Great.  So Bloomberg contributed to the economy by spending 200m+ on a 4 week campaign.  But these people are all morons -- they need to go after Bernie.  It is like they genuinely don't know that he is the front-runner.  This is terrible.

The Old Man posted:

Nappy always falls back on whataboutism. That's all he's got. And Nappy, would you care to defend the war criminals he's pardoned? I'm sure Fox State News has given you some talking points.

Whataboutism is such a moronic term...it just means you give up and cop to your hypocrisy! You are a pathetic individual.  You are knowledgeable about movies though and I respect that.  

winetarelli posted:

Great.  So Bloomberg contributed to the economy by spending 200m+ on a 4 week campaign.  But these people are all morons -- they need to go after Bernie.  It is like they genuinely don't know that he is the front-runner.  This is terrible.

Oh my....worse than I thought. That was shocking how bad these candidates are.  Are you kidding me.  I could do better.  Can’t someone stand up and say...I’m rich...so what.  Worked hard to get there.  How did all those people get to the point they are currently at?  Did Government give it to them?  Are any of the candidates plans going to make anyone a billionaire or a senator?...doubtful.  Hard work will.  Just shocking how poor that was.  Fun though.

 

i feel bad for Democrats tonight.  Ok...I don’t!

napacat posted:
The Old Man posted:

Nappy always falls back on whataboutism. That's all he's got. And Nappy, would you care to defend the war criminals he's pardoned? I'm sure Fox State News has given you some talking points.

Whataboutism is such a moronic term...it just means you give up and cop to your hypocrisy! You are a pathetic individual.  You are knowledgeable about movies though and I respect that.  

Actually it's the pure definition of whataboutism. Clinton's no longer president, I never liked the guy. We're talking about the guy who currently occupies the White House. If you will notice I am not going to use any more personal attacks. It is a passionate subject that only compares during my lifetime to Nixon. As with my one Trump friend, it's just something we don't discuss. Perhaps that makes me most sad for America. My friend would like to debate politics but it's become impossible.

"You are knowledgeable about movies though and I respect that." Thank you for that, yes i am, but it never made me a penny.

Last edited by The Old Man
napacat posted:
winetarelli posted:

Great.  So Bloomberg contributed to the economy by spending 200m+ on a 4 week campaign.  But these people are all morons -- they need to go after Bernie.  It is like they genuinely don't know that he is the front-runner.  This is terrible.

Oh my....worse than I thought. That was shocking how bad these candidates are.  Are you kidding me.  I could do better.  Can’t someone stand up and say...I’m rich...so what.  Worked hard to get there.  How did all those people get to the point they are currently at?  Did Government give it to them?  Are any of the candidates plans going to make anyone a billionaire or a senator?...doubtful.  Hard work will.  Just shocking how poor that was.  Fun though.

 

i feel bad for Democrats tonight.  Ok...I don’t!

It was, in a lot of respects, a shit show.  But I will still vote for the candidate the emerges and faces the occupant of the Office currently.  

patespo1 posted:

It was, in a lot of respects, a shit show.  But I will still vote for the candidate the emerges and faces the occupant of the Office currently.  

I didn't watch it.  I don't need to watch it.  But I will vote D always this year.

mimik posted:
As per AzCat's idea in the Undiscovered thread, here goes:



Cornflakes are nice.

Sorry Mim. but cornflakes are boring.....

I only know one thing for a fact: No matter who the Democratic nominee is in November, and no matter who wins, 100% of Trump supporters will be voting for a racist, a bigot and a misogynist who mocks the disabled and P.O.W.s and 100% of Democratic voters will not.

bman posted:

So Clinton was worse than Trump in terms of volume and as bad in terms of the crimes he pardoned and commuted.  Fair enough.  I'll do some googling next time!

That said, I'm not sure Clinton's apparent abuse of the power makes OK what Trump is doing.  And if he pardons anyone who ends up in jail because they refused to provide evidence against him or lied to protect him, then in many ways that is worse than what Clinton did, in that it further undermines the rule of law and institutions key to the healthy functioning of a democracy.

 

Frankly, neither one should be proud of their use of the presidential pardon IMO, just was answering your questions about the behaviour of other presidents.  I don't think that Clinton's behaviour either excuses or justifies Trump's.  Clinton really should be no one's north star when it comes to issues of morality or ethics, I think that much is clear.

I agree with Irwin that the power should be sparingly used and believe further that it should be used only to correct examples of injustice, not as a reward for political support or financial contributions.  

Bloomberg is planning on spending $2 billion of his own money on the election which dwarfs any spending by other candidates.  To me it doesn't really make sense to have election laws defining what candidates can do with third party money and not have any laws regarding spending your own money.

thistlintom posted:

Bloomberg is planning on spending $2 billion of his own money on the election which dwarfs any spending by other candidates.  To me it doesn't really make sense to have election laws defining what candidates can do with third party money and not have any laws regarding spending your own money.

thistlintom.  I respect you attempts to argue facts.  I will posit that since Citizens United, any arguments from your side about transparency in the use of campaign money is laughable.  

At least we know where Bloomberg's money is coming from.

PH

Last edited by purplehaze

I don't really think about it in sides taken.  But don't you have an issue in the Democratic  primary where you have two candidates spending what they want and others hamstrung by donation laws?  Warren has recently changed her position regarding donations from Super Pacs due to the money being spent by the billionaires.

"But don't you have an issue in the Democratic  primary where you have two candidates spending what they want and others hamstrung by donation laws? "

Oh I'm sure you're very concerned about us Democrats. Anyways, not if you don't have an issue supporting a racist, bigoted, sexist who mocks the disabled and P.O.W.s. And that's only the tip of the slimeberg.

arsenal4ever posted:

Copy and paste TOM. Copy (ctrl+c.) and paste (ctrl+v)

Saves you time to compose more diatribes

 

 

One trick pony. Tiring.

thistlintom posted:
arsenal4ever posted:

Copy and paste TOM. Copy (ctrl+c.) and paste (ctrl+v)

Saves you time to compose more diatribes

 

 

One trick pony. Tiring.

Oh my, I guess we're all supposed to get used to have a racist in the WH. I guess we're supposed to accept his daily barrage of bigotry. TT, a proud voter for this truly awful human being and disgrace as a president. arsenal I don't get at all. He's not for Trump, but willing to overlook, or at least not want to hear the truth about him. I'll stop when there's no longer a bigot, a racist. and a sexist occupying the WH.

arsenal, as I've said before, my avatar stands out as a black and white image; very easy to spot. And you say I'm just repeating myself. So exactly why do you keep read my posts? And then, talk about cut and paste, you make the same comment each time. Try  (ctrl+c.) and paste (ctrl+v) indeed.

Last edited by The Old Man
arsenal4ever posted:

You're right TOM. You're not worth reading. You've become a characterization of yourself.

Then why do you keep reading my posts and commenting? 

I'm not sure, but I'm pretty sure that the word you were looking for is "caricature." 

Last edited by The Old Man
thistlintom posted:

I don't really think about it in sides taken.  

Unfortunately, it is ultimately about sides taken.  

It's about attempting  to return to something approaching normalcy in our Federal government or 4 more years of idiocy.  

You either choose to re-elect Trump, or you choose "NOT TRUMP," and then try to patch it up from there.  I disagree very strongly with Sanders and Warren, and don't see a "can't lose" pairing for a Potus/Veep from the weak Democratic field either.

That said, whoever the Dem nominee is, I will vote for him or her. Or her or him.    I will do actual work to help them get elected.  I will give whatever funds I can afford to assist the Democratic nominee in what is the most important election in any of our lifetimes.

Oh... What am I drinking?  A randomly found 2001 Neal Cabernet.  Quite good.  Glad I found two.  

PH

 

Last edited by purplehaze
purplehaze posted:
thistlintom posted:

I don't really think about it in sides taken.  

Unfortunately, it is ultimately about sides taken.  

It's about attempting  to return to something approaching normalcy in our Federal government or 4 more years of idiocy.  

You either choose to re-elect Trump, or you choose "NOT TRUMP," and then try to patch it up from there.  I disagree very strongly with Sanders and Warren, and don't see a "can't lose" pairing for a Potus/Veep from the weak Democratic field either.

That said, whoever the Dem nominee is, I will vote for him or her. Or her or him.    I will do actual work to help them get elected.  I will give whatever funds I can afford to assist the Democratic nominee in what is the most important election in any of our lifetimes.

Oh... What am I drinking?  A randomly found 2001 Neal Cabernet.  Quite good.  Glad I found two.  

PH

 

Discovered Neal years ago thanks to pyang when he worked for them. But we don't get it here. 

purplehaze posted:
thistlintom posted:

I don't really think about it in sides taken.  

Unfortunately, it is ultimately about sides taken.  

It's about attempting  to return to something approaching normalcy in our Federal government or 4 more years of idiocy.  

You either choose to re-elect Trump, or you choose "NOT TRUMP," and then try to patch it up from there.  I disagree very strongly with Sanders and Warren, and don't see a "can't lose" pairing for a Potus/Veep from the weak Democratic field either.

That said, whoever the Dem nominee is, I will vote for him or her. Or her or him.    I will do actual work to help them get elected.  I will give whatever funds I can afford to assist the Democratic nominee in what is the most important election in any of our lifetimes.

PH

 

***WARNING, WARNING*** You don't have to read this if you don't like my posts--really. No one is making you.

"That said, whoever the Dem nominee is, I will vote for him or her."

This is what all Americans, no matter what their party, who care about decency and our democracy will do. We'll see if it's enough.

Sanders and Stacy Abrams. You heard it here first.

Last edited by The Old Man
purplehaze posted:
thistlintom posted:

I don't really think about it in sides taken.  

Unfortunately, it is ultimately about sides taken.  

It's about attempting  to return to something approaching normalcy in our Federal government or 4 more years of idiocy.  

You either choose to re-elect Trump, or you choose "NOT TRUMP," and then try to patch it up from there.  I disagree very strongly with Sanders and Warren, and don't see a "can't lose" pairing for a Potus/Veep from the weak Democratic field either.

That said, whoever the Dem nominee is, I will vote for him or her. Or her or him.    I will do actual work to help them get elected.  I will give whatever funds I can afford to assist the Democratic nominee in what is the most important election in any of our lifetimes.

Oh... What am I drinking?  A randomly found 2001 Neal Cabernet.  Quite good.  Glad I found two.  

PH

 

This sums up my attitude exactly.  I'm not optimistic about Sanders' chances against Trump -- and I think his nomination would damage the Democrats' ability to retain control of the House, irrespective of if he wins -- and I could go on and on for days why, in a vacuum,  Sanders should not be President.  But dealing with a Sanders Presidency is immeasurably preferable to dealing with the Trump one.  

 

And 2001 Neal!  Wow.  That brings back memories of this board at its pinnacle.  Powell really rang the bell and we all jumped.  Glad to read it is doing well!

Agree, winetarelli.  Bernie running the country from the cardiac care ward would be a better option than the angry child currently in the White House.  A Sanders candidacy would murder any chance of a Senate majority and might well return the House to the Republicans.  Imagine Bernie as president with a majority Republican House and Senate.  Nah... don't.

PH

See MSNBC is in trouble for comments made re Bernie.  Maybe a bit below belt, some were germaine.   Bernie really scares me with policies, and if the Dems nominate him, we have king donald for 4 more years.

I switched from NPA [no party affiliation] last week just so I can vote for a replacement candidate.  Our ballot in Palm Beach County still have about 15 folks listed, as they had to print the absentee ballot so many weeks ago,

I really hope Obama steps in to help stop this.  Even if Biden looses to Trump, he wouldn't necessarily bring the House with him.  Bernie looses the House, too.  And we have an unrestrained Trump on the loose.

winetarelli posted:

I really hope Obama steps in to help stop this.  Even if Biden looses to Trump, he wouldn't necessarily bring the House with him.  Bernie looses the House, too.  And we have an unrestrained Trump on the loose.

Previous Presidents are loath to get involved in primaries.  I think Obama will become a bit more vocal once a Dem candidate is selected.  Keep in mind that he is still polarizing, and may not carry the impact that the left wishes for.  Frankly, Michelle would probably be a more effective voice than her husband, at least early on.  The good guys NEED women to be heavily involved this time around.  Without them, we are truly lost.  I predict a Michelle/Oprah national tour once a candidate is chosen by the Dems to drum up support from the stronger sex.

PH

Last edited by purplehaze
purplehaze posted:
winetarelli posted:

I really hope Obama steps in to help stop this.  Even if Biden looses to Trump, he wouldn't necessarily bring the House with him.  Bernie looses the House, too.  And we have an unrestrained Trump on the loose.

Previous Presidents are loath to get involved in primaries.  I think Obama will become a bit more vocal once a Dem candidate is selected.  Keep in mind that he is still polarizing, and may not carry the impact that the left wishes for.  Frankly, Michelle would probably be a more effective voice than her husband, at least early on.  The good guys NEED women to be heavily involved this time around.  Without them, we are truly lost.  I predict a Michelle/Oprah national tour once a candidate is chosen by the Dems to drum up support from the stronger sex.

PH

Obama left office at +22 approval in Gallup (59 / 37).  With a 90+% approval amongst Democrats.  He isn't polarizing to Democrats who can be swayed away from Bernie.  

But, yes, people love Michelle.

winetarelli posted:

Obama left office at +22 approval in Gallup (59 / 37).  With a 90+% approval amongst Democrats.  He isn't polarizing to Democrats who can be swayed away from Bernie.  

But, yes, people love Michelle.

The dems don't need to sway other dems, they need to sway other independents, and also, to convince the women to come out and vote that stayed home last time because of their dislike for Hilary.  They don't seem to realize that fact though, hence the support for Bernie.  

csm posted:
winetarelli posted:

Obama left office at +22 approval in Gallup (59 / 37).  With a 90+% approval amongst Democrats.  He isn't polarizing to Democrats who can be swayed away from Bernie.  

But, yes, people love Michelle.

The dems don't need to sway other dems, they need to sway other independents, and also, to convince the women to come out and vote that stayed home last time because of their dislike for Hilary.  They don't seem to realize that fact though, hence the support for Bernie.  

In the general, yes. Hence the need to sway Dem primary voters away from Bernie to a person who can win. 

The Old Man posted:
purplehaze posted:
thistlintom posted:

I don't really think about it in sides taken.  

Unfortunately, it is ultimately about sides taken.  

It's about attempting  to return to something approaching normalcy in our Federal government or 4 more years of idiocy.  

You either choose to re-elect Trump, or you choose "NOT TRUMP," and then try to patch it up from there.  I disagree very strongly with Sanders and Warren, and don't see a "can't lose" pairing for a Potus/Veep from the weak Democratic field either.

That said, whoever the Dem nominee is, I will vote for him or her. Or her or him.    I will do actual work to help them get elected.  I will give whatever funds I can afford to assist the Democratic nominee in what is the most important election in any of our lifetimes.

PH

 

***WARNING, WARNING*** You don't have to read this if you don't like my posts--really. No one is making you.

"That said, whoever the Dem nominee is, I will vote for him or her."

This is what all Americans, no matter what their party, who care about decency and our democracy will do. We'll see if it's enough.

Sanders and Stacy Abrams. You heard it here first.

"Sanders and Stacy Abrams. You heard it here first."

Oh...yes please.  Could not think of a worse Dem ticket and a surefire win for President Trump.  Please make this happen.  I'm starting to like your posts TOM!

bman posted:
purplehaze posted:
thistlintom posted:

I don't really think about it in sides taken.  

Unfortunately, it is ultimately about sides taken.  

It's about attempting  to return to something approaching normalcy in our Federal government or 4 more years of idiocy.  

You either choose to re-elect Trump, or you choose "NOT TRUMP," and then try to patch it up from there.  I disagree very strongly with Sanders and Warren, and don't see a "can't lose" pairing for a Potus/Veep from the weak Democratic field either.

That said, whoever the Dem nominee is, I will vote for him or her. Or her or him.    I will do actual work to help them get elected.  I will give whatever funds I can afford to assist the Democratic nominee in what is the most important election in any of our lifetimes.

Oh... What am I drinking?  A randomly found 2001 Neal Cabernet.  Quite good.  Glad I found two.  

PH

 

Discovered Neal years ago thanks to pyang when he worked for them. But we don't get it here. 

I used to enjoy Neal wines very much...especailly the 02 Second Chance Vineyard and the One Lane Bridge.  The last few I tried (more current vintages (Wykoff and Howell Mountain), I noticed a very medicinal / Band Aid like nose coming through.  I wonder if they have a bit of Brett in their cellar. 

This has certainly turned me off to the winery and have not bought in a while.  Anyone else notice this?

thistlintom posted:

Bernie's run seems reminiscent of 2016 when a brash candidate who no one thought could win has moved to the front of the party.

Similar maybe...but it ends there, as Bernie cannot win the general.    That debate last night left a lot to be desired.  Pocahontas is a good debater though for sure. 

Add Reply

Post
×
×
×
×
Link copied to your clipboard.
×