It just so happens that interests aligned with Russia. There’s no evidence that he’s in any way a Russian asset (though sure the speculation is fair if pee tapes are there [emoji23][emoji23][emoji23]).


Is it correct to say he colluded?

Muller had what, 2 years and 200 million dollars and a couple dozen crack attorneys.

And with all that he said they found no evidence of Trump collusion with Russia,
 
Is it correct to say he colluded?



Muller had what, 2 years and 200 million dollars and a couple dozen crack attorneys.



And with all that he said they found no evidence of Trump collusion with Russia,



Not sure where you got that. The Mueller report clearly says there’s no legal definition of collusion ... but 1) the Trump campaign aimed to converse directly with Russia, 2) they aimed to benefit from DNC hacks, 3) Russia attempted to hack Clinton’s emails after Trump publicly requested they do so, and 4) significant members within the Trump campaign had troubling ties to Russia.

You can call it what you want, but the report absolutely didn’t say they found no collusion.
 
Election turnout is or is not important for a Democratic win?

Turnout of a fired up (and ready to go) contingency seems more important.



Looking back to 1992 we have had turnouts from 47% to 58+%

Candidates that fill areas seem yo do the best. Obama, Trump and perhaps Bernie?


The 47% turnout was a landside democratic win.
 
Not sure where you got that. The Mueller report clearly says there’s no legal definition of collusion ... but 1) the Trump campaign aimed to converse directly with Russia, 2) they aimed to benefit from DNC hacks, 3) Russia attempted to hack Clinton’s emails after Trump publicly requested they do so, and 4) significant members within the Trump campaign had troubling ties to Russia.

You can call it what you want, but the report absolutely didn’t say they found no collusion.


First, I'm not all in for Trump. Your points have all been litigated by others before. Some of you items I tend to agree with, but I feel it is pointless to split hairs.

But on Russia interference, it is a bit interesting that this card was played against Bernie recently, sure they just told him. Then it leaked at a time when a mere mention could have upended his campaign.

In 2020 they tell both Bernie and Trump about Russia trying to interfere.

In 2016 they told Hillary about Russia interference and told the Trump people the same . right? or was that not the case?
 
Last edited:
Oh lookie here, Bernie is disavowing everything Russia and your target “Bernie Bros.”

What will it be next...


I presume you are watching CNN as am I,

I have a hard time with the woman playing victim because she is 250000 in student loans to get a law degree. And then Bernie says he will wipe that out with a tax on the rich.
 
I presume you are watching CNN as am I,



I have a hard time with the woman playing victim because she is 250000 in student loans to get a law degree. And then Bernie says he will wipe that out with a tax on the rich.



She will be fine if she’s a successful lawyer.

But she won’t be fine if she isn’t.
 
To be honest, I believe a lot of that $250,000 was living expenses, food, entertainment, etc. for 6-8 years while she was getting her law degree. I could be wrong.
 
don't knock it
Stormy Daniels got a cool $130000


but, on a serious note, all this spotlight on SC
3 days later on super Tuesday, 8 days from now, Sanders could have this thing all but wrapped up.
 
Last edited:
To be honest, I believe a lot of that $250,000 was living expenses, food, entertainment, etc. for 6-8 years while she was getting her law degree. I could be wrong.



Who the hell takes 6-8 years to complete a law degree??
 
I just don’t understand what Michael Bloomberg is doing.

How egotistical must that man be to think he can be nominated at this point? He’s literally burning cash in front of America and it’s too late. The irony behind all of this is it plays so freaking well for Bernie Sanders. To date, this is still Sanders vs. Biden. People seem to think Biden is done with no hope but the reality is that Biden is the only one with the infrastructure to campaign his way through the nation, even with the supposed cash issue he has. Odds are if it’s not Sanders, it’s still Biden. Bloomberg is actually just eating into that share, dividing any Sanders opposition (along with the rest of them) and quite literally being the one pacent of the one pacent... literally standing on a pedestal in front of Sanders to be made an example of.

Alls I’m saying is... Bloomberg is a gift wrapped with a bow made out to Bernie.

You beat me to this post.

Here's the deal. Bloomberg says he was running in case Biden couldn't be a contender to win. Yet, he will be the sole reason that Biden won't win. Not saying Biden would beat Bernie. But definitely possible. Super Tuesday States like TX, VA, OK, FL, GA, TN, NC, Ark, AL. That means getting the majority of about 630 delegates. Now, not gonna happen.

I think everyone was surprised by Biden's poor showing. But now that I look back, I think... Bloomberg was hanging over it the whole time. People knew that he was the alternate to Biden. And he had billions of dollars. So I think they felt like it was never really going to happen for Biden in the end. And they were right.

I think the bigger story now is. If Bloomberg is really going through with this, Who will do the right thing and drop out.
Amy has to - She has 7 delegates and will end Super Tuesday with around 37 if she wins MN.

Warren has to - She has 8 delegates, looking like she may not win MA. and will end up with 8.

Pete has to - He has 25 delegates and will receive no more from what I can tell.

Biden really should but also is the only one with prospects from this point forward. He has 15 delegates and looking like he will probably have about 40 or more after SC. Then he still could pull a few hundred or so on Super Tuesday. Would have been able to double that if not for Bloomberg.

Right now I don't see Bloomberg being able to pull much more than Biden will in the end.

I think Bloomberg obviously has calculated out a lot. But I think his biggest miscalculation is not getting in the race for NV and SC. If he had. Then he could have ensured Biden and the rest drop out. And would put him in much higher standing against Bernie on Super Tuesday. In fact, I think he would have won had he done that one small change. But for now, I don't see it happening.

You couldn't really ask for more irony. A billionaire spends hundreds of millions to clear the way for the socialist who says billionaires shouldn't exist.
 
Is it correct to say he colluded?

Muller had what, 2 years and 200 million dollars and a couple dozen crack attorneys.

And with all that he said they found no evidence of Trump collusion with Russia,

First, it cost 32 million. Clinton's investigation took 6 years and 70 million dollars

And...
Only in a country where a opinion memo is followed as law, that a president can't be indicted. And a country where laws are made by politicians with wide enough loopholes to not actually give any consequences to politicians - does it happen where the Trump campaign meets with Russians over 140 times and , receives stolen information, shares polling data, and swing states strategy and it doesn't equal the "legal standard of collusion"
 
Does no one remember 2008 when the GOP accused Obama of palling around with terrorists such as Bill Ayers? Are we seriously going to pretend like Obama didn’t have any baggage? He did and guess what? He still won
Great.

There was a poster in here like 3 days ago touting Bernie's "lack of baggage" as a reason why he'd do well against Trump.
 
Even more pathetic than the fact he said this is the fact that it will work on so many people

NEW DELHI (Reuters) - U.S. President Donald Trump said on Tuesday the U.S. stock market will crash if he loses the election this year.

During a trip to India, Trump told business leaders stocks will jump higher if he is re-elected, but "if I don’t win you’re going to see a crash like you’ve never seen before."
 
So according to Bernie, Fidel Castro is all good because he started a literacy program.

Ladies and gentlemen, your Democratic Nominee.
 
I think everyone was surprised by Biden's poor showing. But now that I look back, I think... Bloomberg was hanging over it the whole time.

No. There were quite a few of us, here and everywhere else, who immediately called Biden borderline senile and said he was a terrible campaigner and couldn't win despite what the polls said. And I don't think that Bloomberg was hanging over his head the whole time. Biden basically had all of 2019 to himself as the alleged frontrunner.

I don't begrudge Bloomberg taking out Biden insofar as I believe that Biden is a terrible candidate and would lose to Trump. Sorry but if you are the VP of the most popular President in a generation and you can't even get through a primary because of a billionaire who didn't even enter the race until 10 weeks ago, didn't participate in the first 8 or 9 debates and wasn't even on the freaking ballot in the first 4 primary states, you should pack your bags and go home.
 
During a trip to India, Trump told business leaders stocks will jump higher if he is re-elected, but "if I don’t win you’re going to see a crash like you’ve never seen before."

Judging by the looks of the MAGA crowd at his rallies, these aren't exactly people with stock portfolios.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom