2020 US Elections | Biden certified as President | Dems control Congress

Status
Not open for further replies.
So does anybody else think the next debate might see some real dem on dem attacks...

I'm wondering if Kamala (or somebody else) might take an approach of...

Hey Joe... Why don't you set the record straight and tell us about hunters extensive qualifications for the positions he held in China / Ukraine
 
A bit off topic, but yesterday we had a general election here in Portugal and it made me think again about the two party politics of the US and how silly it is. We have 10 million voters and the new parliament has 9 different parties, from communists to fascists (just 1 guy elected thank god). How can 300+M americans be represented by only 2 parties? I feel sorry for americans and their very limited choices.
 
maniak said:
A bit off topic, but yesterday we had a general election here in Portugal and it made me think again about the two party politics of the US and how silly it is. We have 10 million voters and the new parliament has 9 different parties, from communists to fascists (just 1 guy elected thank god). How can 300+M americans be represented by only 2 parties? I feel sorry for americans and their very limited choices.
Click to expand...
Say it quietly but the US has a Green Party and a Liberterian Party that will field candidates in 2020. People in here will tell you that theyre crazy though because John Oliver makes a video saying so.
 
freeurmind said:
Say it quietly but the US has a Green Party and a Liberterian Party that will field candidates in 2020. People in here will tell you that theyre crazy though because John Oliver makes a video saying so.
Click to expand...

But you have a winner takes all system, so I understand how people would see their vote in those parties as a waste. I voted for a party which I knew wouldn't have more than 10% because I know that would be enough for them to have in impact. If it was like in America, I'd probably stay home.
 
The right-wing smear campaign against Elizabeth Warren kicks into gear — with a little help from the left

Sen. Elizabeth Warren has risen impressively in the Democratic presidential primary polls recently, so even as President Donald Trump continues to press his bogus and hypocritical smear about former Vice President Joe Biden in Ukraine, some branches of the right wing are setting their sights on the Massachusetts lawmaker.

Of course, there’s been long-simmering questions about the fact that she previously identified as Native American, citing family lore, though she has admitted that was a mistake and has apologized. But it’s not clear that scandal has or will damage her enough for conservatives’ likings, so they needed to find something else. First, fraudster Jacob Wohl launched a bizarre and obviously fake attack on Warren that was regarded as a joke from start to finish.

But on Monday, the conservative site Washington Free Beacon launched a new attack that is more likely to have staying power, even though it is, at least for the moment, completely baseless.

Reporter Collin Anderson claimed that:

The Riverdale Board of Education approved a second-year teaching contract for a young Elizabeth Warren, documents show, contradicting the Democratic presidential candidate’s repeated claims that she was asked not to return to teaching after a single year because she was “visibly pregnant.”

The only problem with the story is that the documents Anderson provided show no such thing.

He reported that the board approved Warren for a second-year contract on April 21, 1971. Then on June 16, two months later, the documents show that the board accepted her resignation “with regret.”

Never once in the article does Anderson actually explain how these findings contradict Warren’s story. Which make sense, because they don’t. The only mystery that remains is why an editor, even at a conservative publication, would let the story have a headline and a lead paragraph that are unsupported by the story itself.

As Ryan Grim, D.C. bureau chief for the Intercept observed: “I used to be a substitute teacher and I never went before the board of education. I’m sure they just submitted my name and it was approved. At that level, the boards just rubber-stamp principals’ decisions. And principals don’t tend to write ‘fired for pregnant’ on the forms.”

There’s no reason to think the principal in question couldn’t have discovered Warren was pregnant after her second-year contract was approved and then pressured her to resign. That is completely consistent with the Beacon’s findings, yet the story confidently declares that its records contradict her claims. They just don’t. It’s true that the records don’t say she was asked not to return because she was having a baby, but no one should have expected that they would.

As Anderson himself explained, this attack on Warren’s past actually first came from the left wing, not the right. Journalist Meagan Day from Jacobin magazine claimed that Warren’s story of why she left teaching was different when the then-law professor recounted it in a 2007 interview. Warren explained at the time:

I was married at nineteen and graduated from college after I’d married, and my first year post-graduation I worked in a public school system with the children with disabilities. I did that for a year, and then that summer I didn’t have the education courses, so I was on an “emergency certificate,” it was called. I went back to graduate school and took a couple of courses in education and said, “I don’t think this is going to work out for me.” I was pregnant with my first baby, so I had a baby and stayed home for a couple of years, and I was really casting about, thinking, “What am I going to do?” My husband’s view of it was, “Stay home. We have children, we’ll have more children, you’ll love this.” And I was very restless about it.

But again, this story isn’t inconsistent with her story of being dismissed for being pregnant. Perhaps you might find it odd that she didn’t mention that fact in this interview, but people emphasize different parts of stories in different settings and for different reasons.

Conservatives are clearly ready to run with the smear against Warren. White House counselor and chief Trump battering ram picked up the narrative quickly, apparently without any scrutiny or interest in accuracy.
Click to expand...


She as to be doing something right.
 
maniak said:
A bit off topic, but yesterday we had a general election here in Portugal and it made me think again about the two party politics of the US and how silly it is. We have 10 million voters and the new parliament has 9 different parties, from communists to fascists (just 1 guy elected thank god). How can 300+M americans be represented by only 2 parties? I feel sorry for americans and their very limited choices.
Click to expand...
The 'founding fathers' never set up the US be a democracy, it was meant to be a slave state until the end of time. Democracy itself is a threat to the way that country is governed.
 
maniak said:
But you have a winner takes all system, so I understand how people would see their vote in those parties as a waste. I voted for a party which I knew wouldn't have more than 10% because I know that would be enough for them to have in impact. If it was like in America, I'd probably stay home.
Click to expand...

The merits of Proportional representation.
 
Sweet Square said:
The 'founding fathers' never set up the US be a democracy, it was meant to be a slave state until the end of time. Democracy itself is a threat to the way that country is governed.
Click to expand...
Not everyone was in favor of slaves. It was a pretty big debate at the time IIRC.
 
Florida Man said:
Not everyone was in favor of slaves. It was a pretty big debate at the time IIRC.
Click to expand...
True although this sort of sums up the debate

Thomas Jefferson's views on slavery are complex. Jefferson consistently spoke out against the turpitude of slavery and worked gradually to end the practice of slavery while he owned over 600 African-American people throughout his adult life and freed only seven
Click to expand...
 
Per the Q poll released a day or two prior

General H2H

Biden 51, Trump 40
Warren 49, Trump 41
Sanders 49, Trump 42

Obviously there are still plenty of feckwittery going about, the Morning Consult tracking poll still does not move and actually has Biden gaining a bit (33-21-19), but Biden’s team must be shitting bricks if the pattern of his ‘electability’ edge vs the other two being eroded become apparent with further polls.
 
InfiniteBoredom said:
Per the Q poll released a day or two prior

General H2H

Biden 51, Trump 40
Warren 49, Trump 41
Sanders 49, Trump 42

Obviously there are still plenty of feckwittery going about, the Morning Consult tracking poll still does not move and actually has Biden gaining a bit (33-21-19), but Biden’s team must be shitting bricks if the pattern of his ‘electability’ edge vs the other two being eroded become apparent with further polls.
Click to expand...
It shouldn't be surprising but Trump polling at around 40% is just very very depressing.
 
InfiniteBoredom said:
His approval is at 43 and handling of the economy is at 52. I think there’s a good to fair chance he ends up with 47% of the popular vote again, irrespective of the Dem nominee.
Click to expand...

under-apreciated risk is the significant 2016 libertarian vote returning home, it is much larger in every state (3x?) than the green party vote.
 
Sweet Square said:
True although this sort of sums up the debate
Click to expand...
South Park nailed it in the Cartman time travel episode back in the 1700s where it was mentioned that it’s like saying one thing and then doing another as a foundation of the country’s founding.
 
Raoul said:
Click to expand...

If my mental graphing program is functioning correctly, trend lines applied to this would show Liz is taking votes from Joe and Kamala moreso than Bernie.

Which would make more sense than the purported Bernie v Liz tug of war for the Left.
 
Organic Potatoes said:
If my mental graphing program is functioning correctly, trend lines applied to this would show Liz is taking votes from Joe and Kamala moreso than Bernie.

Which would make more sense than the purported Bernie v Liz tug of war for the Left.
Click to expand...

based on 2016 votes, she gets the whiter and richer parts of bernie's base, and the more liberal part of hillary's.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.