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

Status
Not open for further replies.
Raoul said:
Obama's economics are considered fairly middle of the road by US standards, which neither Rs or Ds would consider right wing.

On the question of a Romney Presidency - taxes would've gone down, judges would've been more conservative, Russia would've been confronted more directly over Ukraine/Crimea, there would've been no movement from the old predatory health system to Obamacare (despite Romney's loose affiliation with a similar scheme in Mass), there would've likely been no Iran deal or pointless trip to hang out with Castro etc..

At the end of the day, Romney would've been a very liberal Republican President, but it would've still been some distance from where a pragmatic Dem President like Obama was on the political spectrum.
Click to expand...

Yep and to add, Romney would have also looked to scrap Obamacare as that was (and still is) a GOP rallying cry, no matter how similar Romney's own MA model was. He would have gotten a lot of opposition from his own party if he stood in the way of getting rid of Obamacare and I don't think he would want to use a lot of political capital in that fight.
 
sport2793 said:
Yep and to add, Romney would have also looked to scrap Obamacare as that was (and still is) a GOP rallying cry, no matter how similar Romney's own MA model was. He would have gotten a lot of opposition from his own party if he stood in the way of getting rid of Obamacare and I don't think he would want to use a lot of political capital in that fight.
Click to expand...

True. And Romney ran on getting rid of Obamacare in 2012 as well.
 
Raoul said:
Obama's economics are considered fairly middle of the road by US standards, which neither Rs or Ds would consider right wing.

On the question of a Romney Presidency - taxes would've gone down, judges would've been more conservative, Russia would've been confronted more directly over Ukraine/Crimea, there would've been no movement from the old predatory health system to Obamacare (despite Romney's loose affiliation with a similar scheme in Mass), there would've likely been no Iran deal or pointless trip to hang out with Castro etc..

At the end of the day, Romney would've been a very liberal Republican President, but it would've still been some distance from where a pragmatic Dem President like Obama was on the political spectrum.
Click to expand...

The idea that Mitt Romney could be called ‘very liberal’ in any context says more about America than almost anything else could..
 
entropy said:
Is it? she sided with trump on deporting asylum seekers.
Click to expand...

Yeah but the next appointee will side with him on 99% of stuff while folks like you scream "We want 100% change now" instead of realizing it's a process. And processes take time.
 
Raoul said:
Very Liberal in a Republican context. Big difference between that and just very liberal.
Click to expand...
Not sure I agree. In 2008, he was supposed to be the right wing answer to McCain who was supposed to be very liberal (he actually wasn’t, in fact, he was similar to the average Republican like Bush back the ). The fact that someone as conservative (except Romneycare) is now considered to be very liberal says more about how much to the right the Republicans have gone.
 
Revan said:
Not sure I agree. In 2008, he was supposed to be the right wing answer to McCain who was supposed to be very liberal (he actually wasn’t, in fact, he was similar to the average Republican like Bush back the ). The fact that someone as conservative (except Romneycare) is now considered to be very liberal says more about how much to the right the Republicans have gone.
Click to expand...

It’s a bit of both. Romney was never conservative enough for Republicans and the fact that he was governor of a very liberal state also sat oddly with the base at a time when the Tea Party was at its peak.
 
Last edited:
entropy said:
Purity test? buddy, she is a conservative. Just look at her record. Do you know what purity test means?
Click to expand...

You’re right, she’s just like Kavanaugh. Let’s have a party when she dies and vacates a spot on the Supreme Court because she’s “conservative”. Is she perfect? No! But is she better than anyone Trump would nominate and the senate would confirm? Yes! So if you really believe Trump replacing her is good because she is “conservative” and not the bestest then fukc you. I have to live in this country and will prefer it be under RBG’s conservatism than Trumps.
 
WI_Red said:
Probably. Honestly, rural Wisconsin in the summer only differs from rural Alabama in that there is corn in the ground and not cotton. The gun culture here is right on par with what I saw in Bama. My coworkers (who lives in a rural county) neighbor runs an AR-15 modification business from his house and set up shooting range on his property (its a small farm). All his neighbors have sued him for noise and for the random bullet that flies over their heads. At the first council meeting the council all took time to thank that guy for his service (he is an ex-marine) and basically chided his neighbors for hampering their poor neighbor. Forget that he had no permits and was not zoned to have a shooting range. The police have told them they cannot do anything until someone gets hit by one of those bullets. This country is broken.
Click to expand...
Simple answer to that is have to have your own shooting range that caters to the blind.
 
entropy said:
Is it? she sided with trump on deporting asylum seekers.
Click to expand...
I've asked you four times now without an answer. I'm curious which party aligns most with your values and which one offers a brighter future for your kids if you have any?
 
WI_Red said:
You’re right, she’s just like Kavanaugh. Let’s have a party when she dies and vacates a spot on the Supreme Court because she’s “conservative”. Is she perfect? No! But is she better than anyone Trump would nominate and the senate would confirm? Yes! So if you really believe Trump replacing her is good because she is “conservative” and not the bestest then fukc you. I have to live in this country and will prefer it be under RBG’s conservatism than Trumps.
Click to expand...
You are talking with a religious fanatic. If someone is not to the left of Mao, he/she is a conservative. So obviously by these standards Ginsburg is a conservative. As are you. Well, me too.

It is really hard to pass entropy’s purity test.
 
WI_Red said:
You’re right, she’s just like Kavanaugh. Let’s have a party when she dies and vacates a spot on the Supreme Court because she’s “conservative”. Is she perfect? No! But is she better than anyone Trump would nominate and the senate would confirm? Yes! So if you really believe Trump replacing her is good because she is “conservative” and not the bestest then fukc you. I have to live in this country and will prefer it be under RBG’s conservatism than Trumps.
Click to expand...
It would be great if we had a normal functioning system instead of a legal system where control is based on ghoulishly hoping people die at the "right" time. Putting aside her voting record, refusing to retire when democrats held a supermajority, It’s a joke that the slightest of criticism sparks such BS outrage from you. Believe it or not, some of us live in this country too and can’t stand any form of conservatism, even if it has the notorious rbg brand slapped on it.
 
Last edited:
entropy said:
It would be great if we had a normal functioning system instead of a legal system where control is based on ghoulishly hoping people die at the "right" time. Putting aside her voting record, refusing to retire when democrats held a supermajority, It’s a joke that the slightest of criticism sparks such BS outrage from you. Believe it or not, some of us live in this country too and can’t stand any form of conservatism, even if it has the notorious rbg brand slapped on it.
Click to expand...
Your answer to the question I asked?
 
entropy said:
Is it? she sided with trump on deporting asylum seekers.
Click to expand...

It’s not about siding with anyone or just making partisan political opinions (although obviously that happens sometimes too). The SCOTUS judges are enforcing the constitution and working with precedent, and sometime that means they’re going to arrive at judgements that are conservative regardless of what they might wish for.
 
Revan said:
You are talking with a religious fanatic. If someone is not to the left of Mao, he/she is a conservative. So obviously by these standards Ginsburg is a conservative. As are you. Well, me too.

It is really hard to pass entropy’s purity test.
Click to expand...
Don’t quote me in any of your BS. I want nothing to do with someone who whines about a black person getting recognized for their work.
 
entropy said:
Don’t quote me in any of your BS. I want nothing to do with someone who whines about a black person getting recognized for their work.
Click to expand...
What if I quote you?

And it is awesome that what you got from that thread is that (ignoring that no one deserves anything from an unpublished paper). But it doesn’t matter. It shows your lack of intelligence, same as when you say that Ginsburg is a conservative.
 
Kentonio said:
It’s not about siding with anyone or just making partisan political opinions (although obviously that happens sometimes too). The SCOTUS judges are enforcing the constitution and working with precedent, and sometime that means they’re going to arrive at judgements that are conservative regardless of what they might wish for.
Click to expand...
It’s still an archaic system that will never come to represent my belief system. Assuming you think I am progressive or left wing or whatever, It’s a farce that I have to engage in this song and dance about “future generations” and make peace with a brand of conservatism that is still disgusting.
 
Raoul said:
Click to expand...


The longer this trends the better. It’s imbedded in American culture to be on the winning side. The longer Trump is seen to be a loser and the wider the gap is, the more people that will abandon him and switch to the winning side.
 
Pexbo said:
The longer this trends the better. It’s imbedded in American culture to be on the winning side. The longer Trump is seen to be a loser and the wider the gap is, the more people that will abandon him and switch to the winning side.
Click to expand...

If this were an ordinary election year with no COVID, the usual party conventions, full on in-person campaigning in swing states, and wall to wall media coverage of the campaigns - then Trump would have a decent chance of gradually chipping away at Biden’s lead. With everything that’s happening in recent weeks, it seems like COVID will continue to dominate political news, which will make it very hard for Trump to claw his way back.

Still, i can’t help but recall 88, when Dukakis came out of the convention (which took place today exactly 32 years ago) with a double digit lead, only to have Bush roar back and win the Gen fairly easily.
 
Last edited:
Raoul said:
If this were an ordinary election year with no COVID, the usual party conventions, full on in-person campaigning in all the swing states, and wall to wall media coverage of the elections - then Trump would have a decent chance of gradually chipping away at Biden’s lead. With everything that’s happening in recent weeks, it seems like COVID will continue to dominate political narratives, which will make it very hard for Trump to claw his way back.

Still, i can’t help but recall 88, when Dukakis came out of the convention (which took place today exactly 32 years ago) with a double digit lead, only to have Bush roar back and win the Gen fairy easily.
Click to expand...

if anyone can mess up an election, it's the democrats. But the evidence is quite clear that Biden is now a runaway favourite. Trump's only hope is that enough people catch COVID so election day voting is suppressed and they don't allow for mail voting.
 
Raoul said:
Still, i can’t help but recall 88, when Dukakis came out of the convention (which took place today exactly 32 years ago) with a double digit lead, only to have Bush roar back and win the Gen fairly easily.
Click to expand...

Then he decided to take a ride in that tank, no?
 
The Firestarter said:
Then he decided to take a ride in that tank, no?
Click to expand...

The tank commercial was one of four big events that "tanked' Dukakis in 88. The other 3 were the Boston Harbor commercial that framed Dukakis as having governed a state with a filthy harbor; the infamous Willie Horton ad that showed how Dukakis allowed a murderer to go on a weekend furlough during which he murdered again; and finally, Dukakis was asked during a debate whether he would favor the death penalty if his wife was raped and murdered, and he said no...which made him come across as incredibly weak and feckless on crime. The guy had a double digit national lead in July and wound up losing the Gen 426-111.
 
GiddyUp said:
Still won't answer.
Click to expand...
What answer are you looking for ? I get the frustration but also it's kind of clear now that there isn't a "left" in the United State, if someone wants universal healthcare, anti war policies and better worker rights than atm they have no political representation, as Gore Vidal put it - 'In America there are only reactionaries and conservatives'.

So trying to make them care about mainstream/bourgeois politics or whatever the hell is happening with supreme court isn't going to materialise into anything productive. Giving a shit or not about RBG health bar and if her conservatism is better than Trumps isn't a sign of pragmatic politics or "utopian" idealism it's just an individual personal preference and as about useful as picking Coke over Pepsi.

A lot of the time these conversations are really happening at two different frequencies without anyone really knowing tbh.
 
Raoul said:
The tank commercial was one of four big events that "tanked' Dukakis in 88. The other 3 were the Boston Harbor commercial that framed Dukakis as having governed a state with a filthy harbor; the infamous Willie Horton ad that showed how Dukakis allowed a murderer to go on a weekend furlough during which he murdered again; and finally, Dukakis was asked during a debate whether he would favor the death penalty if his wife was raped and murdered, and he said no...which made him colme across as incredibly weak and feckless on crime. The guy had a double digit national lead in July and wound up losing the Gen 426-111.
Click to expand...
The death penalty question seems like impossible to answer properly in US. If he said yes, he would be portrayed as hypocritical. I presume he was running on abolishing the death penalty.
 
The Firestarter said:
The death penalty question seems like impossible to answer properly in US. If he said yes, he would be portrayed as hypocritical. I presume he was running on abolishing the death penalty.
Click to expand...

Yep. He was anti death penalty which is why the question was asked. Of course the other really big moment in 88 was when Lloyd Bentsen told Dan Quayle he was no Jack Kennedy.
 
I don't trust any of this to continue. Our political attention span is about 30 seconds. The race can only get closer in the next few months, which will turn the media into 'TRUMP COMEBACK!' mode.

Also, Trump can comfortably lose the popular vote by 5% and still win the election. So all these leads need that to be taken into account.

All that matters is November.
 
Beachryan said:
I don't trust any of this to continue. Our political attention span is about 30 seconds. The race can only get closer in the next few months, which will turn the media into 'TRUMP COMEBACK!' mode.

Also, Trump can comfortably lose the popular vote by 5% and still win the election. So all these leads need that to be taken into account.

All that matters is November.
Click to expand...

2-3 percent yes. 5 percent definitely not imo.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.