| FORUM | ARCHIVE |                    | TOTAL QUIZ RESULT |


  New Posts New Posts RSS Feed - will dems self-destruct?
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Events   Register Register  Login Login


Welcome stranger, click here to read about some of the great benefits of registering for a free account with us and joining us in our global online community.


will dems self-destruct?

 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <12
Author
Windemere View Drop Down
Consul
Consul
Avatar

Joined: 10 Oct 2007
Location: U.S.A.
Status: Offline
Points: 316
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Windemere Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 19 Mar 2019 at 05:08
Originally posted by franciscosan franciscosan wrote:

Part of the significance of the democrats having their convention in Millwaukie is that Wisconsin has historically had a strong streak of socialism, they had a governor or two that was a socialist.  Also, the democrats have to do something about the loss of the mid-West in the last election.

Also, Wisconsin is a swing-vote state. Right from the get-go, most states are either clearly red (conservative Republican) or clearly blue (liberal Democratic). Thus it may pay off more to campaign in a swing-vote state, which can go either way. I think that Florida and Ohio are also swing-vote states.

In the electoral college, for most states, it's winner-take-all. Whoever gets the most popular votes gets all of that state's electoral votes. I n the election, it's almost a predestined fact which candidate will get the red states' electoral votes, and which candidate   will get the blue states' electoral votes. In the swing states, even if the popular vote is very close, it doesn't matter, all of the electoral votes will go to the winner. 

This also puts 3rd party candidates at a serious disadvantage in the electoral college. The electoral system  favors the 2 mainstream political parties. There's no need for the winner to have an absolute majority (51% or more) of votes. If one candidate gets 34% of the popular vote, another gets 33%, and a third also gets 33%, the first candidate will get 100% of that states' electoral votes.   


Edited by Windemere - 19 Mar 2019 at 05:20
Dis Aliter Visum
"Beware of martyrs and those who would die for their beliefs; for they frequently make many others die with them, often before them, sometimes instead of them."
Back to Top
Sponsored Links


Back to Top
Vanuatu View Drop Down
Administrator
Administrator
Avatar

Joined: 24 Feb 2015
Location: New England
Status: Offline
Points: 2027
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Vanuatu Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 22 Mar 2019 at 00:10
Originally posted by franciscosan franciscosan wrote:

Considering how hostile President Obama was to the business community, I think that Scooby Do would have improved the economy if he had been elected.  Now President Trump probably did better than Scooby Do would.  But so would have your favorite person, Hillary Clinton.
Considering how President Obama cooked the statics for unemployment, I am not sure that when you say lowest unemployment since the 1950s, that that is a meaningful statistic under President Trump.  Obama did not count people who had been unemployed a long time, and had basically stopped looking, he did not count them as unemployed, thus cooking the statistics that had been developed by Herbert Hoover.

So, whose statistics are you and Trump using, Herbert Hoover's or President Obama's?
Now, now certainly your friends at CNN would have discredited the employment data if they COULD.
The fact that liberal media won't talk about the economy should be a BIG TIP, much like the elephant's circumcision. 
“The United Nations is the biggest joke of this century. If each one is trying to assert his own rights there, how can there be a United Nations?” UG Krishnamurti
Back to Top
Vanuatu View Drop Down
Administrator
Administrator
Avatar

Joined: 24 Feb 2015
Location: New England
Status: Offline
Points: 2027
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Vanuatu Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 22 Mar 2019 at 00:18
Quote
This also puts 3rd party candidates at a serious disadvantage in the electoral college. The electoral system  favors the 2 mainstream political parties. There's no need for the winner to have an absolute majority (51% or more) of votes. If one candidate gets 34% of the popular vote, another gets 33%, and a third also gets 33%, the first candidate will get 100% of that states' electoral votes.   
Hi Windemere

What are your thoughts on the front runners DNC who have announced their candidacy?

Can you see Gillibrand or Booker or Harris winning a Primary?

Jill Stein was a much better candidate than any of these democrats, says I. Yet as you suggest quality does not matter where the mainstream parties or media is concerned.
“The United Nations is the biggest joke of this century. If each one is trying to assert his own rights there, how can there be a United Nations?” UG Krishnamurti
Back to Top
franciscosan View Drop Down
WorldHistoria Master
WorldHistoria Master


Joined: 09 Feb 2015
Location: Littleton CO
Status: Offline
Points: 10218
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote franciscosan Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 23 Mar 2019 at 11:31
Colorado liberal governor has pushed forth a bill saying that Colorado's electoral college delegates will be given to those who win the [national] popular majority, even if the state goes the other way.

Jared Polis is a gay Boulderite (people's republic of Boulder), who is rich and buys his elections, his first election was for school board and he spent a million on the campaign.  Liberals only mind the buying of campaigns if they are not the one's doing it.

Co Governor Hickenlooper is a nice guy (moderate), but I can't see him making it on the national stage, Senator Bennett is a bit of a carpet bagger.  Someone who came to Colorado to make it politically, because he couldn't do it where he came from.


Edited by franciscosan - 24 Mar 2019 at 03:19
Back to Top
Vanuatu View Drop Down
Administrator
Administrator
Avatar

Joined: 24 Feb 2015
Location: New England
Status: Offline
Points: 2027
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Vanuatu Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 28 Mar 2019 at 00:28
Originally posted by franciscosan franciscosan wrote:

Colorado liberal governor has pushed forth a bill saying that Colorado's electoral college delegates will be given to those who win the [national] popular majority, even if the state goes the other way.
Jeez, Is this an idea whose time has come? It sure don't feel right. Certainly can see why the DNC hates the electoral college but I think its fair :)

Quote Jared Polis is a gay Boulderite (people's republic of Boulder), who is rich and buys his elections, his first election was for school board and he spent a million on the campaign.  Liberals only mind the buying of campaigns if they are not the one's doing it.

Massachusetts is full of democrats who always vote the party line. Maybe it's a Kennedy thing I don't get it at all. Ted Kennedy used to show up in town every couple years and people went nuts for it, just love those sons of bitches. Joe Kennedy was a treasonous criminal and all their empire built on bootlegging. Doesn't matter, democrats can't lose here. (R)Gov Bill Weld was a fluke, he might be running POTUS 2020.

Quote Co Governor Hickenlooper is a nice guy (moderate), but I can't see him making it on the national stage, Senator Bennett is a bit of a carpet bagger.  Someone who came to Colorado to make it politically, because he couldn't do it where he came from.
Sounds like Mitt Romney, that man has always seemed dishonest and disloyal. Even after licking Trump's boots to get his endorsement for the Senate and winning, he says Trump hasn't "risen to the mantle of the office." 
What office would that be, Mitt? The one you will never win?
“The United Nations is the biggest joke of this century. If each one is trying to assert his own rights there, how can there be a United Nations?” UG Krishnamurti
Back to Top
pikeshot1600 View Drop Down
King
King


Joined: 22 Jan 2005
Status: Offline
Points: 5080
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote pikeshot1600 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 02 Apr 2019 at 02:29
Will dems self-destruct?  Probably.  The Democrats may have to give up on 2020, and will have to groom candidates for future elections.

With the stable of possible candidates for POTUS they may not be able to do otherwise.  It is difficult enough to defeat an incumbent at most any level of political office in the US.  With the GOP spinning the "end" of Russiagate, it could be that Mr. Trump has a leg up on re-election.  

Republicans appear to be oblivious to the degree of corruption in the highest offices these days.  One must assume they don't care as long as POTUS is anti-immigration.  The populist has his issue that resonates.  The Dems don't.  Of course that could all change in a year, but don't bet on it.

The traditional Democrats (Joe Biden, etc.) are mostly dead politicians.  Biden and Hilary Clinton can forget about 2020.  They are too old anyway.  The new Congress is populated by too many inexperienced and inconsequential personalities rather than serious potential candidates.  Amy Klobuchar; Warren; Gillibrand et. al., and crazy old guys like Bernie Sanders - and young guys like Beto O'Rourke - are not serious contenders (IMHO).

The president elected in 2020 will not be a woman - too many bad effects from Clinton.  It will not be a Black man - that experiment is too recent and unfortunately polarizing.  If the Repubs don't challenge Trump in primaries, it looks like a 2020 horse race he might win again.  The Electoral College is a minority party political asset.  

Comment above concerning Mitt Romney as a Repub candidate is probably best ignored.  He is a dead politician too.  Once you lose on the national level, your are no longer a serious figure in leadership.         


Edited by pikeshot1600 - 02 Apr 2019 at 02:31
Back to Top
Windemere View Drop Down
Consul
Consul
Avatar

Joined: 10 Oct 2007
Location: U.S.A.
Status: Offline
Points: 316
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Windemere Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 02 Apr 2019 at 03:07
That statement about no longer being a viable leadership candidate once you lose at the national level is probably true in most cases, but there are exceptions. Richard Nixon overcame his loss to John Kennedy to defeat Hubert Humphrey.
I wouldn't say Mitt Romney is quite dead. But I doubt he could mount an effective challenge to Trump. I think that Bernie Sanders did significantly better in 2016 than anyone expected him to. I think he'll actually improve this time around, too, but it still won't be enough to overcome Trump.  Trump's much-vaunted tax-cut didn't amount to a hill of beans for working-class people (It came to a tax savings of perhaps $150 per year for those who didn't itemize and took the standard-deduction) but they are still hoping that he'll come through for them in a second term. But Sanders' message of Medicare for All is resonating with more and more people,  and it will stay in the forefront.




Edited by Windemere - 02 Apr 2019 at 03:18
Dis Aliter Visum
"Beware of martyrs and those who would die for their beliefs; for they frequently make many others die with them, often before them, sometimes instead of them."
Back to Top
Windemere View Drop Down
Consul
Consul
Avatar

Joined: 10 Oct 2007
Location: U.S.A.
Status: Offline
Points: 316
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Windemere Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 02 Apr 2019 at 03:15
Originally posted by Vanuatu Vanuatu wrote:

Quote
This also puts 3rd party candidates at a serious disadvantage in the electoral college. The electoral system  favors the 2 mainstream political parties. There's no need for the winner to have an absolute majority (51% or more) of votes. If one candidate gets 34% of the popular vote, another gets 33%, and a third also gets 33%, the first candidate will get 100% of that states' electoral votes.   
Hi Windemere

What are your thoughts on the front runners DNC who have announced their candidacy?

Can you see Gillibrand or Booker or Harris winning a Primary?

Jill Stein was a much better candidate than any of these democrats, says I. Yet as you suggest quality does not matter where the mainstream parties or media is concerned.

Thanks for your reply. There are so many Democratic candidates coming out of the woodwork now, that I can't keep them straight. I actually don't know anything about Gillibrand or Booker or Harris. I'll have to wait for the debates. Jill Stein has been running for stateoffices in Massachusetts for years. She represents the Green/Rainbow Party, and she has a small but loyal constituency. She knows she has no chance of being elected. I think her main goal is to keep the Green/Rainbow issues in the forefront of the public. She knows she won't have to fulfill any promises, so she has some freedom to be a bit more idealistic than otherwise. I think she's less practical than Bernie Sanders, but she strikes me as more down-to-earth than Elizabeth Warren. But the media loves drama, and Warren will appeal to them more than Stein.


Edited by Windemere - 02 Apr 2019 at 03:16
Dis Aliter Visum
"Beware of martyrs and those who would die for their beliefs; for they frequently make many others die with them, often before them, sometimes instead of them."
Back to Top
pikeshot1600 View Drop Down
King
King


Joined: 22 Jan 2005
Status: Offline
Points: 5080
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote pikeshot1600 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 02 Apr 2019 at 04:59
Originally posted by Windemere Windemere wrote:

That statement about no longer being a viable leadership candidate once you lose at the national level is probably true in most cases, but there are exceptions. Richard Nixon overcame his loss to John Kennedy to defeat Hubert Humphrey.
I wouldn't say Mitt Romney is quite dead. But I doubt he could mount an effective challenge to Trump. I think that Bernie Sanders did significantly better in 2016 than anyone expected him to. I think he'll actually improve this time around, too, but it still won't be enough to overcome Trump.  Trump's much-vaunted tax-cut didn't amount to a hill of beans for working-class people (It came to a tax savings of perhaps $150 per year for those who didn't itemize and took the standard-deduction) but they are still hoping that he'll come through for them in a second term. But Sanders' message of Medicare for All is resonating with more and more people,  and it will stay in the forefront.



Interesting comments.  The juggling act of tax cuts and benefits for all has a mutually exclusive quality that will always be difficult to reconcile.  In the US at least, no politician with a functioning brain is going to favor tax increases.  There is no upside to that (of course there is no upside to cutting spending either, but that is all another argument).

All the Repub/Trump noise about steel mills opening all over the country and coal mines opening and all the jobs  and so on is just background noise.  No one thinks that is happening.  A populist ex-Democrat and current convenient Republican, Mr. Trump has cast himself as a great white hope and that is about all there is to any popularity he has.  

Even Republican White evangelicals, who are supposed to be Christian in outlook and practice, support him by something like 87%.  What they approve of is that their president doesn't like swarthy foreigners.  There isn't much else involved.  Media conspiracy theorists stoke fear and resentment; they are ready to buy into the M.S.M. being "enemies of the people" because of ratings and the effect on their income.  Don't ask them about public policy because they really don't care.  These days he who can manipulate media and form supporters based on fear and hate has a great advantage.

Aside from all that, the Democrats don't have anything to counter Trump's celebrity status in the media age.  He is not really a politician.  He is a professional personality and a showman.  O.J. Simpson and Michael Jackson showed how celebrities are Teflon-coated in many respects.  

All that stuff about POTUS's disengagement in office; his disinterest in policy and in national security concerns will be difficult to overcome by "Medicare for all" and free university.  Trump has shown he can get at what he wants by not paying a price for anything.  The "Wall" is just a finger to his opponents and its isn't costing him anything; it energizes his "base.".  

All his Mar-a-Lago buddies got actual tax cuts, but they vote too I guess. Big smile




Edited by pikeshot1600 - 02 Apr 2019 at 06:30
Back to Top
Vanuatu View Drop Down
Administrator
Administrator
Avatar

Joined: 24 Feb 2015
Location: New England
Status: Offline
Points: 2027
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Vanuatu Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 02 Apr 2019 at 08:05
Originally posted by pikeshot1600 pikeshot1600 wrote:

T

Comment above concerning Mitt Romney as a Repub candidate is probably best ignored.  He is a dead politician too.  Once you lose on the national level, your are no longer a serious figure in leadership.         
The comment on Romney wasn't about him running for POTUS. He just won a senate seat after gaining Trumps' support and now resumes back biting Trump.
“The United Nations is the biggest joke of this century. If each one is trying to assert his own rights there, how can there be a United Nations?” UG Krishnamurti
Back to Top
pikeshot1600 View Drop Down
King
King


Joined: 22 Jan 2005
Status: Offline
Points: 5080
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote pikeshot1600 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 02 Apr 2019 at 11:25
Originally posted by Vanuatu Vanuatu wrote:

Originally posted by pikeshot1600 pikeshot1600 wrote:

T

Comment above concerning Mitt Romney as a Repub candidate is probably best ignored.  He is a dead politician too.  Once you lose on the national level, your are no longer a serious figure in leadership.         
The comment on Romney wasn't about him running for POTUS. He just won a senate seat after gaining Trumps' support and now resumes back biting Trump.

That's politics.  It is highly unlikely that Romney will be a credible primary challenger, but who knows what will happen in the next 12 months.  There may be an "asset bubble" close to bursting, and when the inevitable recession follows, that may be in the middle of the election year.
Back to Top
franciscosan View Drop Down
WorldHistoria Master
WorldHistoria Master


Joined: 09 Feb 2015
Location: Littleton CO
Status: Offline
Points: 10218
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote franciscosan Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 02 Apr 2019 at 14:03
Romney seems to be considering a run against Trump.  He hasn't said that, but one can see it.  I am not sure that Trump is someone who deserves loyalty, because for him it is a something that he demands, but does not care to give.  Not saying he will, not saying he won't.

We are in la-la land now, folks, standard expectations are out the window, and they have been since the W. Bush administration (when Barack Obama became ascendant).

Of course, the democrats came into trouble when Hillary Clinton became the "obvious" choice because of how all the superdelegates owed the Clinton's power structure.  I wonder if Trump switched to Republicans because the superdelegate system was designed to prevent someone like him (an outsider) from running.  I thinK the democrats have fixed the problem, they're good at "fixing" things, like their new bid to get rid of the electoral college.  Why bother to play within the rules when you can change them in your favor.  Of course civilization is based on a bet that it is more profitable to play the game, than it is to beat your opponent profusely on the head and shoulders.  That is one thing that scares me, the democrats are playing up to the rabble, and the Republicans are playing up to a (different) rabble.  My concern is that in trying to win, both will loose.
Back to Top
Vanuatu View Drop Down
Administrator
Administrator
Avatar

Joined: 24 Feb 2015
Location: New England
Status: Offline
Points: 2027
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Vanuatu Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 03 Apr 2019 at 02:06
Originally posted by pikeshot1600 pikeshot1600 wrote:


All the Repub/Trump noise about steel mills opening all over the country and coal mines opening and all the jobs  and so on is just background noise.  No one thinks that is happening.  A populist ex-Democrat and current convenient Republican, Mr. Trump has cast himself as a great white hope and that is about all there is to any popularity he has.
Our local economy is good. Numbers don't lie but fair enough just as Obama's administration skewed the numbers , so could Trump's. I'm not imagining the increase in jobs for people in the trades as we say. Our local economy is banging. 

Quote Even Republican White evangelicals, who are supposed to be Christian in outlook and practice, support him by something like 87%.  What they approve of is that their president doesn't like swarthy foreigners.  There isn't much else involved.
Quote
Legal swarthy is fine we'll take em. Especially if they are willing to work, and we know they are. I wish every person in central and south american could have a decent legal status that allowed them to eran and assimilate. Hell Yes! And bring some enchiladas for me!
[quote]  Media conspiracy theorists stoke fear and resentment; they are ready to buy into the M.S.M. being "enemies of the people" because of ratings and the effect on their income.  Don't ask them about public policy because they really don't care.  These days he who can manipulate media and form supporters based on fear and hate has a great advantage.

Not exactly news there pikeshot1600 Wink. No silent coup. 

All that stuff about POTUS's disengagement in office; his disinterest in policy and in national security concerns will be difficult to overcome by "Medicare for all" and free university.  Trump has shown he can get at what he wants by not paying a price for anything.  The "Wall" is just a finger to his opponents and its isn't costing him anything; it energizes his "base.".  

All his Mar-a-Lago buddies got actual tax cuts, but they vote too I guess. Big smile

Probably did get tax cuts, everyone did. It was less weekly deduction and you didn't get the return that you expected. 
I suspect the wiser action on the border is a physical barrier. The threats are manifold. Why not have a migrant facility on the Mexican side? We should be humanitarian, get the WHO to meet the basic needs ..but over there not in US. 
Why hasn't the US government established a better relationship with Central and South America? As far I can see it's been the absence of reliable government on their part. And now it's this horrendous kill fest in these countries. Not to mention our participation in the destruction of the lungs of the plant, destroying estuaries in South America?

Why can't the Democrats get behind a candidate who cares about the planet? Solyndra was $500 million dollar flop. All we have to do is look at Germany and how they are using solar but no one in mainstream parties will touch that rail.


Edited by Vanuatu - 03 Apr 2019 at 02:09
“The United Nations is the biggest joke of this century. If each one is trying to assert his own rights there, how can there be a United Nations?” UG Krishnamurti
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <12
  Share Topic   

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Forum Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 12.01
Copyright ©2001-2018 Web Wiz Ltd.

This page was generated in 0.156 seconds.