horsechoker
The Caf's Ezza.
And with the nuclear launch codesThere's no way he's going to last another 5 years. He'll be older, more senile, more emboldened, more corrupt and more reckless. .
And with the nuclear launch codesThere's no way he's going to last another 5 years. He'll be older, more senile, more emboldened, more corrupt and more reckless. .
I’m deadly serious when I say that if he was caught on video shooting someone, the Republicans would rally around him and state that as the commander in chief of the US army it’s entirely normal for him to be armed and prepared to use it to protect his nation.
There is absolutely nothing they won’t do to protect him because they are completely corrupt, compromised and radicalised.
I think I gave them enough attention in '16.
I was making a joke at Maticmaker’s expense since that’s literally the only thing he insists on in this threadName checks out
I think they converged to 70% chance for Herr.Weren't 538 the site telling everyone that a Hillary win was not so obvious/great odds?
I agree he may have got away with one this time around. However, there will be the fallout from this catching up with him as more documents eventually pass through the court system, his tax returns being released, Bolton blabbing, Giuliani being investigated, starting a war with Iran etc., etc.
I just can't see this being the last and worst of his exploits. Five years is a hell of a long time considering what he's managed to cram into three years already.
I think they converged to 70% chance for Herr.
Locker room talk"Take her out" doesn't sound like the words you use when you want to fire someone. Sounds like something a bit more permanent.
Fair enough. Well if that's the case, they will deserve everything they get.I think you’re being too optimistic here. If anything, the republicans have shown that there are no lengths they won’t go to in order to keep Trump happy.
It should be titled “failed coup”
Don't even think about it....
I agree he may have got away with one this time around. However, there will be the fallout from this catching up with him as more documents eventually pass through the court system, his tax returns being released, Bolton blabbing, Giuliani being investigated, starting a war with Iran etc., etc.
I just can't see this being the last and worst of his exploits. Five years is a hell of a long time considering what he's managed to cram into three years already.
The Dems obviously have to win the next election or take over the House and Senate. But if he commits another high crime or misdemeanour, they are duty bound by the constitution to go through the process again. Otherwise they may as well just do away with Congress and just install a dictatorship instead.If his presidency has taught me one thing it's that the public has absolutely no memory. People will call him out one moment, then regurgitate even the most ridiculous White House talking points come next news cycle. "Critical mass" will never be reached, because the scales are wiped every week. And even if it somehow were, how would people actually get rid of him? After the current impeachment gets shot down in record time people will be loath to try again.
If his presidency has taught me one thing it's that the public has absolutely no memory. People will call him out one moment, then regurgitate even the most ridiculous White House talking points come next news cycle. "Critical mass" will never be reached, because the scales are wiped every week. And even if it somehow were, how would people actually get rid of him? After the current impeachment gets shot down in record time people will be loath to try again.
I won't, been threatened with 'tar and feathering' already, my lips are sealed only my eyes tell the story!Don't even think about it....
Good man.I won't, been threatened with 'tar and feathering' already, my lips are sealed only my eyes tell the story!
Not sure where you are getting your data but by all accounts jobs are less secure and offer less benefits than in 1970.
Here is an article from the 1990s where the jobs were more stable than the gig economy of 2020:
"Although there has been little change in the average number of hours worked each week since the mid-1970s, the proportion of persons working verylong workweeks has risen, and there has beena growing trend toward year-round work among women "
https://www.bls.gov/opub/mlr/1997/04/art1full.pdf
Purchasing remains stagnant yet our costs of living are rising:
Rising cost of health in constant 2018 dollars:
"In dollar terms, out-of-pocket expenditures have grown steadily since 1970, averaging $1,150 per capita in 2018, up from $119 per capita in 1970 ($613 in 2018 dollars). Out-of-pocket medical costs do not include the amount individuals contribute towards health insurance premiums. "
https://www.healthsystemtracker.org...r-capita-out-of-pocket-expenditures-1970-2018
Cost of College is rising: "Price Of College Increasing Almost 8 Times Faster Than Wages"
https://www.forbes.com/sites/camilo...lmost-8-times-faster-than-wages/#39ddd6e066c1
The cost of owning a home is rising: "The cost of buying a home is rising three times faster than the cost to rent "
https://www.marketwatch.com/story/t...times-faster-than-the-cost-to-rent-2018-09-01
So taking all that into account, the lot of the average American worker is much worse in 2020 than 1970 (although for the top 10% its definitely better)
Now related to caring and keeping up with the arcane parliamentary proceedings of Impeachment, you must keep in mind is the speed of information these days and all the competition for attention. It was far easier in 1970 for the average person to devote a few moments to read some newspaper articles on impeachment and keep up on the nightly news. Now there is no water cooler culture and only a tiny percentage of people listen to the news and even then most just get it from one biased side (MSNBC/CNN for establishment Dems and Fox for establishment conservatives. Now we have Facebook, Instagram and dozens of smaller social networks competng for attention. In 1970 the family would have one television and extremely limited home entertainment options from the "Big Three Networks (CBS, ABC, NBC) whereas now every kid has smartphones and dozens of services to compete for attention. Cord cutting is popular and rising now so many don't even have normal television news these days, they simply use streaming services.
"Just 37 percent of Americans got news “often” from local TV last year, down ... news consumers, with fewer and fewer young people watching "
https://www.vox.com/2018/1/7/16856574/tv-news-ratings-audience-donald-trump-pew-research
And thats not even getting into how the Democrat narrative simply isn't compelling: start around 50-55 minute for a good explanation on how uncompelling the Dem narrative on impeachment comes across to average Americans:
https://shootthedancingbear.libsyn.com/and-iraniran-so-far-awaaayy
I don’t know if I already replied to you but it’s not really about the ability to obtain news, but rather people having the interest in news. Most people I know in my age group here barely keep up with the news. Or they may come across headlines but don’t dive deep into it. And some of the older people like my parents already have their minds made up that this impeachment stuff is fabricated without even considering one piece of evidence put forth.Again, complete bollocks. You can get the latest news summarized in your hand via your phone in seconds, whereas in the past you had to rely on once daily newspapers and perhaps a nightly news show.
There is zero reason for anyone who wants to to not be able to stay up to date with events, practically in real time. Any shite about people working too hard now is fecking laughable. People just don’t want to be interested in politics these days, and would rather care about stupid shit with Kardashians and reality TV than the stuff that actually matters to their lives.
I have no idea why you felt the need to explain that working people have it tougher now btw, I’m a socialist and a big Bernie fan, this stuff isn’t news to me.
Yes. And the one who predicted Obama to win easily, while many were thinking that Romney has a good chance.Weren't 538 the site telling everyone that a Hillary win was not so obvious/great odds?
I don’t know if I already replied to you but it’s not really about the ability to obtain news, but rather people having the interest in news. Most people I know in my age group here barely keep up with the news. Or they may come across headlines but don’t dive deep into it. And some of the older people like my parents already have their minds made up that this impeachment stuff is fabricated without even considering one piece of evidence put forth.
He’s not wrong that people are too busy, at least in the sense that’s how they feel. It may not be a good excuse considering how streamlined news is as you pointed out but it’s not uncommon to hear that as a reason. Again, I base this off of what I hear personally.Firstly, apologies for sounding snappy earlier, was having a crap morning. Secondly I agree with you 100%. It was whoever I originally replied to that was talking about people being too busy to follow impeachment proceedings, and that just irritates me considering how much easier it is now than it ever was in the past.
He’s not wrong that people are too busy, at least in the sense that’s how they feel. It may not be a good excuse considering how streamlined news is as you pointed out but it’s not uncommon to hear that as a reason. Again, I base this off of what I hear personally.
Because people default to basic stuff that makes them feel good. We’re pretty spoiled here and take our democracy for granted, always expecting someone else to take care of the problem for us. It’s reflected in what has been typically expected of our reps and presidents, and they don’t even believe they have the power to effect change. Hopefully what Bernie is doing is changing that mindset.Sure people claim that stuff all the time. But then have plenty of time for consuming other forms of media/entertainment.
I don't understand why republican senators are so afraid of ditching Trump, I mean what are their voters gonna do? Vote democrat? They'd have to vote for republican candidates either way.
It's not like Trump would create a new party, he doesn't give a shit about politics.
They would lose a primary.I don't understand why republican senators are so afraid of ditching Trump, I mean what are their voters gonna do? Vote democrat? They'd have to vote for republican candidates either way.
It's not like Trump would create a new party, he doesn't give a shit about politics.
They would lose a primary.
Because Trump controls the voter base - so all he would do is replace any defectors with his own loyalists.
Yes. Not only that, it would kill turn out for Republicans in a presidential election.So you guys think that if Trump was removed as president, with all the legal stuff he's involved in in civil courts, he'd still be involved in politics to the point he would try to influence primaries? I don't see it.
So you guys think that if Trump was removed as president, with all the legal stuff he's involved in in civil courts, he'd still be involved in politics to the point he would try to influence primaries? I don't see it.
Yes. Not only that, it would kill turn out for Republicans in a presidential election.
He wont be removed and Republican politicians know it, so they aren't in any way incentivized to move against him given the consequences.
The funny thing is Trumpers are vehemently anti-538/Nate to this day even though they were giving Donald the best odds in respectable media at around 1 in 3.Yes. And the one who predicted Obama to win easily, while many were thinking that Romney has a good chance.
No poll is flawless, but they are easily the best when it comes to polling.
Trump also pretty much copied Obama's tribute Tweet to Kobe Bryant's family word for word. His supporters are all claiming Obama copied Trump's who had posted his first, despite Trump's being 2 hours after AND Obama's receiving over 1.2 million likes by that time.