THE Political Thread (ALL Political Discussion Here - See Rules, P. 1)
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 1955, 1956, 1957 ... 3661, 3662, 3663  Next
 
Post new topic    LakersGround.net Forum Index -> Off Topic Reply to topic
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
greenfrog
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 02 Jan 2011
Posts: 36081
Location: 502 Bad Gateway

PostPosted: Tue Jan 28, 2020 6:03 pm    Post subject:

Baron Von Humongous wrote:
greenfrog wrote:
Baron Von Humongous wrote:
greenfrog wrote:
California Us Berkeley Poll
(Chance since Dec 27)

Sanders 26% (+2)
Warren 20% (-2)
Biden 15% (+1)
Buttigieg 7% (-5)
Bloomberg 6% (+4)
Klobuchar 5% (+2)
Yang 4% (+1)
Steyer 2% (+1)

https://www.latimes.com/politics/story/2020-01-28/bernie-sanders-grabs-lead-in-california-presidential-primary

Quote:

Under state Democratic Party’s rules, delegates go to candidates who get at least 15% of the vote statewide or in a congressional district. The rest of the Democratic field remains far below that threshold, in single digits


So Biden is actually in danger of getting zero delegates from the bluest of states. That's always great sign for a "front runner".

At least he'll win in Texas and South Carolina, though.

Do you think all of those candidates will still be in the race come Super Tuesday?


Klobuchar I suspect being on the bubble. Maybe Biden gets a boost there. Bloomberg and Steyer can keep their vanity projects going as long as they want. Yang's crowd are either non-voters or Berners.

I think Buttigieg (sp) gets swallowed up by Bloomberg and/or Steyer as centrist alternative and may drop out next month. Of course, one of the billionaires could cut further into Biden's voting bloc, too.


Buttigieg is the candidate of Hollywood. I doubt he's going anywhere by then. He certainly has the money to hang around.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Baron Von Humongous
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 02 Jul 2015
Posts: 32979

PostPosted: Tue Jan 28, 2020 6:28 pm    Post subject:

greenfrog wrote:
Baron Von Humongous wrote:
greenfrog wrote:
Baron Von Humongous wrote:
greenfrog wrote:
California Us Berkeley Poll
(Chance since Dec 27)

Sanders 26% (+2)
Warren 20% (-2)
Biden 15% (+1)
Buttigieg 7% (-5)
Bloomberg 6% (+4)
Klobuchar 5% (+2)
Yang 4% (+1)
Steyer 2% (+1)

https://www.latimes.com/politics/story/2020-01-28/bernie-sanders-grabs-lead-in-california-presidential-primary

Quote:

Under state Democratic Party’s rules, delegates go to candidates who get at least 15% of the vote statewide or in a congressional district. The rest of the Democratic field remains far below that threshold, in single digits


So Biden is actually in danger of getting zero delegates from the bluest of states. That's always great sign for a "front runner".

At least he'll win in Texas and South Carolina, though.

Do you think all of those candidates will still be in the race come Super Tuesday?


Klobuchar I suspect being on the bubble. Maybe Biden gets a boost there. Bloomberg and Steyer can keep their vanity projects going as long as they want. Yang's crowd are either non-voters or Berners.

I think Buttigieg (sp) gets swallowed up by Bloomberg and/or Steyer as centrist alternative and may drop out next month. Of course, one of the billionaires could cut further into Biden's voting bloc, too.


Buttigieg is the candidate of Hollywood. I doubt he's going anywhere by then. He certainly has the money to hang around.

Good analysis. We shall see.
_________________
Under New Management
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Baron Von Humongous
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 02 Jul 2015
Posts: 32979

PostPosted: Tue Jan 28, 2020 6:31 pm    Post subject:

greenfrog wrote:
Omar Little wrote:
LakerSanity wrote:
eddiejonze wrote:
LakerSanity wrote:
Bernie, for good and bad, is the left's answer to Donald Trump. I don't know whether or not in the end that's a good thing. I believe in Bernie's policies but at some point this country needs to be united. Surely, Bernie will just divide this country even more, much like Trump did but just on the opposite end of the coin. We can rationalize it that at least Bernie is good and Trump is bad, but I am sure Trump supporters say the same thing. All this being said, I dont k now if there is any candidate who can unite the country try right now. Maybe the only way to change things is to start rebuilding our institutions, and at least Bernie will try to do that.


I'm not just saying this as a Biden stan but If Joe wins the Presidency i think Dems would have a much better chance keeping control for a while, possibly to a more progressive shift. Immediately jumping to Bernie would be great because that means no more Drumpf but I would peg Bernie as a one term prez and a shift back to a moderate like Romney.

Both Bernie and Biden remove Drumpf, but Biden keeps the blue wave going longer IMO.


It could go either way. If Bernie's agenda is in the mainstream and people start having to take it seriously, maybe the country shifts left a bit. I think a lot of people would really love Bernie's agenda if they were just forced to listen to it. It benefits them.

However, if people only become that much more ingrained and tribal AND Bernie doesn't accomplish anything (because the Senate doesn't turn blue to get him the support), then, yes, one term could be in his future.

All of this though is premature. Get Trump out and worry about these things later. Given that every candidate is one who we can at least respect, and whose policies reflect, at the least, the bare minimum standard to be a democrat, whoever can beat Trump is the one who we need to support for now. Its also notable that, unlike Republicans who support Trump, just about every liberal can support Bernie without compromising their ethics or morality.


With all due respect, Bernie doesn't poll well with people outside the "you can have everything and I've figured out how someone else can pay for it" demographic. His ideas are great, his plans are laughably naive. And that's the problem. He's a cartoon to campaign against. Bernie fans have already thought the world is rigged against him, and he's been treated with relative kid gloves compared to what's coming in a general.

And there are way too many democrats in moderate districts who won those seats precisely because they had the strategy of strengthening Obamacare and not going to M4A right off, who aren't going to give those seats back for a pipe dream. Remember, the progressives went 0fer in taking red seats.

And if 2018 doesn't speak to you, check out the British elections.


He's literally running on raising middle class taxes. Even centrists like Klob give him props for admitting it.


What'll really pay for it?

MMT, baby! Gimme that fiat currency!

Which Sanders understands.
_________________
Under New Management
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Baron Von Humongous
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 02 Jul 2015
Posts: 32979

PostPosted: Tue Jan 28, 2020 6:36 pm    Post subject:

greenfrog wrote:
https://www.opensecrets.org/news/2019/07/20dems-are-taking-money-healthcare/

Keep in mind, they don't support a public option either. It's simply become the default political position because Bernie has pushed the needle so far to the left in this primary. As soon as he's gone expect order to reconstitute.

I feel confident in predicting that every viable candidate still remaining in the field will push the United States the furthest it has ever been in ensuring healthcare for every American even if that still falls short of a single payer system. Those more moderate proposals are also more likely to pass in the Senate, though I understand Bernie wants to start out with the most aggressive ask before making concessions in office, which I respect as a strategy.
_________________
Under New Management
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Baron Von Humongous
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 02 Jul 2015
Posts: 32979

PostPosted: Tue Jan 28, 2020 6:57 pm    Post subject:

This is a bit of a dumb hypothetical since it will likely never cone to pass, but if you were US president pushing M4A and the GOP came back to give you 60 votes to pass it -comprensive single payer health, vision, and dental coverage for all of America - as long as abortions and hormone replacement therapy (HRT) weren't included, would you take that deal?

Would POTUS Bernie Sanders take that deal?
_________________
Under New Management
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Omar Little
Moderator
Moderator


Joined: 02 May 2005
Posts: 90299
Location: Formerly Known As 24

PostPosted: Tue Jan 28, 2020 7:16 pm    Post subject:

Baron Von Humongous wrote:
greenfrog wrote:
Omar Little wrote:
LakerSanity wrote:
eddiejonze wrote:
LakerSanity wrote:
Bernie, for good and bad, is the left's answer to Donald Trump. I don't know whether or not in the end that's a good thing. I believe in Bernie's policies but at some point this country needs to be united. Surely, Bernie will just divide this country even more, much like Trump did but just on the opposite end of the coin. We can rationalize it that at least Bernie is good and Trump is bad, but I am sure Trump supporters say the same thing. All this being said, I dont k now if there is any candidate who can unite the country try right now. Maybe the only way to change things is to start rebuilding our institutions, and at least Bernie will try to do that.


I'm not just saying this as a Biden stan but If Joe wins the Presidency i think Dems would have a much better chance keeping control for a while, possibly to a more progressive shift. Immediately jumping to Bernie would be great because that means no more Drumpf but I would peg Bernie as a one term prez and a shift back to a moderate like Romney.

Both Bernie and Biden remove Drumpf, but Biden keeps the blue wave going longer IMO.


It could go either way. If Bernie's agenda is in the mainstream and people start having to take it seriously, maybe the country shifts left a bit. I think a lot of people would really love Bernie's agenda if they were just forced to listen to it. It benefits them.

However, if people only become that much more ingrained and tribal AND Bernie doesn't accomplish anything (because the Senate doesn't turn blue to get him the support), then, yes, one term could be in his future.

All of this though is premature. Get Trump out and worry about these things later. Given that every candidate is one who we can at least respect, and whose policies reflect, at the least, the bare minimum standard to be a democrat, whoever can beat Trump is the one who we need to support for now. Its also notable that, unlike Republicans who support Trump, just about every liberal can support Bernie without compromising their ethics or morality.


With all due respect, Bernie doesn't poll well with people outside the "you can have everything and I've figured out how someone else can pay for it" demographic. His ideas are great, his plans are laughably naive. And that's the problem. He's a cartoon to campaign against. Bernie fans have already thought the world is rigged against him, and he's been treated with relative kid gloves compared to what's coming in a general.

And there are way too many democrats in moderate districts who won those seats precisely because they had the strategy of strengthening Obamacare and not going to M4A right off, who aren't going to give those seats back for a pipe dream. Remember, the progressives went 0fer in taking red seats.

And if 2018 doesn't speak to you, check out the British elections.


He's literally running on raising middle class taxes. Even centrists like Klob give him props for admitting it.


What'll really pay for it?

MMT, baby! Gimme that fiat currency!

Which Sanders understands.


You guys know that’s not even close to reality, right?
_________________
“We must always take sides. Neutrality helps the oppressor, never the victim. Silence encourages the tormentor, never the tormented.” ― Elie Wiesel
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
kikanga
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 15 Sep 2012
Posts: 29152
Location: La La Land

PostPosted: Tue Jan 28, 2020 7:24 pm    Post subject:

Baron Von Humongous wrote:
This is a bit of a dumb hypothetical since it will likely never cone to pass, but if you were US president pushing M4A and the GOP came back to give you 60 votes to pass it -comprensive single payer health, vision, and dental coverage for all of America - as long as abortions and hormone replacement therapy (HRT) weren't included, would you take that deal?

Would POTUS Bernie Sanders take that deal?


The GOP would NEVER EVER EVER offer that. But sure I'd take it. And I think Bernie would take it as well.

Because you can always push for coverage of women's reproductive rights and HRT at a later date.
Can't undervalue how important it is to get legislation on the books. It's why we still have ACA after 3+ years of Trump trying to undermine it via the executive and judicial branches.
_________________
"Every hurt is a lesson, and every lesson makes you better”
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Baron Von Humongous
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 02 Jul 2015
Posts: 32979

PostPosted: Tue Jan 28, 2020 7:25 pm    Post subject:

Omar Little wrote:
Baron Von Humongous wrote:
greenfrog wrote:
Omar Little wrote:
LakerSanity wrote:
eddiejonze wrote:
LakerSanity wrote:
Bernie, for good and bad, is the left's answer to Donald Trump. I don't know whether or not in the end that's a good thing. I believe in Bernie's policies but at some point this country needs to be united. Surely, Bernie will just divide this country even more, much like Trump did but just on the opposite end of the coin. We can rationalize it that at least Bernie is good and Trump is bad, but I am sure Trump supporters say the same thing. All this being said, I dont k now if there is any candidate who can unite the country try right now. Maybe the only way to change things is to start rebuilding our institutions, and at least Bernie will try to do that.


I'm not just saying this as a Biden stan but If Joe wins the Presidency i think Dems would have a much better chance keeping control for a while, possibly to a more progressive shift. Immediately jumping to Bernie would be great because that means no more Drumpf but I would peg Bernie as a one term prez and a shift back to a moderate like Romney.

Both Bernie and Biden remove Drumpf, but Biden keeps the blue wave going longer IMO.


It could go either way. If Bernie's agenda is in the mainstream and people start having to take it seriously, maybe the country shifts left a bit. I think a lot of people would really love Bernie's agenda if they were just forced to listen to it. It benefits them.

However, if people only become that much more ingrained and tribal AND Bernie doesn't accomplish anything (because the Senate doesn't turn blue to get him the support), then, yes, one term could be in his future.

All of this though is premature. Get Trump out and worry about these things later. Given that every candidate is one who we can at least respect, and whose policies reflect, at the least, the bare minimum standard to be a democrat, whoever can beat Trump is the one who we need to support for now. Its also notable that, unlike Republicans who support Trump, just about every liberal can support Bernie without compromising their ethics or morality.


With all due respect, Bernie doesn't poll well with people outside the "you can have everything and I've figured out how someone else can pay for it" demographic. His ideas are great, his plans are laughably naive. And that's the problem. He's a cartoon to campaign against. Bernie fans have already thought the world is rigged against him, and he's been treated with relative kid gloves compared to what's coming in a general.

And there are way too many democrats in moderate districts who won those seats precisely because they had the strategy of strengthening Obamacare and not going to M4A right off, who aren't going to give those seats back for a pipe dream. Remember, the progressives went 0fer in taking red seats.

And if 2018 doesn't speak to you, check out the British elections.


He's literally running on raising middle class taxes. Even centrists like Klob give him props for admitting it.


What'll really pay for it?

MMT, baby! Gimme that fiat currency!

Which Sanders understands.


You guys know that’s not even close to reality, right?

The U.S. can print money until its not a global hegemon. Maybe the printing money knocks the nation down a peg or two, but I bet it'll be spending priorities rather than the issuance of bank notes that will bring it down.
_________________
Under New Management
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Baron Von Humongous
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 02 Jul 2015
Posts: 32979

PostPosted: Tue Jan 28, 2020 7:26 pm    Post subject:

Interesting:

Everyone should google Barr Swennerfelt and Bernie Sanders.
_________________
Under New Management
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Baron Von Humongous
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 02 Jul 2015
Posts: 32979

PostPosted: Tue Jan 28, 2020 7:28 pm    Post subject:

kikanga wrote:
Baron Von Humongous wrote:
This is a bit of a dumb hypothetical since it will likely never cone to pass, but if you were US president pushing M4A and the GOP came back to give you 60 votes to pass it -comprensive single payer health, vision, and dental coverage for all of America - as long as abortions and hormone replacement therapy (HRT) weren't included, would you take that deal?

Would POTUS Bernie Sanders take that deal?


The GOP would NEVER EVER EVER offer that. But sure I'd take it. And I think Bernie would take it as well.

Because you can always push for coverage of women's reproductive rights and HRT at a later date.
Can't undervalue how important it is to get legislation on the books. It's why we still have ACA after 3+ years of Trump trying to undermine it via the executive and judicial branches.

It's an interesting moral quandary for me and I'm still undecided. Thank you for weighing in.
_________________
Under New Management
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Palin
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 26 Feb 2008
Posts: 1807

PostPosted: Tue Jan 28, 2020 9:24 pm    Post subject:

I m not fully grasp the concept of government in USA. Obviously there is President, Senate and Congress. I am not sure how much a President can do without both of houses. Lets say Bernie or Warren won it all you guys think moderate Dems will work with them? Obviously there are many subjects they are agreed on but what about subjects that makes Bernie and Warren different from others? Can she/he achieve any of it without moderate Dems? If they can't then doesn't it mean that there will be pretty much no difference at all between them or Biden being president?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
greenfrog
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 02 Jan 2011
Posts: 36081
Location: 502 Bad Gateway

PostPosted: Tue Jan 28, 2020 10:32 pm    Post subject:

Palin wrote:
I m not fully grasp the concept of government in USA. Obviously there is President, Senate and Congress. I am not sure how much a President can do without both of houses. Lets say Bernie or Warren won it all you guys think moderate Dems will work with them? Obviously there are many subjects they are agreed on but what about subjects that makes Bernie and Warren different from others? Can she/he achieve any of it without moderate Dems? If they can't then doesn't it mean that there will be pretty much no difference at all between them or Biden being president?


Troop movements, enforcing anti-trust laws, redirecting aid, judges, and power over regulatory agencies are the differences. On those first two I think the differences between a Sanders and Biden administation would be measurable. Warren's great on anti-trust as well, but a blank slate when it comes to the military. Just using the Obama years as a guide (inherited 2 wars and took that number to 7), if a president lacks core principles or interest on matters of war and peace they get rolled by the national security state and their donors in the military industrial complex.

And no, moderate Dems would work against them. Warren doesn't seem to understand this. Bernie does and says he'll use his expansive grassroots organization to primary them out of office. I personally have doubts that he's tough enough (can't even call Biden a crook to his face).
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
kikanga
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 15 Sep 2012
Posts: 29152
Location: La La Land

PostPosted: Tue Jan 28, 2020 10:46 pm    Post subject:

greenfrog wrote:
Just using the Obama years as a guide (inherited 2 wars and took that number to 7), if a president lacks core principles or interest on matters of war and peace they get rolled by the national security state and their donors in the military industrial complex.


What 5 new wars did Obama add?
_________________
"Every hurt is a lesson, and every lesson makes you better”
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
greenfrog
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 02 Jan 2011
Posts: 36081
Location: 502 Bad Gateway

PostPosted: Tue Jan 28, 2020 10:53 pm    Post subject:

kikanga wrote:
greenfrog wrote:
Just using the Obama years as a guide (inherited 2 wars and took that number to 7), if a president lacks core principles or interest on matters of war and peace they get rolled by the national security state and their donors in the military industrial complex.


What 5 new wars did Obama add?


Syria, Yemen, Somalia, Libya, and Niger.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Baron Von Humongous
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 02 Jul 2015
Posts: 32979

PostPosted: Tue Jan 28, 2020 11:46 pm    Post subject:

greenfrog wrote:
kikanga wrote:
greenfrog wrote:
Just using the Obama years as a guide (inherited 2 wars and took that number to 7), if a president lacks core principles or interest on matters of war and peace they get rolled by the national security state and their donors in the military industrial complex.


What 5 new wars did Obama add?


Syria, Yemen, Somalia, Libya, and Niger.

Wow. (bleep) wow, bro. You're gone, bro.
_________________
Under New Management
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
ContagiousInspiration
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 07 May 2014
Posts: 13811
Location: Boulder ;)

PostPosted: Wed Jan 29, 2020 6:03 am    Post subject:

Baron Von Humongous wrote:
greenfrog wrote:
kikanga wrote:
greenfrog wrote:
Just using the Obama years as a guide (inherited 2 wars and took that number to 7), if a president lacks core principles or interest on matters of war and peace they get rolled by the national security state and their donors in the military industrial complex.


What 5 new wars did Obama add?


Syria, Yemen, Somalia, Libya, and Niger.

Wow. (bleep) wow, bro. You're gone, bro.


frog. don't be all deplorable here lets get some links
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
ContagiousInspiration
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 07 May 2014
Posts: 13811
Location: Boulder ;)

PostPosted: Wed Jan 29, 2020 6:05 am    Post subject:

Baron Von Humongous wrote:
ContagiousInspiration wrote:
Baron Von Humongous wrote:
Trump - impeached - and Netanyahu - indicted - pulled a PR stunt with their "Deal of a Century" Middle East Peace proposal without Palestine at the table and which Jordan immediately rejected. It's a laughably poor plan for reasons outlined in this Twitter thread:

Quote:
Ilan Goldenberg
@ilangoldenberg

14. A couple final points. The plan is just deeply deeply condescending to Palestinians and uses insensitive languge all over the place. It reads as it was written by a bunch of Americans who never talked to a Palestinian about its content, which is exactly what happened.

https://twitter.com/ilangoldenberg/status/1222222993239236613

Two world leader thugs trying to distract from their domestic crimes and corruption by putting out a bs "plan" that would lead to apartheid and war.


Reading about the way we and Israel treats the Palestinians used to honestly drive me insane. I would lose my mind over all the support Israel got while they bombed all the Palestinian Humanitarian infrastructure and destroyed their homes and property whenever they felt necessary..
All the while building more and more and more and more settlements against every UN resolution ever written..

Then you probably don't want to watch this:
Quote:
CNN
@CNN
Jared Kushner, senior adviser to the President, says the White House's Middle East plan is "a great deal" and if Palestinians reject it, “they’re going to screw up another opportunity, like they’ve screwed up every other opportunity that they’ve ever had in their existence.”

https://twitter.com/CNN/status/1222267596210343940


More SUBHUMAN treatment of the Palestinian peoples
The rest of the Jordan Valley.. poof.. here we will just force you off that PEACEFULLY... then give it to Bibi
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
ContagiousInspiration
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 07 May 2014
Posts: 13811
Location: Boulder ;)

PostPosted: Wed Jan 29, 2020 6:13 am    Post subject:

Can the other Supreme Court Justices step in if the Trial really looks to be too much of a Sham- others should be allowed to step in if Roberts stays partisan
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
greenfrog
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 02 Jan 2011
Posts: 36081
Location: 502 Bad Gateway

PostPosted: Wed Jan 29, 2020 6:26 am    Post subject:

ContagiousInspiration wrote:
Baron Von Humongous wrote:
greenfrog wrote:
kikanga wrote:
greenfrog wrote:
Just using the Obama years as a guide (inherited 2 wars and took that number to 7), if a president lacks core principles or interest on matters of war and peace they get rolled by the national security state and their donors in the military industrial complex.


What 5 new wars did Obama add?


Syria, Yemen, Somalia, Libya, and Niger.

Wow. (bleep) wow, bro. You're gone, bro.


frog. don't be all deplorable here lets get some links


https://www.vice.com/en_us/article/a3ywd5/white-house-acknowledges-the-us-is-at-war-in-seven-countries

https://www.thenation.com/article/archive/how-many-wars-is-the-us-really-fighting/

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/03/14/world/africa/niger-green-berets-isis-firefight-december.html

A few senators don't even know about Niger.

https://www.thedailybeast.com/senators-are-stunned-to-discover-we-have-1000-troops-in-niger
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
LarryCoon
Site Staff
Site Staff


Joined: 11 Aug 2002
Posts: 11264

PostPosted: Wed Jan 29, 2020 7:28 am    Post subject:

greenfrog wrote:
ribeye wrote:
So . . . has anyone considered that at the end of these primaries no one has enough delegates to win, but Bernie is leading, and then a brokered convention follows but after all the finagling and deal making, Bernie doesn't win?

Won't that be a blast.


I was told that was a bad topic.


But it was a good West Wing episode. Josh worked the teacher's union in New York while Santos sealed the deal with an inspiring speech.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website Reply with quote
ribeye
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 10 Nov 2001
Posts: 12612

PostPosted: Wed Jan 29, 2020 7:32 am    Post subject:

greenfrog wrote:
ContagiousInspiration wrote:
Baron Von Humongous wrote:
greenfrog wrote:
kikanga wrote:
greenfrog wrote:
Just using the Obama years as a guide (inherited 2 wars and took that number to 7), if a president lacks core principles or interest on matters of war and peace they get rolled by the national security state and their donors in the military industrial complex.


What 5 new wars did Obama add?


Syria, Yemen, Somalia, Libya, and Niger.

Wow. (bleep) wow, bro. You're gone, bro.


frog. don't be all deplorable here lets get some links


https://www.vice.com/en_us/article/a3ywd5/white-house-acknowledges-the-us-is-at-war-in-seven-countries

https://www.thenation.com/article/archive/how-many-wars-is-the-us-really-fighting/

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/03/14/world/africa/niger-green-berets-isis-firefight-december.html

A few senators don't even know about Niger.

https://www.thedailybeast.com/senators-are-stunned-to-discover-we-have-1000-troops-in-niger


So there is ^that^ or more 9/11's. Just who wants to be the Commander and Chief who sat on their hands while a plot unfolded that killed hundreds or thousands of Americans? And that is assuming this person could get elected with the latter choice.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
ribeye
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 10 Nov 2001
Posts: 12612

PostPosted: Wed Jan 29, 2020 7:56 am    Post subject:

Omar Little wrote:

With all due respect, Bernie doesn't poll well with people outside the "you can have everything and I've figured out how someone else can pay for it" demographic. His ideas are great, his plans are laughably naive. And that's the problem. He's a cartoon to campaign against. Bernie fans have already thought the world is rigged against him, and he's been treated with relative kid gloves compared to what's coming in a general.

And there are way too many democrats in moderate districts who won those seats precisely because they had the strategy of strengthening Obamacare and not going to M4A right off, who aren't going to give those seats back for a pipe dream. Remember, the progressives went 0fer in taking red seats.

And if 2018 doesn't speak to you, check out the British elections.


Harsh, but so very true.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
greenfrog
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 02 Jan 2011
Posts: 36081
Location: 502 Bad Gateway

PostPosted: Wed Jan 29, 2020 8:57 am    Post subject:

ribeye wrote:
greenfrog wrote:
ContagiousInspiration wrote:
Baron Von Humongous wrote:
greenfrog wrote:
kikanga wrote:
greenfrog wrote:
Just using the Obama years as a guide (inherited 2 wars and took that number to 7), if a president lacks core principles or interest on matters of war and peace they get rolled by the national security state and their donors in the military industrial complex.


What 5 new wars did Obama add?


Syria, Yemen, Somalia, Libya, and Niger.

Wow. (bleep) wow, bro. You're gone, bro.


frog. don't be all deplorable here lets get some links


https://www.vice.com/en_us/article/a3ywd5/white-house-acknowledges-the-us-is-at-war-in-seven-countries

https://www.thenation.com/article/archive/how-many-wars-is-the-us-really-fighting/

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/03/14/world/africa/niger-green-berets-isis-firefight-december.html

A few senators don't even know about Niger.

https://www.thedailybeast.com/senators-are-stunned-to-discover-we-have-1000-troops-in-niger


So there is ^that^ or more 9/11's. Just who wants to be the Commander and Chief who sat on their hands while a plot unfolded that killed hundreds or thousands of Americans? And that is assuming this person could get elected with the latter choice.


Do you seriously believe any of this has to do with 9/11 at this point? Yemen, really? I don't believe even Obama tried to tie the Libya intervention to terrorism.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Heartburn
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 04 Oct 2001
Posts: 6346
Location: The Titanic that is the USA

PostPosted: Wed Jan 29, 2020 9:21 am    Post subject:

ribeye wrote:
Omar Little wrote:

With all due respect, Bernie doesn't poll well with people outside the "you can have everything and I've figured out how someone else can pay for it" demographic. His ideas are great, his plans are laughably naive. And that's the problem. He's a cartoon to campaign against. Bernie fans have already thought the world is rigged against him, and he's been treated with relative kid gloves compared to what's coming in a general.

And there are way too many democrats in moderate districts who won those seats precisely because they had the strategy of strengthening Obamacare and not going to M4A right off, who aren't going to give those seats back for a pipe dream. Remember, the progressives went 0fer in taking red seats.

And if 2018 doesn't speak to you, check out the British elections.


Harsh, but so very true.


Yep. Agree with every word of it.

I have been getting daily texts from Bernie's team and every time I receive one I ask to be taken off. Only today did someone confirm I would be taken off the list. But not without a little attitude.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Yahoo Messenger Reply with quote
ribeye
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 10 Nov 2001
Posts: 12612

PostPosted: Wed Jan 29, 2020 9:26 am    Post subject:

greenfrog wrote:
ribeye wrote:
greenfrog wrote:
ContagiousInspiration wrote:
Baron Von Humongous wrote:
greenfrog wrote:
kikanga wrote:
greenfrog wrote:
Just using the Obama years as a guide (inherited 2 wars and took that number to 7), if a president lacks core principles or interest on matters of war and peace they get rolled by the national security state and their donors in the military industrial complex.


What 5 new wars did Obama add?


Syria, Yemen, Somalia, Libya, and Niger.

Wow. (bleep) wow, bro. You're gone, bro.


frog. don't be all deplorable here lets get some links


https://www.vice.com/en_us/article/a3ywd5/white-house-acknowledges-the-us-is-at-war-in-seven-countries

https://www.thenation.com/article/archive/how-many-wars-is-the-us-really-fighting/

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/03/14/world/africa/niger-green-berets-isis-firefight-december.html

A few senators don't even know about Niger.

https://www.thedailybeast.com/senators-are-stunned-to-discover-we-have-1000-troops-in-niger


So there is ^that^ or more 9/11's. Just who wants to be the Commander and Chief who sat on their hands while a plot unfolded that killed hundreds or thousands of Americans? And that is assuming this person could get elected with the latter choice.


Do you seriously believe any of this has to do with 9/11 at this point? Yemen, really? I don't believe even Obama tried to tie the Libya intervention to terrorism.


To be honest, I don't know. And I doubt if you really know what intelligence we have and had and why actions were taken. I just happen to believe that protecting out country against terrorism is among the more important tasks the Commander and Chief has.
'
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic    LakersGround.net Forum Index -> Off Topic All times are GMT - 8 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 1955, 1956, 1957 ... 3661, 3662, 3663  Next
Page 1956 of 3663
Jump to:  

 
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum






Graphics by uberzev
© 1995-2018 LakersGround.net. All Rights Reserved. Privacy Policy. Terms of Use.
LakersGround is an unofficial news source serving the fan community since 1995.
We are in no way associated with the Los Angeles Lakers or the National Basketball Association.


Powered by phpBB