nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

2020 US Presidential Election (aka: The Trump Coronation)

notobtuse

With Nancy Pelosi’s Schiff Show Sham of an impeachment over (well, all but over, anyway) time to turn to the US presidential election.

So, who is left:

Donald Trump (R): You wanted change, you got change... Trump change!

Joe Biden (D): Distracted by shiny objects!
Bernie Sanders (I - running as a D, what's up with that?): On a scale of Mao to Stalin, how bad would a president Bernie be?
Elizabeth Warren (D): Little Chief Gonna Spend A Lot.
Mayor Pete Buttigieg (D): Portrait of a young bull$hit artist.
Andrew Yang : Vote for me and I’ll give you $12,000.
Mike Bloomberg (?): Who says you can’t buy an election?
Tulsi Gabbard (D): I guess it’s true you never piss off the Clintons.
Amy Klobuchar (D) and the rest of the also-rans: Who?

And then there’s Hillary Clinton (Witch), waiting in the wings for a contested convention so her superdelegates buddies can hand her the nomination: Liar, liar, pantsuit on fire!

Personally, when Pelosi, who had to impeach Trump immediately because he was such a threat to the nation, and then waited a month to walk the articles of impeachment in a stupid procession over to the Senate... it was like she was walking with Trump’s reelection papers.

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

AllForIt

Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »

And you dont think Trump/Republicans aren't?

Aren't what? Trump a career politician? Trump is the most un-career politician we've even seen!

AllForIt

duploelabs wrote: »

In what? The democratic nomination? Looks like he's got that in the bag. In the presidential election? The polls are saying he's a shoo in, some by even more than 10 points

No, not the nomination, the presidency. Obviously he has the nomination in the bag. This was my comment on it before the first super Tuesday when Sanders was in front. Before the turn around.

AllForIt

6 wrote: »

A recession will definitely be a massive negative for Trump and I can't see how will avoid one. This virus will cripple them.

Ordinarily a rescission would but this is different. It's caused by an act of God i.e nothing to do with Trump's economic policies which were going well. I doubt Trump's supporters would blame him for it and I don't see how anything Biden could do would make any difference.

MadYaker

AllForIt wrote: »

Ordinarily a rescission would but this is different. It's caused by an act of God i.e nothing to do with Trump's economic policies which were going well. I doubt Trump's supporters would blame him for it and I don't see how anything Biden could do would make any difference.

The impending humanitarian crisis due to Coronavirus will finish him politically.

Mad_maxx

AllForIt wrote: »

Ordinarily a rescission would but this is different. It's caused by an act of God i.e nothing to do with Trump's economic policies which were going well. I doubt Trump's supporters would blame him for it and I don't see how anything Biden could do would make any difference.

its not trumps fault obviously but he,s the sitting president and will loose as a consequence regardless

that and he proudly boasted of the stock market performance under his presidency , he.s toast alone for that

duploelabs

AllForIt wrote: »

Ordinarily a rescission would but this is different. It's caused by an act of God i.e nothing to do with Trump's economic policies which were going well. I doubt Trump's supporters would blame him for it and I don't see how anything Biden could do would make any difference.

A proper president wouldn't have such a discoloration of their message as the timeline I posted above

rossie1977

If election took place today Biden would win Florida, Ohio, Wisconsin, Michigan, Arizona, Pennsylvania, North Carolina, Maine 2nd as well as everything Clinton won in 2016. That's how strong his momentum is right now. Its 323 to 215 in electoral college vote for those wondering.

Of course election doesn't take place today

AllForIt

To the above posts, you're living in fantasy land. Just like you were when you though he wouldn't win in the first place.

Consider the amount of personal criticism he got before his first win, and he still won.

Nothing that has happened since was worse than that.

You can keep quoting the odds all you like but that's just because the bookies know you will loose your money.

Austria!

AllForIt wrote: »

You can keep quoting the odds all you like but that's just because the bookies know you will loose your money.

BOOKIES DO NOT WORK THAT WAY. GOODNIGHT

[Deleted User]

AllForIt wrote: »

To the above posts, you're living in fantasy land. Just like you were when you though he wouldn't win in the first place.

Consider the amount of personal criticism he got before his first win, and he still won.

Nothing that has happened since was worse than that.

You can keep quoting the odds all you like but that's just because the bookies know you will loose your money.

Huh? You can bet on Trump at excellent odds too

Overheal

"The Trump Coronation..."

90507933_10219619554453735_8268369784958091264_n.jpg?_nc_cat=101&_nc_sid=8024bb&_nc_eui2=AeFsdT8TWLrgwjrbpBQAWXB6x3Z9-0vXa1R7x3liTdgAr0yED7mIEpG59NGuEaGFs4hAf0kbL1P_QMzNEFACjL0WSlRrcT00892LiEQNoBro-Q&_nc_oc=AQlwFIqreenQDdkRKFjgWiBRLSV6s1OoRyWAoGIdKTXPN0W3xnkQCMbIwy7UsBJtcBn5nHJu979QzDN1iwHSUkbT&_nc_ht=scontent-atl3-1.xx&oh=703b91a10ea1679a69b914c9f56b219d&oe=5E9A688B

90507933_10219619554453735_8268369784958091264_n.jpg?_nc_cat=101&_nc_sid=8024bb&_nc_eui2=AeFsdT8TWLrgwjrbpBQAWXB6x3Z9-0vXa1R7x3liTdgAr0yED7mIEpG59NGuEaGFs4hAf0kbL1P_QMzNEFACjL0WSlRrcT00892LiEQNoBro-Q&_nc_oc=AQlwFIqreenQDdkRKFjgWiBRLSV6s1OoRyWAoGIdKTXPN0W3xnkQCMbIwy7UsBJtcBn5nHJu979QzDN1iwHSUkbT&_nc_ht=scontent-atl3-1.xx&oh=703b91a10ea1679a69b914c9f56b219d&oe=5E9A688B

'but Overheal it's not fair to link Trump to the st-'

https://twitter.com/kylegriffin1/status/1238855011657973760?s=20

duploelabs

AllForIt wrote: »

To the above posts, you're living in fantasy land. Just like you were when you though he wouldn't win in the first place.

Consider the amount of personal criticism he got before his first win, and he still won.

Nothing that has happened since was worse than that.

You can keep quoting the odds all you like but that's just because the bookies know you will loose your money.

So when you're out of talking points, shouting 'YOU'RE ALL WRONG' whilst covering your ears to our posts is your defence.

Good tactic

rossie1977

AllForIt wrote: »

To the above posts, you're living in fantasy land. Just like you were when you though he wouldn't win in the first place.

Consider the amount of personal criticism he got before his first win, and he still won.

Nothing that has happened since was worse than that.

You can keep quoting the odds all you like but that's just because the bookies know you will loose your money.

Actually in the run up to 2016 his media coverage was mostly positive while his opponent Clinton got mostly negative

figure-7.gif?resize=700%2C362

https://shorensteincenter.org/pre-primary-news-coverage-2016-trump-clinton-sanders/

The only negative press coverage Trump really got that people remembered was the Hollywood access tape and that was reported more in jest by the media. A day later it was wall to wall Clinton's emails again.

Trump won last election because Republican party, right wing media and the corporate media made Hillary Clinton more unpopular than Trump. They did this through a variety of ways but by the end many hardcore Democratic voters viewed Clinton as a monster on her deathbed.

The fact an A+ rated charity in Clinton Foundation got MORE bad press than Trumps Foundation which had been shut down and sued multiple times says it all really.

Overheal

Keep your eye on the revisionism in full swing

https://twitter.com/atrupar/status/1240640020714848257?s=20

Ludwig Wittgenstein

AllForIt wrote: »

To the above posts, you're living in fantasy land. Just like you were when you though he wouldn't win in the first place.

Consider the amount of personal criticism he got before his first win, and he still won.

Nothing that has happened since was worse than that.

You can keep quoting the odds all you like but that's just because the bookies know you will loose your money.

In fairness, the parameters have shifted massively since the 2016 election. Trump was seen as the dynamic, anti-establishment, tells-it-as-it-is figure, going up against one of the stalest, least exciting, easy target, establishment (and lets not forget, female) Democrats that he could have asked for. It was the perfect storm. It's widely thought that him being an underdog actually worked in his favour in that election.

Now he's had four years of a presidency which achieved little besides economic success, which has now been wiped out. He's walked away from the Paris Climate Agreement, Obama's Nuclear Deal with Iran, his early successes with North Korea seem to have evaporated, and now he has to deal with the greatest issue America has faced since World War Two. The same issue he had been all but ignoring up to the last fortnight or so. He has been quoted as not wanting a cruise ship with people affected by COVID10 to dock, not because of the threat to American life, but because the figures might negatively affect him. His attempts to portray the virus as "Chinese" or to put the blame on Europe doesn't seem to be falling on very receptive ears - and even if it does, once this thing starts to hit hard it's doubtful this will even matter.

On top of all this, the November election was always going to be heavily fought on healthcare grounds. This virus has highlighted the importance of access to healthcare for everyone, when it comes to contagious disease one of the most effective ways of looking after your own health is by having everyone else's also looked after. I still don't think Sanders' plan for free healthcare for all would have been supported by a majority, but Biden's more central position should work in his favour in this regard. If I was a Republican whispering in Trump's ear I'd be looking for him to soften his position on socialised healthcare.

Rjd2

Ludwig Wittgenstein wrote: »

I If I was a Republican whispering in Trump's ear I'd be looking for him to soften his position on socialised healthcare.

His only chance of beating Biden is to somehow cut Biden off from the left on economics and obviously health care, and as he has no principles I expect that will be the plan. How he does that, who knows.

Ludwig Wittgenstein

Rjd2 wrote: »

His only chance of beating Biden is to somehow cut Biden off from the left on economics and obviously health care, and as he has no principles I expect that will be the plan. How he does that, who knows.

What do you mean by cut Biden off from the left on economics/health care? By co-opting some leftist economic policies into his own? I imagine he might just have to do that depending on how bad the economic downturn is following this virus, America surely won't continue their stand against a robust welfare safety net if a large proportion of them have just lost their jobs.

Rjd2

Ludwig Wittgenstein wrote: »

What do you mean by cut Biden off from the left on economics/health care? By co-opting some leftist economic policies into his own? I imagine he might just have to do that depending on how bad the economic downturn is following this virus, America surely won't continue their stand against a robust welfare safety net if a large proportion of them have just lost their jobs.

Something like that yeah.

Possible Trump might try to adopt some sort of UBI type scheme.

Some of the 2024 front runners like Hawley, Cotton etc seem to adopting leftist rhetoric regarding how to handle the fall out.

notobtuse

Joe Biden’s live anti-Trump shadow briefing train wreck about the coronavirus simply goes to show that if you vote for Biden you are as foolish as he is.

Boggles

notobtuse wrote: »

Joe Biden’s live anti-Trump shadow briefing train wreck about the coronavirus simply goes to show that if you vote for Biden you are as foolish as he is.

Trump is going to get a lot of your fellow citizens needlessly killed.

Time to put down the pom poms. He isn't funny anymore.

notobtuse

Boggles wrote: »

Trump is going to get a lot of your fellow citizens needlessly killed.

Time to put down the pom poms. He isn't funny anymore.

How so? Time to turn off the Trump hating MSNBC & CNN.

Rjd2

notobtuse wrote: »

Joe Biden’s live anti-Trump shadow briefing train wreck about the coronavirus simply goes to show that if you vote for Biden you are as foolish as he is.

People who voted for Biden over Bernie are dire, mainly selfish boomers nostalgic for Obama, but I'd gladly vote for him over Trump as at least he will surround himself with experts and actually listen to them unlike Trump.

Loafing Oaf

Rjd2 wrote: »

People who voted for Biden over Bernie are dire, mainly selfish boomers nostalgic for Obama, but I'd gladly vote for him over Trump as at least he will surround himself with experts and actually listen to them unlike Trump.

I'd imagine the coronavirus die will be long cast by the start of the next presidency. The crucial decisions will be taken by the current administration over the next couple of months.

notobtuse

Sorry haters, but President Trump continues to get high marks for his coronavirus response despite biased overwhelmingly negative media coverage.

[Deleted User]

notobtuse wrote: »

Sorry haters, but President Trump continues to get high marks for his coronavirus response despite biased overwhelmingly negative media coverage.

Given the number of lives now at risk, your responses are getting progressively more bleak. Do you think the US can realistically open for business on Easter Sunday? You realise that the US is set to to pass out Italy in terms of infections in next few days and China next week.

Eric Cartman

rossie1977 wrote: »

Actually in the run up to 2016 his media coverage was mostly positive while his opponent Clinton got mostly negative

https://shorensteincenter.org/pre-primary-news-coverage-2016-trump-clinton-sanders/

The only negative press coverage Trump really got that people remembered was the Hollywood access tape and that was reported more in jest by the media. A day later it was wall to wall Clinton's emails again.

Trump won last election because Republican party, right wing media and the corporate media made Hillary Clinton more unpopular than Trump. They did this through a variety of ways but by the end many hardcore Democratic voters viewed Clinton as a monster on her deathbed.

The fact an A+ rated charity in Clinton Foundation got MORE bad press than Trumps Foundation which had been shut down and sued multiple times says it all really.

not a chance , pre and post election it has been wall to wall negativity on trump, even Fox News were berating him before the Super Tuesday debate when it looked like he had an actual shot.

notobtuse

Deleted User wrote: »

Given the number of lives now at risk, your responses are getting progressively more bleak. Do you think the US can realistically open for business on Easter Sunday? You realise that the US is set to to pass out Italy in terms of infections in next few days and China next week.

Of course the US will have more infections than Italy. The US population is 327 million to Italy's 60 million. Did you know the current flu we all get is a form of the 1918 Spanish Flu? That flu has been around for over a hundred years. The Wuflu will most likely be around for a hundred years, also. Everyone will probably contract it in the next few years regardless of whatever draconian measures are taken. The countries that come out of the initial hysteria with economies less affected will be considered the smart ones.

[Deleted User]

notobtuse wrote: »

Of course the US will have more infections than Italy. The US population is 327 million to Italy's 60 million. Did you know the current flu we all get is a form of the 1918 Spanish Flu? That flu has been around for over a hundred years. The Wuflu will most likely be around for a hundred years, also. Everyone will probably contract it in the next few years regardless of whatever draconian measures are taken. The countries that come out of the initial hysteria with economies less affected will be considered the smart ones.

That's not actually logically true though, relatively untouched economies aren't even realistic at the moment. Eg Every single healthcare system in the globe would collapse in a situation where you don't actively attempt preventative measures. There's a very strong possibility that you could face hundreds of thousands of US citizens dying. That's because of a very poor strategy for dealing with it.

You also seemed to ignore that US infections will pass out China's. A far bigger population. The reason is, it's been allowed to run rampant for ages within the US.

You can call measures to drastically reduce deaths 'draconian' but realistically, it will save lives. This currently strain of the coronavirus can potentially be wiped out entirely if the correct measures are pursued.

Jolly Red Giant

notobtuse wrote: »

Of course the US will have more infections than Italy. The US population is 327 million to Italy's 60 million.

This is true - however the USA is about 14-18 days behind Italy in terms of infection. If you want a true comparison look at what the USA is like in 3 weeks compared to Italy today - and they way things are developing the USA is likely to be worse.

notobtuse wrote: »

Did you know the current flu we all get is a form of the 1918 Spanish Flu?

The Spanish flu killed up to 100 million people.

notobtuse wrote: »

That flu has been around for over a hundred years.

There are different types of flu virus - and within that there are a number of sub catagories - the Spanish flu was H1N1 - the swine flu was a version of this. The H2N2 caused the Asian flu in 1957 causing the deaths of 2 million - the Hong Kong flu in was H3N2 and caused 1 millions deaths. These are all sub catagories of Type A which is the type most associated with the 'common flu' - a flu which kills about 500,000 annually.

notobtuse wrote: »

The Wuflu will most likely be around for a hundred years, also.

Your problem here is that your 'Wuflu' isn't a flu - Covid 19 is a cold virus. Terming the virus as a 'flu' is false - it is a human pathogen that causes critical conditions in about 5% of victims including viral pneumonia, organ failure and death. It is possible that the virus could run out of steam - particularly if the isolation and social distancing is effective - however, given the approach of governments to date in continuing with non-essential work that is unlikely to happen.

notobtuse wrote: »

Everyone will probably contract it in the next few years regardless of whatever draconian measures are taken.

That may or may not be the case - it may run out of steam if the virus cannot find hosts without immunity. If that is not the case and 'everyone' contracts - then the death toll will be in the tens of millions, if not hundreds of millions.

notobtuse wrote: »

The countries that come out of the initial hysteria with economies less affected will be considered the smart ones.

Regarding the measures that have been implemented as 'hysteria' is being flippant. The reality is that they have been late and they haven't been enough - coupled with the inability of governments to have proper health measures in place because of the hatchet job done on health services globally over the past 10 years. The earlier this virus is killed off (through a combination of those infected developing immunity and those not infected social isolating) the better - allowing the virus to run its course through the population of the planet risks a second wave of infection with a mutation of the original virus. The economic fallout from this crisis will be significant - the capitalist market is incapable of sustaining itself against shocks such as this - the quicker the virus peters out the better in economic terms. If society was to adopt the approach you are advocating then the economic catastrophe would make the Great Depression look like a Sunday picnic.

Jolly Red Giant

Ludwig Wittgenstein wrote: »

Now he's had four years of a presidency which achieved little besides economic success, which has now been wiped out.

Trump's 'economic success' was superficial, benefited the billionaires and largely based on a stock market bubble.