2020 Presidential Election thread

Ad

  • Wed, Oct 16, 2019 12:54 PM
    posted by Spock

    I watched during tv breaks while watching the new 30 for 30 on the UFC.......I think that watching a little helps solidify your political views either for or against.  Or just for the humor of watching people try to outdo each other in the idiot catagory

    I guess so? Debates are the most pointless things in this day and age. i'm not sure why anyone watches them anymore.

    Wed, Oct 16, 2019 2:33 PM
    posted by kizer permanente

    I guess so? Debates are the most pointless things in this day and age. i'm not sure why anyone watches them anymore.

    At this stage of the game, they're more or less worthless unless you're just looking for some sort of soundbite to make your point about how one or more people either gets it or is delusional. There just are too many people looking for air time and too little time to elaborate on points to make them have any real meaning beyond that. They're a bit more worthwhile when the field is trimmed to 2-3 primary contenders or it's the actual presidential ones, but I still find skipping them and just hooking myself up with a few articles on what happened to be far more palatable than listening to people give canned answers to generic questions, while trying to throw in whatever catchphrases they're working on as often as possible.

    Wed, Oct 16, 2019 5:48 PM
    posted by Heretic

    At this stage of the game, they're more or less worthless unless you're just looking for some sort of soundbite to make your point about how one or more people either gets it or is delusional. There just are too many people looking for air time and too little time to elaborate on points to make them have any real meaning beyond that. They're a bit more worthwhile when the field is trimmed to 2-3 primary contenders or it's the actual presidential ones, but I still find skipping them and just hooking myself up with a few articles on what happened to be far more palatable than listening to people give canned answers to generic questions, while trying to throw in whatever catchphrases they're working on as often as possible.

    I have no interest in them and I’m apathetic to either party. If I hated a party as much as Quaker and Spock do, I couldn’t imagine watching said party’s debate. 

    Wed, Oct 16, 2019 6:29 PM

    I really like Tulsi.  I think she would easily be a candidate 6 or 8 years ago in a moderate environment

    Thu, Oct 17, 2019 9:54 AM
    posted by kizer permanente

    I have no interest in them and I’m apathetic to either party. If I hated a party as much as Quaker and Spock do, I couldn’t imagine watching said party’s debate. 

     

    I do not have much interest in watching a group of Marxists discuss who can steal the most productive labor and redistribute it in order to gain power. 

    Thu, Oct 17, 2019 10:01 AM
    posted by Heretic

    At this stage of the game, they're more or less worthless unless you're just looking for some sort of soundbite to make your point about how one or more people either gets it or is delusional. There just are too many people looking for air time and too little time to elaborate on points to make them have any real meaning beyond that. They're a bit more worthwhile when the field is trimmed to 2-3 primary contenders or it's the actual presidential ones, but I still find skipping them and just hooking myself up with a few articles on what happened to be far more palatable than listening to people give canned answers to generic questions, while trying to throw in whatever catchphrases they're working on as often as possible.

    Pretty spot on. I can't imagine anyone watching the whole debate though. Twitter politicos post all the relevant clips to make the other side look crazy. I think it actually hurts the left to still let people like Beto up there, because his gun confiscation talk is not good for them. We all know it is going to be Warren, Biden, and Bernie, the rest is just noise.

    Thu, Oct 17, 2019 10:54 AM
    posted by iclfan2

    Pretty spot on. I can't imagine anyone watching the whole debate though. Twitter politicos post all the relevant clips to make the other side look crazy. I think it actually hurts the left to still let people like Beto up there, because his gun confiscation talk is not good for them. We all know it is going to be Warren, Biden, and Bernie, the rest is just noise.

    for sure.....Beto makes just completely illegal points and it just makes the rest of them either agree or move further left.

    Thu, Oct 17, 2019 11:18 AM

    Watching Beto get dragged by CNN and MSNBC for his gun control scheme is pretty funny. That guy is definitely a liability for the Dems.

    Thu, Oct 17, 2019 11:26 AM
    posted by iclfan2

    Pretty spot on. I can't imagine anyone watching the whole debate though. Twitter politicos post all the relevant clips to make the other side look crazy. I think it actually hurts the left to still let people like Beto up there, because his gun confiscation talk is not good for them. We all know it is going to be Warren, Biden, and Bernie, the rest is just noise.

     

     

    If they really wanted to give themselves any chance at all they would draft Bloomberg.

    Thu, Oct 17, 2019 11:37 AM
    posted by QuakerOats

    If they really wanted to give themselves any chance at all they would draft Bloomberg.

    Talk about a nanny-stater.

    Thu, Oct 17, 2019 1:32 PM

    Yep …but the only one with a chance to at least be somewhat formidable.

    Thu, Oct 17, 2019 2:08 PM
    posted by iclfan2

    Pretty spot on. I can't imagine anyone watching the whole debate though. Twitter politicos post all the relevant clips to make the other side look crazy. I think it actually hurts the left to still let people like Beto up there, because his gun confiscation talk is not good for them. We all know it is going to be Warren, Biden, and Bernie, the rest is just noise.

    I'd agree, these debates are largely worthless. Looks like those three above with maybe a wildcard like Pete making a run. I didn't even watch any of the debate, I cared way more about the Nats clinching. I'll really start to care once we get close to Iowa and once we start counting votes. 

    posted by QuakerOats

    Yep …but the only one with a chance to at least be somewhat formidable.

    I don't think so, as poll after poll show Trump in a tight battle or behind against most of the front runners. 
     

     

    Fri, Oct 18, 2019 6:55 AM
    posted by ptown_trojans_1

     

    I don't think so, as poll after poll show Trump in a tight battle or behind against most of the front runners. 
     

     

    I'm not sure if you watch any Tim Pool but he recently had this to say/show:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PiObx_51jcs

    While you can only take that with a grain of salt you've got to look at who he's running against:

    - Warren who got caught appropriating culture (lol)
    - Bernie with a heart attack
    - Joe Biden with quid pro quo stuff not to mention bleeding eyes and can't speak without jumbling
    - Beto who won't be happy until there are Ruby Ridge's everywhere
    - All of the dems promising "muh free shit!" with Executive Orders

    Those are the dems who have gotten the most eye views. So I don't know. Polls would be about as useful right now as the study Tim Pool shows.

    Fri, Oct 18, 2019 8:59 AM

    I haven't paid attention to many polls, but I still believe Biden is their only chance to win.  Maybe Bloomberg if he really enters the race.

    Fri, Oct 18, 2019 9:05 AM

    The national polls are useless. Really just need Ohio, PA, FL, and the other swing states. 

    Fri, Oct 18, 2019 9:46 AM
    posted by ptown_trojans_1

    I'd agree, these debates are largely worthless. Looks like those three above with maybe a wildcard like Pete making a run. I didn't even watch any of the debate, I cared way more about the Nats clinching. I'll really start to care once we get close to Iowa and once we start counting votes. 

    posted by QuakerOats

    Yep …but the only one with a chance to at least be somewhat formidable.

    I don't think so, as poll after poll show Trump in a tight battle or behind against most of the front runners. 
     

     

     

    https://www.marketwatch.com/story/trump-in-a-landslide-this-historically-accurate-model-predicts-exactly-that-2019-10-15

     

    Take care.

    Fri, Oct 18, 2019 10:20 AM

    “Warren has a problem: The central message of her campaign is that the economy is working for the very wealthy but it is not working for ordinary Americans. Unfortunately for her, ordinary Americans disagree.

    A Marist poll asked voters whether "the economy is working well for you personally." Nearly two-thirds of Americans said yes. This includes large majorities in almost every demographic group.

    Sixty-seven percent of college graduates and 64 percent of those without a college education say the economy is working for them. So do 68 percent of whites and 61 percent of nonwhite people.”

     

    Case closed.

    https://www.foxnews.com/opinion/marc-thiessen-elizabeth-warren-favors-huge-federal-spending-requiring-massive-middle-class-tax-hikes

     

     

    Fri, Oct 18, 2019 10:57 AM

    The only chance the Dems have is a Pete/Tulsi ticket.

     

    Seriously......young, articulate and not crazy.

    Fri, Oct 18, 2019 10:59 AM
    posted by CenterBHSFan

    I'm not sure if you watch any Tim Pool but he recently had this to say/show:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PiObx_51jcs

    While you can only take that with a grain of salt you've got to look at who he's running against:

    - Warren who got caught appropriating culture (lol)
    - Bernie with a heart attack
    - Joe Biden with quid pro quo stuff not to mention bleeding eyes and can't speak without jumbling
    - Beto who won't be happy until there are Ruby Ridge's everywhere
    - All of the dems promising "muh free shit!" with Executive Orders

    Those are the dems who have gotten the most eye views. So I don't know. Polls would be about as useful right now as the study Tim Pool shows.

    Which would all mean A LOT if whomever wins out of the group was going against a beloved, respected president who doesn't regularly use social media to act like an overly-entitled teen girl who just found out her boyfriend was banging her best friend. But since the D candidate is not going against such a person, that just means things are pretty wide open. If the Ds could find something better than either Democrat Trump (Biden, with the gropes and jumbled speech and comparable popularity with the hardcore progressive movers-n-shakers) or hardcore progressives (the rest), it'd have the potential to be a slam dunk, depending on how unhinged Trump acts over the next year, but since this is the "best" they felt compelled to do because, apparently, placating the 10-15% farthest to the left is more important than trying to court moderates, 2020 has all the potential to be one of those coin flips where the loser spends infinity plus a few years claiming they were robbed.

    Fri, Oct 18, 2019 12:49 PM
    posted by Heretic

    placating the 10-15% farthest to the left is more important than trying to court moderates, 2020 has all the potential to be one of those coin flips where the loser spends infinity plus a few years claiming they were robbed.

    Well, whoever "wins" will also be robbed. Let's face it, everybody's screwed.

    Ad