ISF Logo   IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » USA Politics
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Tags 2020 elections , democratic party , presidential candidates

Reply
Old 5th March 2020, 08:48 AM   #1
xjx388
Philosopher
 
xjx388's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 8,262
2020 Democratic Candidates Tracker Part IV

Mod Info This is a continuation from Part III The split point is, as always, arbitrary and participants are free to quote from the previous thread(s).
Posted By:Darat



Originally Posted by d4m10n View Post
Where is that written? If the Senate neglects to even consider a nominee, it doesn't make much sense to say they are following constitutional procedure.
What Constitutional procedure? The C only says that the Senate gives advice and consent; the details of that are completely in the hands of the Senate. The Senate has adopted rules for these nominations.

Harry Reid exercised the "nuclear option," for nominations except Supreme Court justices; McConnell did it for Supreme Court justices. Let's not pretend that Harry Reid's actions were noble and altruistic and McConnell's were dastardly and selfish. The Senate makes the rules and the leader of the Senate can use the rules to accomplish their goals. Fair game.
__________________
Hello.

Last edited by Darat; 5th March 2020 at 08:54 AM.
xjx388 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th March 2020, 08:57 AM   #2
Segnosaur
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Posts: 15,397
Originally Posted by xjx388 View Post
What Constitutional procedure? The C only says that the Senate gives advice and consent; the details of that are completely in the hands of the Senate. The Senate has adopted rules for these nominations.

Harry Reid exercised the "nuclear option," for nominations except Supreme Court justices; McConnell did it for Supreme Court justices. Let's not pretend that Harry Reid's actions were noble and altruistic and McConnell's were dastardly and selfish.
The way I see it it went like this:

Under Obama
Republicans: We are going to oppose everything Obama does
Democrats: Here is a perfectly competent lower court judges
Republicans: We are going to fillibuster, just because we're selfish jerks
Democrats: Guess we need the nuclear option

Under Trump
Republicans: Here is a judge that is totally unsuitable for the supreme court
Democrats: We don't think you should place an unsuitable judge on the supreme court
Republicans: We're going with the nuclear option because we really want that unsuitable judge on the bench.

Quote:
The Senate makes the rules and the leader of the Senate can use the rules to accomplish their goals. Fair game.
Its possible for something to be 'within the rules' and still be considered unethical/selfish/harmful to the country as a whole.
__________________
Trust me, I know what I'm doing. - Sledgehammer

I'm Mary Poppin's Y'all! - Yondu

We are Groot - Groot
Segnosaur is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th March 2020, 08:58 AM   #3
applecorped
Banned
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 20,145
Pocahontas has left the building
applecorped is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th March 2020, 09:04 AM   #4
Segnosaur
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Posts: 15,397
Originally Posted by applecorped View Post
Pocahontas has left the building
You do realize that "Pocahontas" is a racial slur that is considered insulting to large numbers of people of native American heritage. Its not just an attack on Warren.

It would be the equivalent of using the N-word to describe Obama leaving the presidency.
__________________
Trust me, I know what I'm doing. - Sledgehammer

I'm Mary Poppin's Y'all! - Yondu

We are Groot - Groot
Segnosaur is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th March 2020, 09:05 AM   #5
Ziggurat
Penultimate Amazing
 
Ziggurat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 46,170
Originally Posted by applecorped View Post
Pocahontas has left the building
There were some smoke signals earlier this morning that she was going to drop out.
__________________
"As long as it is admitted that the law may be diverted from its true purpose -- that it may violate property instead of protecting it -- then everyone will want to participate in making the law, either to protect himself against plunder or to use it for plunder. Political questions will always be prejudicial, dominant, and all-absorbing. There will be fighting at the door of the Legislative Palace, and the struggle within will be no less furious." - Bastiat, The Law
Ziggurat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th March 2020, 09:08 AM   #6
Belz...
Fiend God
 
Belz...'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In the details
Posts: 89,107
Originally Posted by Segnosaur View Post
You do realize that "Pocahontas" is a racial slur that is considered insulting to large numbers of people of native American heritage. Its not just an attack on Warren.

It would be the equivalent of using the N-word to describe Obama leaving the presidency.
You forget, part of the thrill of being a Trump supporter is that you get to be a jerk, too.
__________________
Master of the Shining Darkness

"My views are nonsense. So what?" - BobTheCoward


Belz... is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th March 2020, 09:08 AM   #7
JoeMorgue
Self Employed
Remittance Man
 
JoeMorgue's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Florida
Posts: 24,748
Classy guys. I guess dancing around doing war cries wouldn't work as well over the internet.
__________________
- "Ernest Hemingway once wrote that the world is a fine place and worth fighting for. I agree with the second part." - Detective Sommerset
- "Stupidity does not cancel out stupidity to yield genius. It breeds like a bucket-full of coked out hamsters." - The Oatmeal
- "To the best of my knowledge the only thing philosophy has ever proven is that Descartes could think." - SMBC
JoeMorgue is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th March 2020, 09:09 AM   #8
Trebuchet
Penultimate Amazing
 
Trebuchet's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Port Townsend, Washington
Posts: 27,019
Originally Posted by Segnosaur View Post
You do realize that "Pocahontas" is a racial slur that is considered insulting to large numbers of people of native American heritage. Its not just an attack on Warren.

It would be the equivalent of using the N-word to describe Obama leaving the presidency.
I was in the process of replying to a post about this just when the thread got split. Someone said she was finished as soon as she took the DNA test. The real problem was that she didn't take it much earlier, as soon as the story came up.
__________________
Cum catapultae proscribeantur tum soli proscripti catapultas habeant.
Trebuchet is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th March 2020, 09:13 AM   #9
Childlike Empress
Ewige Blumenkraft
 
Childlike Empress's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Ivory Tower
Posts: 18,171
The one delegate Tulsi Gabbard won in American Samoa should have won her a ticket to the next "debates" - if rules meant rules for the DNC machine: DNC Scrambles To Change Debate Threshold After Gabbard Qualifies

Originally Posted by Caitlin Johnstone
[...] Rank-and-file supporters of the Hawaii congresswoman enjoyed a brief celebration on social media, before having their hopes dashed minutes later by an announcement from the DNC’s Communications Director Xochitl Hinojosa that “the threshold will go up”.

“We have two more debates– of course the threshold will go up,” tweeted Hinojosa literally minutes after Gabbard was awarded the delegate. “By the time we have the March debate, almost 2,000 delegates will be allocated. The threshold will reflect where we are in the race, as it always has.”

“DNC wastes no time in announcing they will rig the next debates to exclude Tulsi,” Journalist Michael Tracey tweeted in response.

This outcome surprised nobody, least of all Gabbard supporters. The blackout on the Tulsi 2020 campaign has reached such extreme heights this year that you now routinely see pundits saying things like there are no more people of color in the race, or that Elizabeth Warren is the only woman remaining in the primary. They’re not just ignoring her, they’re actually erasing her. They’re weaving a whole alternative reality out of narrative in which she is literally, officially, no longer in the race. [...]

All this means is that the machine is exposing its mechanics to the view of the mainstream public. Both the Gabbard campaign and the Sanders campaign have been useful primarily in this way; not because the establishment would ever let them actually become president, but because they force the unelected manipulators who really run things in the most powerful government on earth to show the public their box of dirty tricks.

And yes, the site is down at the moment, likely under attack by "Russian bots". I'm quoting from my RSS feed. Just try again later.
__________________
Audiatur et altera pars
Childlike Empress is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th March 2020, 09:14 AM   #10
SuburbanTurkey
Illuminator
 
SuburbanTurkey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2018
Location: Norwood, MA
Posts: 3,991
Originally Posted by Trebuchet View Post
I was in the process of replying to a post about this just when the thread got split. Someone said she was finished as soon as she took the DNA test. The real problem was that she didn't take it much earlier, as soon as the story came up.
I think a lot of liberal types were in denial about the whole issue. They tried to hand-wave away the problem as the usual right-wing nonsense, but there was some actual meat to the controversy.

I like Warren as a Senator, but this whole claiming to be Native American in a professional context thing is a black mark on her record. It plays exactly into the worst tropes of affirmative action policies.

Curious to see who she endorses, or if she abstains from endorsing at all.
__________________
Gobble gobble
SuburbanTurkey is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th March 2020, 09:15 AM   #11
Childlike Empress
Ewige Blumenkraft
 
Childlike Empress's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Ivory Tower
Posts: 18,171
Originally Posted by Segnosaur View Post
You do realize that "Pocahontas" is a racial slur that is considered insulting to large numbers of people of native American heritage. Its not just an attack on Warren.

You forgot the question marks. The answer is that nobody "realizes" the nonsense you are trying to sell here.
__________________
Audiatur et altera pars
Childlike Empress is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th March 2020, 09:15 AM   #12
Belz...
Fiend God
 
Belz...'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In the details
Posts: 89,107
Originally Posted by Childlike Empress View Post
The one delegate Tulsi Gabbard won in American Samoa should have won her a ticket to the next "debates" - if rules meant rules for the DNC machine: DNC Scrambles To Change Debate Threshold After Gabbard Qualifies




And yes, the site is down at the moment, likely under attack by "Russian bots". I'm quoting from my RSS feed. Just try again later.
Considering the source, you'll forgive us if we don't assign any weight to this.

Originally Posted by Childlike Empress View Post
You forgot the question marks. The answer is that nobody "realizes" the nonsense you are trying to sell here.
As usual, you attempt to project your own ignorance onto others has failed. I understood exactly what Segnosaur meant.
__________________
Master of the Shining Darkness

"My views are nonsense. So what?" - BobTheCoward


Belz... is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th March 2020, 09:16 AM   #13
SuburbanTurkey
Illuminator
 
SuburbanTurkey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2018
Location: Norwood, MA
Posts: 3,991
Originally Posted by Childlike Empress View Post
The one delegate Tulsi Gabbard won in American Samoa should have won her a ticket to the next "debates" - if rules meant rules for the DNC machine: DNC Scrambles To Change Debate Threshold After Gabbard Qualifies




And yes, the site is down at the moment, likely under attack by "Russian bots". I'm quoting from my RSS feed. Just try again later.
Is anyone but Tulsi die-hards going to care? It's a two candidate race. Any time spent on Tulsi is wasted.

People who are still undecided are choosing between Bernie or Biden. Nobody else should be on the stage.
__________________
Gobble gobble
SuburbanTurkey is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th March 2020, 09:16 AM   #14
Firestone
Proud Award Award recipient
 
Firestone's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Belgium
Posts: 2,072
With Warren gone, at least the probability of a contested convention becomes quite low.
__________________
The method of science is tried and true. It is not perfect, it's just the best we have. And to abandon it, with its skeptical protocols is the pathway to a dark age. -- Carl Sagan
Firestone is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th March 2020, 09:19 AM   #15
SuburbanTurkey
Illuminator
 
SuburbanTurkey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2018
Location: Norwood, MA
Posts: 3,991
Originally Posted by Firestone View Post
With Warren gone, at least the probability of a contested convention becomes quite low.
Somebody ought to be able to clear the bar. If not, there at least will be a stronger argument that the plurality winner should take the nomination.
__________________
Gobble gobble
SuburbanTurkey is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th March 2020, 09:21 AM   #16
Ziggurat
Penultimate Amazing
 
Ziggurat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 46,170
Originally Posted by Segnosaur View Post
You do realize that "Pocahontas" is a racial slur that is considered insulting to large numbers of people of native American heritage. Its not just an attack on Warren.

It would be the equivalent of using the N-word to describe Obama leaving the presidency.
I can't remember who said it regarding Chris Cuomo claiming "Fredo" was an insult equivalent to the n-word, but when you're comparing the badness of two words and you won't even say one of those words, that's the worse word.

So no, "Pocahontas" isn't the equivalent of the n-word, and your own post proves it.
__________________
"As long as it is admitted that the law may be diverted from its true purpose -- that it may violate property instead of protecting it -- then everyone will want to participate in making the law, either to protect himself against plunder or to use it for plunder. Political questions will always be prejudicial, dominant, and all-absorbing. There will be fighting at the door of the Legislative Palace, and the struggle within will be no less furious." - Bastiat, The Law
Ziggurat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th March 2020, 09:21 AM   #17
sir drinks-a-lot
Illuminator
 
sir drinks-a-lot's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Cole Valley, CA
Posts: 4,310
Originally Posted by Segnosaur View Post
You do realize that "Pocahontas" is a racial slur that is considered insulting to large numbers of people of native American heritage.
....and you know this how?
__________________
I don't like that man. I must get to know him better. --Abraham Lincoln
sir drinks-a-lot is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th March 2020, 09:24 AM   #18
Firestone
Proud Award Award recipient
 
Firestone's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Belgium
Posts: 2,072
Originally Posted by SuburbanTurkey View Post
Somebody ought to be able to clear the bar. If not, there at least will be a stronger argument that the plurality winner should take the nomination.
Yep.

But I fear it will be like 2008 and 2016, with the contest dragging on and on and on, even after it becomes clear that one of the two doesn't have any chance of getting a majority of pledged delegates.
__________________
The method of science is tried and true. It is not perfect, it's just the best we have. And to abandon it, with its skeptical protocols is the pathway to a dark age. -- Carl Sagan
Firestone is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th March 2020, 09:29 AM   #19
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 44,537
Originally Posted by Segnosaur View Post
You do realize that "Pocahontas" is a racial slur that is considered insulting to large numbers of people of native American heritage. Its not just an attack on Warren.

It would be the equivalent of using the N-word to describe Obama leaving the presidency.
OLOL

It would be the equivalent of using "Kunta Kinte" to describe Bill Clinton leaving the presidency.
theprestige is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th March 2020, 09:30 AM   #20
Childlike Empress
Ewige Blumenkraft
 
Childlike Empress's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Ivory Tower
Posts: 18,171
Originally Posted by SuburbanTurkey View Post
Is anyone but Tulsi die-hards going to care? It's a two candidate race. Any time spent on Tulsi is wasted.

People who are still undecided are choosing between Bernie or Biden. Nobody else should be on the stage.

Read the last paragraph of my quote again. The mechanisms now on public display alone make it worthwhile. Don't let my realism distract you from keeping up the good fight.
__________________
Audiatur et altera pars
Childlike Empress is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th March 2020, 09:30 AM   #21
Crossbow
Seeking Honesty and Sanity
 
Crossbow's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Charleston, WV
Posts: 13,015
Originally Posted by Childlike Empress View Post
The one delegate Tulsi Gabbard won in American Samoa should have won her a ticket to the next "debates" - if rules meant rules for the DNC machine: DNC Scrambles To Change Debate Threshold After Gabbard Qualifies




And yes, the site is down at the moment, likely under attack by "Russian bots". I'm quoting from my RSS feed. Just try again later.
If you want people to take your postings seriously, then you need to stop using citations from crap sources.
__________________
On 22 JUL 2016, Candidate Donald Trump in his acceptance speech: "There can be no prosperity without law and order."
On 05 FEB 2019, President Donald Trump said in his Sate of the Union Address: "If there is going to be peace and legislation, there cannot be war and investigation."
On 15 FEB 2019 'BobTheCoward' said: "I constantly assert I am a fool."
A man's best friend is his dogma.
Crossbow is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th March 2020, 09:37 AM   #22
Segnosaur
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Posts: 15,397
Originally Posted by sir drinks-a-lot View Post
Quote:
You do realize that "Pocahontas" is a racial slur that is considered insulting to large numbers of people of native American heritage
.....and you know this how?
From: https://www.independent.co.uk/news/w...-a9083001.html
Donald Trump’s repeated use of the name “Pocahontas” as part of an attack on Democrat Elizabeth Warren has been condemned as “an insult for political gain”, by the country’s largest indigenous rights groups...the National Congress of American Indians (NCAI), which describes itself as the oldest and largest indigenous rights organisation in the US, formally criticised Mr Trump, saying his actions were part of a long tradition of insults endured by Native Americans and other indigenous groups.
__________________
Trust me, I know what I'm doing. - Sledgehammer

I'm Mary Poppin's Y'all! - Yondu

We are Groot - Groot
Segnosaur is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th March 2020, 09:44 AM   #23
Segnosaur
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Posts: 15,397
Re: Tulsi making the next Democratic debates...
Originally Posted by SuburbanTurkey View Post
Is anyone but Tulsi die-hards going to care? It's a two candidate race. Any time spent on Tulsi is wasted.

People who are still undecided are choosing between Bernie or Biden. Nobody else should be on the stage.
Your right, she shouldn't be on the stage. But, the question is how do you prevent her from appearing if the rules already say she has that right? (Remember the controversy when the Democrats changed the rules for Bloomberg.... last thing they need is more publicity by changing the rules again.)

Granted Tulsi is unlikely to win anything, or even pick up significant support, even after appearing in a debate.

She can however, throw a monkey wrench into the works in a couple of ways:

- With a much smaller field of candidates, she might get enough attention (and ultimately delegates) to prevent one of the candidates from getting a majority

- She could mess with the dynamics of the debate, drag up irrelevancies (such as Clinton) and make the Democrats look foolish
__________________
Trust me, I know what I'm doing. - Sledgehammer

I'm Mary Poppin's Y'all! - Yondu

We are Groot - Groot
Segnosaur is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th March 2020, 09:45 AM   #24
TragicMonkey
Poisoned Waffles
 
TragicMonkey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Monkey
Posts: 55,246
Warren's out of the race so is any of this jumping on her grave, racist or not, relevant? I loved her dearly but our journey together is over, it's time to move on.
__________________
You added nothing to that conversation, Barbara.
TragicMonkey is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th March 2020, 10:04 AM   #25
xjx388
Philosopher
 
xjx388's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 8,262
Originally Posted by Segnosaur View Post
The way I see it it went like this:

Under Obama
Republicans: We are going to oppose everything Obama does
Democrats: Here is a perfectly competent lower court judges
Republicans: We are going to fillibuster, just because we're selfish jerks
Democrats: Guess we need the nuclear option

Under Trump
Republicans: Here is a judge that is totally unsuitable for the supreme court
Democrats: We don't think you should place an unsuitable judge on the supreme court
Republicans: We're going with the nuclear option because we really want that unsuitable judge on the bench.


Its possible for something to be 'within the rules' and still be considered unethical/selfish/harmful to the country as a whole.
I totally agree. The subject was "competing interests" and my point was that "obstructionism" is fair play as long as it isn't cheating the rules. It's no surprise that the Dems considered Gorusch unsuitable; is there a nominee in the country that Trump could realistically offer (given that he wants to advance the party's interests) that the Dems would happily accept? I don't think so.
Obstructionism to advance one's interests is part of the game; in Gorusch's case, the Dems were engaging in some obstructionism of their own. The Republicans decided to blow that up right away to eliminate the obstacle.

If the roles had been reversed, you think the Dems wouldn't have done the same thing?
__________________
Hello.
xjx388 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th March 2020, 10:20 AM   #26
Cabbage
Suspended
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 2,463
Originally Posted by xjx388 View Post
I totally agree. The subject was "competing interests" and my point was that "obstructionism" is fair play as long as it isn't cheating the rules. It's no surprise that the Dems considered Gorusch unsuitable; is there a nominee in the country that Trump could realistically offer (given that he wants to advance the party's interests) that the Dems would happily accept? I don't think so.
Obstructionism to advance one's interests is part of the game; in Gorusch's case, the Dems were engaging in some obstructionism of their own. The Republicans decided to blow that up right away to eliminate the obstacle.

If the roles had been reversed, you think the Dems wouldn't have done the same thing?

And your point is simply naive and wrong, as has been repeatedly explained to you.
Edited by kmortis:  Removed to comply with Rule 12 & Rule 0


It really depends on the law, you know.

Last edited by kmortis; 10th March 2020 at 03:07 AM.
Cabbage is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th March 2020, 10:22 AM   #27
Fast Eddie B
Philosopher
 
Fast Eddie B's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Lenoir City, TN/Mineral Bluff, GA
Posts: 6,210
Stipulated that Trump will viciously and relentlessly attack whoever the Democratic nominee is - it’s his MO and not even his lawyer and early and ardent supporters are immune - thinking Cohen and Sessions for two.

But I still think Sanders is especially vulnerable in this regard - as I said before, the attack ads on Bernie will write themselves.

Here’s one from my Facebook feed a few days ago:



Now imagine the ads in S Florida painting Bernie as “praising” Castro.

I will support Sanders 100% if he’s the nominee. I support Medicare for All, so there’s that. But I’m not optimistic as to how he will fare in the general election once he’s the sole target of the Trump/Republican smear machine.
__________________
“I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that...I will to the best of my ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.” - President Donald J. Trump, January 20, 2017.
"And it's, frankly, disgusting the way the press is able to write whatever they want to write. And people should look into it." - President Donald J. Trump, October 11, 2017.
Fast Eddie B is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th March 2020, 10:35 AM   #28
Suddenly
No Punting
 
Suddenly's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Montani Semper Liberi
Posts: 3,626
Originally Posted by xjx388 View Post
I totally agree. The subject was "competing interests" and my point was that "obstructionism" is fair play as long as it isn't cheating the rules. It's no surprise that the Dems considered Gorusch unsuitable; is there a nominee in the country that Trump could realistically offer (given that he wants to advance the party's interests) that the Dems would happily accept? I don't think so.
Probably. John Roberts sailed through. Someone like him would have again. Getting past a Democratic filibuster would be easy with a nominee that has some redeeming features other than a federalist society endorsement.
Quote:


Obstructionism to advance one's interests is part of the game; in Gorusch's case, the Dems were engaging in some obstructionism of their own. The Republicans decided to blow that up right away to eliminate the obstacle.

If the roles had been reversed, you think the Dems wouldn't have done the same thing?
I don't think the Dems have ever nominated someone that far away from the center who clearly has a political axe to grind, nor do I think they will. Nominating Gorsuch would be like nominating me. Dems keep nominating ex prosecutors and such, not career indigent defense leftists that would just go hog wild and do things like find the American Arbitration Act unconstitutional or start overruling any case finding exceptions to the warrant requirement and completely end qualified immunity for police officer misconduct or maybe literally find a constitutional right to healthcare and housing.
Suddenly is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th March 2020, 10:40 AM   #29
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 44,537
Originally Posted by Fast Eddie B View Post
Stipulated that Trump will viciously and relentlessly attack whoever the Democratic nominee is
The question is, will the Democratic nominee viciously and relentlessly attack Trump? Should they?
theprestige is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th March 2020, 10:42 AM   #30
Segnosaur
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Posts: 15,397
Originally Posted by xjx388 View Post
I totally agree. The subject was "competing interests" and my point was that "obstructionism" is fair play as long as it isn't cheating the rules.
I guess it depends on how you define "the rules".

(And no, I'm not trying to bob the thread.)

So much of the way the U.S. government functions wasn't fully defined in the constitution... it evolved over time in a way that kept things functioning smoothly. It wasn't against "the rules" (in terms of actual written guidelines) for Moscow Mitch to stonewall Obama's judicial nominees. But it was against the norms of the American political system that had been functioning for the past centuries. (whether you consider them unwritten rules, or a gentlemen's agreement). The effect will be an eventual collapse of the American system.

Quote:
If the roles had been reversed, you think the Dems wouldn't have done the same thing?
A decade ago? Probably not. The Democrats appeared to be following established norms, even as the republicans started blowing things up.

Now? Well, the republicans have shown themselves to be completely corrupt, and I suspect the Democrats have realized that they can't trust the republicans to act with any sort of decorum. For better or worse, they may start to adopt the same dirty tricks the republicans have.
__________________
Trust me, I know what I'm doing. - Sledgehammer

I'm Mary Poppin's Y'all! - Yondu

We are Groot - Groot
Segnosaur is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th March 2020, 10:45 AM   #31
JoeMorgue
Self Employed
Remittance Man
 
JoeMorgue's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Florida
Posts: 24,748
Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
The question is, will the Democratic nominee viciously and relentlessly attack Trump?
You mean "state the objective facts as they are actually happening?"
__________________
- "Ernest Hemingway once wrote that the world is a fine place and worth fighting for. I agree with the second part." - Detective Sommerset
- "Stupidity does not cancel out stupidity to yield genius. It breeds like a bucket-full of coked out hamsters." - The Oatmeal
- "To the best of my knowledge the only thing philosophy has ever proven is that Descartes could think." - SMBC
JoeMorgue is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th March 2020, 10:52 AM   #32
Distracted1
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Philadelphia
Posts: 3,750
Originally Posted by TragicMonkey View Post
Warren's out of the race so is any of this jumping on her grave, racist or not, relevant? I loved her dearly but our journey together is over, it's time to move on.
I am very sad about this.
The only "good" choice left is gone.

I now need to find out what happens when a candidate expires or becomes incapacitated after getting on the ballot, but before the election.
__________________
The man with one watch knows what time it is, the man with two watches is never sure.
Distracted1 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th March 2020, 10:55 AM   #33
Segnosaur
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Posts: 15,397
Originally Posted by Fast Eddie B View Post
Stipulated that Trump will viciously and relentlessly attack whoever the Democratic nominee is - it’s his MO and not even his lawyer and early and ardent supporters are immune - thinking Cohen and Sessions for two.

But I still think Sanders is especially vulnerable in this regard - as I said before, the attack ads on Bernie will write themselves.

Here’s one from my Facebook feed a few days ago:

(picture suggesting Sanders supported Iran during the hostage crisis.)
Keep in mind that there are some inaccuracies in that particular ad...

- Sanders was never a 'leader' of the Socialist workers party, nor did he support all their policies
- Sanders himself did not publicly support Iran during the crisis

However, even though he wasn't a member, Sanders did associate himself with the Socialist Workers Party (such as speaking at their events), even after the Iranian hostage crisis. So even though he may not have agreed with their stance on Iran, his disagreement wasn't strong enough for him to break off all ties.

So, guilt by association?

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/be...ostage-crisis/
__________________
Trust me, I know what I'm doing. - Sledgehammer

I'm Mary Poppin's Y'all! - Yondu

We are Groot - Groot
Segnosaur is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th March 2020, 10:56 AM   #34
Segnosaur
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Posts: 15,397
Originally Posted by JoeMorgue View Post
Quote:
The question is, will the Democratic nominee viciously and relentlessly attack Trump?
You mean "state the objective facts as they are actually happening?"
That would be bad. The Democrats should adopt "Alternative facts", just like the republicans.
__________________
Trust me, I know what I'm doing. - Sledgehammer

I'm Mary Poppin's Y'all! - Yondu

We are Groot - Groot
Segnosaur is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th March 2020, 11:11 AM   #35
SuburbanTurkey
Illuminator
 
SuburbanTurkey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2018
Location: Norwood, MA
Posts: 3,991
It would be very curious if Warren endorsed Biden. Biden's support of a credit-card friendly bankruptcy bill is often cited as the reason Warren left Harvard to enter politics. Warren endorsing Biden would be a very strange departure from her primary legislative issues.

More likely that, if she doesn't endorse Bernie, she'll endorse no-one.

https://www.vox.com/policy-and-polit...5-biden-warren
__________________
Gobble gobble
SuburbanTurkey is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th March 2020, 11:13 AM   #36
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 44,537
Originally Posted by JoeMorgue View Post
You mean "state the objective facts as they are actually happening?"
Call it whatever you like. Unlike some, I'm not about to derail this thread quibbling about terminology. The question is, will they do it, and should they do it?
theprestige is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th March 2020, 11:27 AM   #37
I Am The Scum
Illuminator
 
I Am The Scum's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 4,329
The Democratic nominee should definitely state the objective facts as they are actually happening.
I Am The Scum is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th March 2020, 11:28 AM   #38
Suddenly
No Punting
 
Suddenly's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Montani Semper Liberi
Posts: 3,626
Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
The question is, will the Democratic nominee viciously and relentlessly attack Trump? Should they?
No. At least not the way they'd probably do it. Which is to beat the dead horse that he is a bigoted scumbag.

In 2016 Trump literally said that wages were too high. That should have been played on a loop in every rust belt state around the clock. That is the subject matter that will move the needle at this point.
Suddenly is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th March 2020, 11:30 AM   #39
SuburbanTurkey
Illuminator
 
SuburbanTurkey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2018
Location: Norwood, MA
Posts: 3,991
Originally Posted by Suddenly View Post
No. At least not the way they'd probably do it. Which is to beat the dead horse that he is a bigoted scumbag.

In 2016 Trump literally said that wages were too high. That should have been played on a loop in every rust belt state around the clock. That is the subject matter that will move the needle at this point.
Yeah, cultural issues are always a weakpoint, but leaning into the undelivered promises about the economy are the ticket to Democratic victory.

Trump told one hell of a whopper about saving manufacturing and high-wage blue-collar jobs and hasn't delivered. Time to hammer him about this nonstop.
__________________
Gobble gobble
SuburbanTurkey is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th March 2020, 11:41 AM   #40
JoeMorgue
Self Employed
Remittance Man
 
JoeMorgue's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Florida
Posts: 24,748
The people in the Rust Belt don't think the Rust Belt jobs are ever coming back. Nobody does.

Nobody believed Trump when he said he was going to save factory jobs. The Trumpers just heard it for the coded message that it was. "Yeah you and I know that factory ain't never gonna open up again, I'm just here to punish the people who did it, the people you think did it, the people you already hated and now are using this as an excuse to hate, everyone who's better off then you and you're jealous, and hell while we are at it just everyone you've ever wanted to punish for whatever reason."

This is why people are so confused when Trump outright says to his supporters "I'm going to do the thing" then doesn't do the thing and they still love him. Because they didn't hear "I'm gonna do the thing" they heard what he was actually saying "Listen we both know I can't do the thing, but me pretending I'm gonna do the thing is gonna troll the libs soooooo hard and isn't that just awesome?"

Trump didn't tap into some hidden well of hope in the rural areas and the heartland and the rustbelt that things were ever going to get better and he was going to lead them to it. This is spite and revenge and... just raw uncategorized, unorganized lashing out. It's not hope.

The rural areas of America haven't pinned any hope on Donald Trump, that's ludicrous.
__________________
- "Ernest Hemingway once wrote that the world is a fine place and worth fighting for. I agree with the second part." - Detective Sommerset
- "Stupidity does not cancel out stupidity to yield genius. It breeds like a bucket-full of coked out hamsters." - The Oatmeal
- "To the best of my knowledge the only thing philosophy has ever proven is that Descartes could think." - SMBC
JoeMorgue is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » USA Politics

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

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
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 07:25 PM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2020, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.