Is this the end of Democrat front runner Joe Biden?

Chris_Heilong

Quin_Dub wrote: »

Given that you've blown past the polling data , can I assume that we've moved on from "biased polling" and "skewed data" and just moved on to the factual discussion on "How can Trump recover"?

Trumps biggest obstacle is not the Media , it's his own mouth and his crippling inability to admit a mistake.

The Media do not have to spin the speeches at Mt. Rushmore or in DC - A simple verbatim reproduction of them clearly elucidates Trumps viewpoint - That (currently) 50% of the US population are his enemies who hate the country and who's sole aim is to destroy it - How on EARTH do either of those speeches win him more support??? Allied to his continued rhetoric on Twitter which again simply require verbatim reproduction to show clearly their meaning.

He is making absolutely ZERO effort to change peoples minds , not one iota , he is simply hoping that if he gets his base utterly febrile with fear and anger that they might just be enough for him - They will not however.

In terms on the impact of his inability to admit a mistake?

Every Dog in the street knows that he f***ed up in his response to Covid19, but his brain simply will not allow him to process that fact.

He should have shown leadership around simple things like social distancing and mask wearing , but he took a huge bet back in the March time-frame that things would ease off and settle into a level of stasis during the summer months. He has lost that bet as have those whose lives he used as collateral.

Current projections are for the US to hit ~180k deaths by October the 1st , and additional 50,000 people dying - 50% of whom might live if Social Distancing and Mask wearing were consistently applied.

But Trump won't lead from the front , he won't issue a Federal mandate or in fact do anything meaningful because that would make him look "weak" in his eyes because it would involve admitting that he was wrong previously.

So you admit that the media are lying about what he said at rushmore but you feel he is his own worst enemy regardless of the media?

What he said about the far left was spot on and we even see the same attitude here on boards with people supporting violence and acts of vandalism.

Chris_Heilong

Chris_Heilong wrote: »

So you admit that the media are lying about what he said at rushmore but you feel he is his own worst enemy regardless of the media?

What he said about the far left was spot on and we even see the same attitude here on boards with people supporting violence and acts of vandalism.

Erm, no he didn't admit the media was lying.

rossie1977

What far left.

There is no far left in the US. There is barely a left.

Why don't you take issue with massive rise in far right though. Every single terrorism related death in the US last year was far right.

Muahahaha

Quin_Dub wrote: »

Current projections are for the US to hit ~180k deaths by October the 1st , and additional 50,000 people dying - 50% of whom might live if Social Distancing and Mask wearing were consistently applied.

An additional 50,000 dying between no and October is really unbelivable, especially when put up against Trumps response to the virus.

To put that 50,000 figure into perspective in 2001 3,000 Americans lost their lives in the World Trade Centre attacks. The response was to launch a 20 year war which to date has cost them $800 billion and it still isnt over.

Quin_Dub

Chris_Heilong wrote: »

So you admit that the media are lying about what he said at rushmore but you feel he is his own worst enemy regardless of the media?

What he said about the far left was spot on and we even see the same attitude here on boards with people supporting violence and acts of vandalism.

No..Not what I said in any way shape or form.

I watched a full recording of both of his speeches verbatim and was appalled by them.

The Media are not his problem - His own words and deeds are.

Simple verbatim reproduction of the things he says out loud or tweets about are plenty enough for there to be no ambiguity about his position on things.

He is clearly of the view that a vote for Democrats is a vote for the destruction of the US as he believes it to be and that anyone voting for a Democrat hates America.

That's not putting words in his mouth or "mis-interpreting"

I didn't watch the whole video you linked because their 1st "spin" about the media happened almost immediately. One guy said "An Article from the Brookings institute wrote that Trump said Confederates were Heroes - He Absolutely Did not say that , that's just a lie" and his side-kick agrees with him.

Here is the Brookings Article they are talking about.

The quote from Trump was this

Our nation is witnessing a merciless campaign to wipe out our history, defame our heroes, erase our values, and indoctrinate our children.

In the context of the current conversation - What "Heroes" are being defamed and what "history" is being wiped out??

The Answer - Confederate leaders are having their Statues removed or torn down and are being "defamed" I guess..

To suggest that Trump was not labeling the Confederate leaders as Heroes just because he didn't explicitly form the sentence "Confederate Generals are Heroes" is utterly ridiculous.

If he doesn't think they are heroes and he was only talking about Washington or Jefferson for example , then let him say that.

By saying what he said how he said it , the ONLY reasonable conclusion anyone can have is that he meant that ALL those people having statues torn down are heroes.


But the ambiguity is by design - It allows him (and people like those in the video) to get on their high horse about the media misinterpreting him whilst still dog whistling at top volume to those in his base who agree 100% that those Confederate leaders are indeed heroes.

rossie1977

The fact that confederate statues and monuments litter the US is beyond hilarious.

The confederates were the enemy of the US. Would be akin to thousands of nazis monuments around the UK and people complaining when they were taken down..

I ain't watching that video, but what narrative? Civil war was due to one thing and one thing only, slavery. Numerous states clearly outlined in writing the main reason for leaving Union was slavery reform.

jackboy

Quin_Dub wrote: »

In the context of the current conversation - What "Heroes" are being defamed and what "history" is being wiped out??

The Answer - Confederate leaders are having their Statues removed or torn down and are being "defamed" I guess..

To suggest that Trump was not labeling the Confederate leaders as Heroes just because he didn't explicitly form the sentence "Confederate Generals are Heroes" is utterly ridiculous..

It is just as valid to consider some confederate generals ‘heroes’ as considering some union generals heroes.

The civil war was not a war caused and fought solely over slavery. There were a lot of different leaders on both sides fighting for different reasons. Seeing it as a straight fight of good against evil is very simplistic. Some confederate military leaders did achieve some incredible things during some battles. It is not surprising or wrong that a lot of people would consider some of these leaders heroes.

Overheal

jackboy wrote: »

It is just as valid to consider some confederate generals ‘heroes’ as considering some union generals heroes.

The civil war was not a war caused and fought solely over slavery. There were a lot of different leaders on both sides fighting for different reasons. Seeing it as a straight fight of good against evil is very simplistic. Some confederate military leaders did achieve some incredible things during some battles. It is not surprising or wrong that a lot of people would consider some of these leaders heroes.

No no of course not it was about “states rights” ... to own slaves.

Chris_Heilong

I am not even a fan of Trump but the amount of inaccuracies in the thread are startling you would think you were on the echo chamber that is Twitter, If you want to criticize someone at least be accurate, if they are as bad as you think then no one needs to lie about them or misrepresent what they say by injecting accusations of dog whistling or whatever.

Quin_Dub

jackboy wrote: »

It is just as valid to consider some confederate generals ‘heroes’ as considering some union generals heroes.

The civil war was not a war caused and fought solely over slavery. There were a lot of different leaders on both sides fighting for different reasons. Seeing it as a straight fight of good against evil is very simplistic. Some confederate military leaders did achieve some incredible things during some battles. It is not surprising or wrong that a lot of people would consider some of these leaders heroes.

And therein lies the problem.

The Confederates were Traitors , plain and simple. They meet the textbook and legal definition of the term absolutely perfectly.

And yes , it WAS fought solely about Slavery - There have been attempts to muddy the waters on this with revisionist history , but it was only ever about the ability to OWN slaves.

By all means discuss them in detail in History books , or in the correct context in a Museum or something . You can even give them credit for their Military prowess.

Just as people can obectively review someone like Von Runstedt in Germany or Tojo in Japan and recognise that they were pretty good Military leaders with some big wins. It doesn't mean however that you build statues and have bloody parades for them!!!

Having a big Statue in the middle of a town to Traitorous Racists is not in anyway shape or form defensible.

Quin_Dub

Chris_Heilong wrote: »

I am not even a fan of Trump but the amount of inaccuracies in the thread are startling you would think you were on the echo chamber that is Twitter, If you want to criticize someone at least be accurate, if they are as bad as you think then no one needs to lie about them or misrepresent what they say by injecting accusations of dog whistling or whatever.

Give me 3...Any 3 will do...

mcmoustache

Deleted User wrote: »

It's really difficult to pull a coherent thought out of that...

Look. When you're copying and pasting everything, sometimes you put the wrong clipboard contents into the wrong part of the wrong post.

Try writing multiple comments in multiple fora where all you do is copy from dodgy Trump-suckup sites and paste into your posts and see for yourself how quickly your posts start to look like incoherent ramblings.

weisses

Quin_Dub wrote: »

Give me 3...Any 3 will do...

Its not the end of front runner Joe Biden ..... Thats one

jackboy

Quin_Dub wrote: »

Having a big Statue in the middle of a town to Traitorous Racists is not in anyway shape or form defensible.

How much of a traitor? Do we go with the technical definition only?

How much of a racist? Should Churchill and Gandhi statues come down?

Of course there are statues that the vast majority would not like to see. But there are many, many statues that divide opinion.

What will Biden do if president? His opinion on statue knocking might be more robust then.

Quin_Dub

jackboy wrote: »

How much of a traitor? Do we go with the technical definition only?

Well , the legal definition will do fine

Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort

So , the Confederate states and their leaders are covered there quite clearly.

jackboy wrote: »

How much of a racist? Should Churchill and Gandhi statues come down?

What we are talking about is a country celebrating people that fought against them and sought to destroy them - Who the hell does that??

jackboy wrote: »

Of course there are statues that the vast majority would not like to see. But there are many, many statues that divide opinion.

What will Biden do if president? His opinion on statue knocking might be more robust then.

I'd say Biden will do the sensible thing - Which is to remove all of the Confederate from public places , they do not have to be destroyed , they should be moved to Museums or some other contextually relevant location.

Theme park isn't the right word , but parks telling the history of an event would be fine. For example there would be nothing wrong with having the statues of all the opposing generals at the sites of Gettysburg or Appomatox or whatever.

The issue is having them on main thoroughfares in places that suggest that they are to be glorified.

Remembered absolutely , but glorified and considered "Heroes" ? absolutely categorically not.

Overheal

Chris_Heilong wrote: »

I am not even a fan of Trump but the amount of inaccuracies in the thread are startling you would think you were on the echo chamber that is Twitter, If you want to criticize someone at least be accurate, if they are as bad as you think then no one needs to lie about them or misrepresent what they say by injecting accusations of dog whistling or whatever.

These dog whistles aren’t just made up? $88 baseball, the Nazi like tee shirt, just to name a couple.

Nobody is making this up. It’s right there.

ohnonotgmail

jackboy wrote: »

How much of a traitor? Do we go with the technical definition only?

How much of a racist? Should Churchill and Gandhi statues come down?

Of course there are statues that the vast majority would not like to see. But there are many, many statues that divide opinion.

What will Biden do if president? His opinion on statue knocking might be more robust then.

the confederate statues were nearly all erected during the jim crow and civil rights eras. they were a sign to black people that the same white people were still in charge of their lives.

rossie1977

jackboy wrote: »

It is just as valid to consider some confederate generals ‘heroes’ as considering some union generals heroes.

The civil war was not a war caused and fought solely over slavery. There were a lot of different leaders on both sides fighting for different reasons. Seeing it as a straight fight of good against evil is very simplistic. Some confederate military leaders did achieve some incredible things during some battles. It is not surprising or wrong that a lot of people would consider some of these leaders heroes.

Sorry what..

Rommel is arguably one of the greatest military commanders in history but yet nobody views him as a hero.

Civil war was solely over slavery. Numerous states clearly outline slavery as key reason for leaving union, confederate constitution has a clause enshrining slavery forever.

In fact confederate vice president Alexander Stephens in a speech in 1861 said

Our new government is founded upon exactly the opposite idea; its foundations are laid, its corner-stone rests, upon the great truth that the negro is not equal to the white man; that slavery subordination to the superior race is his natural and normal condition

jackboy

rossie1977 wrote: »

Sorry what..

Rommel is arguably one of the greatest military commanders in history but yet nobody views him as a hero.

Civil war was solely over slavery. Numerous states clearly outline slavery as key reason for leaving union, confederate constitution has a clause enshrining slavery forever.

In fact confederate vice president Alexander Stephens in a speech in 1861 said

You are right, but politicians start wars and then soldiers have to fight them. A lot of the confederate military leaders were not more evil than a lot of the union military leaders.

The Germans may not think Rommel is a hero but there is no doubt a lot of the Southerners see some of the confederates as heroes. Maybe this is due to poverty and too many people compensating for a lack of meaning in their lives.

Anyway, if statues are to come down, riots are not the way to do it. We will see what Biden does if he wins. I suspect when his time comes, he will condemn the knocking of statues.

ohnonotgmail

jackboy wrote: »

You are right, but politicians start wars and then soldiers have to fight them. A lot of the confederate military leaders were not more evil than a lot of the union military leaders.

The Germans may not think Rommel is a hero but there is no doubt a lot of the Southerners see some of the confederates as heroes. Maybe this is due to poverty and too many people compensating for a lack of meaning in their lives.

Anyway, if statues are to come down, riots are not the way to do it. We will see what Biden does if he wins. I suspect when his time comes, he will condemn the knocking of statues.

it is not a question of evil. they resigned their commissions in the union army and fought against the union army. pretty much the definition of traitor.

Igotadose

jackboy wrote: »

You are right, but politicians start wars and then soldiers have to fight them. A lot of the confederate military leaders were not more evil than a lot of the union military leaders.

The Germans may not think Rommel is a hero but there is no doubt a lot of the Southerners see some of the confederates as heroes. Maybe this is due to poverty and too many people compensating for a lack of meaning in their lives.

Anyway, if statues are to come down, riots are not the way to do it. We will see what Biden does if he wins. I suspect when his time comes, he will condemn the knocking of statues.

You can be 100% certain that 'a lot of the Germans' saw Rommel as a hero, even after WWII. They simply had to be quiet because they lost and there was no attempt at rehabilitation/normalization like was done with the Confederacy.

Leopards can't change their spots.

Fr Tod Umptious

rossie1977 wrote: »

Sorry what..

Rommel is arguably one of the greatest military commanders in history but yet nobody views him as a hero.

Civil war was solely over slavery. Numerous states clearly outline slavery as key reason for leaving union, confederate constitution has a clause enshrining slavery forever.

In fact confederate vice president Alexander Stephens in a speech in 1861 said

No it wasn't

It was about states rights.

Sure slavery was front and center in the discussion about states rights but the union had no plans to emancipate slaves in the south at the start of the civil war, emancipation only came much later.

In 1861 Washington was not going to remove slavery from the existing slave states in the south.

It was about the rights of new states to decide themselves if they are to be slave states or free states and not have Washington decide for them.

Oddly enough it's happening again in the Trump era.

Liberal states like California and Massachusetts are pushing back against Washington when it comes to immigration etc, they are playing the states rights card in order to not do what Washington wants.

rossie1977

Fr Tod Umptious wrote: »

No it wasn't

It was about states rights.

Sure slavery was front and center in the discussion about states rights but the union had no plans to emancipate slaves in the south at the start of the civil war, emancipation only came much later.

In 1861 Washington was not going to remove slavery from the existing slave states in the south.

It was about the rights of new states to decide themselves if they are to be slave states or free states and not have Washington decide for them.

When South Carolina became first state in Union to leave the primary reason they gave was "an increasing hostility on the part of the non-slaveholding States to the Institution of Slavery".

History especially southern white conservatives might try to white-wash the reason for secession but it was clearly over slavery.

Oddly enough it's happening again in the Trump era.

Liberal states like California and Massachusetts are pushing back against Washington when it comes to immigration etc, they are playing the states rights card in order to not do what Washington wants.

No and here is the difference.

When the southern states left the Union they actually opposed state rights. They left because they were verimently against the northern states outlawing slavery.

California isn't going to leave the union just because say Kentucky says 'no more immigrants'.

timsey tiger

Quin_Dub wrote: »

What we are talking about is a country celebrating people that fought against them and sought to destroy them - Who the hell does that??

We do, or at least Leo etc al. were going to until there was a bit of a commotion and the whole virus thing.

threeball

Fr Tod Umptious wrote: »

No it wasn't

It was about states rights.

Sure slavery was front and center in the discussion about states rights but the union had no plans to emancipate slaves in the south at the start of the civil war, emancipation only came much later.

In 1861 Washington was not going to remove slavery from the existing slave states in the south.

It was about the rights of new states to decide themselves if they are to be slave states or free states and not have Washington decide for them.

Oddly enough it's happening again in the Trump era.

Liberal states like California and Massachusetts are pushing back against Washington when it comes to immigration etc, they are playing the states rights card in order to not do what Washington wants.

I think you are seeing a lot of history repeating itself but playing out in another part of the world. Its not inconceivable to see the the US disintegrate like the Roman empire with states or block of states forming alliances such are the economic disparities across the country. If that happens there's no guarantee it doesn't head towards aggression as the poor states get poorer and the rich richer. Just like Europe tore itself apart in the 30s, its very possible the US does the same 100years later.

timsey tiger

Igotadose wrote: »

You can be 100% certain that 'a lot of the Germans' saw Rommel as a hero, even after WWII. They simply had to be quiet because they lost and there was no attempt at rehabilitation/normalization like was done with the Confederacy.

Leopards can't change their spots.

Well, this is probably true, doesn't stop the deplorables trying to tell us that there were many fine people on the confederate side fighting for individual rights* or something.

* individual right to own slaves

The Tulsa rally apparently led to a spike.

https://twitter.com/AP/status/1280971561097482249?s=19

Timberrrrrrrr

[Deleted User] wrote: »

The Tulsa rally apparently led to a spike.

https://twitter.com/AP/status/1280971561097482249?s=19

Well I for one am shocked!

Danno

Deleted User wrote: »

The Tulsa rally apparently led to a spike.

https://twitter.com/AP/status/1280971561097482249?s=19

Trump must have been very busy holding rallies across vast parts of the USA where we see Covid-19 case increases.

Or, perhaps there was a very liberal backed protest dotted with riots, lootings and killings taking place in multiple US cities.

Nah, it was Trumps - barely attended - rally that is causing the Covid surge. :rolleyes:

greenfield21

Interesting section on bidens supply chain plan from an Irish perspective. Heck I'm surprised they didn't just name Ireland. Both biden and trump now seem to be on the same page re onshoring.

Paragraph below

"Ensure the U.S. tax code encourages on-shoring of pharmaceutical supply chains: Pharmaceutical offshoring has been heavily driven by tax code provisions that have encouraged companies to locate pharmaceutical production in low-tax countries even where those countries have labor and other costs comparable to the U.S. Biden will eliminate Trump Administration tax incentives for offshoring and pursue other tax code changes that will encourage pharmaceutical production in the U.S".

I doubt we will see any changes though...

https://joebiden.com/supplychains/