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:mimik posted:As per AzCat's idea in the Undiscovered thread, here goes:
Cornflakes are nice.Sorry Mim. but cornflakes are boring.....
Colon Blow. https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=Ku42Iszh9KM
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.
for the past 20 years I equate pardons=favors
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
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.
Copy and paste TOM. Copy (ctrl+c.) and paste (ctrl+v)
Saves you time to compose more diatribes
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.
You're right TOM. You're not worth reading. You've become a characterization of yourself.
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."
TOM is beginning to act like one of our departed with 40K posts.
Where is the ignore button?
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
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
By doing what?
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
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.
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.
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?
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.
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.
napacat posted:Pocahontas...
Question for you there, napa. Why did you use "Pocahontas?" She has a name.
Did you come up with that nickname yourself? Oh... never mind.
PH
purplehaze posted:napacat posted:Pocahontas...Question for you there, napa. Why did you use "Pocahontas?" She has a name.
Did you come up with that nickname yourself? Oh... never mind.
PH
It's a bigoted nickname that his sick hero came up with. Using it himself makes him also a bigot. Not that that comes as any surprise.
The Old Man posted:purplehaze posted:napacat posted:Pocahontas...Question for you there, napa. Why did you use "Pocahontas?" She has a name.
Did you come up with that nickname yourself? Oh... never mind.
PH
It's a bigoted nickname that his sick hero came up with. Using it himself makes him also a bigot. Not that that comes as any surprise.
Well we all know napacat is also a sick person. He follows the sicko from DC. maybe we need a "sick" name for napacat. Have a few thoughts.
Him using that slur is like calling a black woman, Aunt Jemima or a Jew Shylock. We've called each other names here (yes I've done my share), but this is over the line and quite disgraceful. And you just know that napacat thought it would be so amusing to throw this troll line out here.
purplehaze posted:napacat posted:Pocahontas...Question for you there, napa. Why did you use "Pocahontas?" She has a name.
Did you come up with that nickname yourself? Oh... never mind.
PH
Used it because it is funny! Wouldn’t she have to be Native American for it to be a racial slur (and we know she is not) and lied about it. It’s really very funny! So is Alfred E Nueman.
It’s just funny...nothing more to read into it than that. Why is everyone always looking for hidden and negative meanings? Enjoy it for what it is. Bill Maher calls Trump a mango, an orangutan and other things...and you know what...it’s funny.
I cannot believe people are still getting baited by Napa.
Look, Warren is a near-Albino literally 99.9% White Christian person who never even came into consistent contact with Native Americans until well into her adult life; who may have heard a false story about a distant relative being Native-American, and who used that as an excuse to lie about her heritage when applying to schools, for scholarships, and for jobs well into her 40s in the hopes that she would be a diversity hire or acceptance. The fact that she has become a woke scold (who, for example, has doubled down on wanting her Secretary of Education vetted by a transgender 8 year old) makes this part of her background that much more irritating.
Pocahontas is generally considered a positive Indigenous figure, but referring to a Native American as that would be like calling a Jew "Moses". It doesn't matter that we like Moses, it is that it would be belittling and reductive and therefore racist. Calling a non-Jew making ridiculous claims of Judaism "Moses" isn't nearly as bad because it is an attack on the claim, not on the ethnicity. However, The way Donald Trump has used this, and the way his disciples have followed suit has been terribly insulting and drips with a certain glee of finding a loophole to say what they really want to say about actual Native Americans. It is the glee and conscious sense of trolling that I find racist and more broadly mean-spirited.
That said, we need to keep our eyes on the prize. Unfortunately, calling out every little thing that Drumpf and his minions do just turns into noise so absolutely nothing gets through, even when there is vital need for Americans to pay attention. Understand, this is by design. "Good people on both sides," utter incompetence in handling a bourgeoning pandemic, conspiracy theorizing, doing Russia's bidding, etc just become a part of the noise if we get baited by every little thing.
We'll put. Trump gave license to bigots and racists to spew their hate freely.
The Old Man posted:We'll put. Trump gave license to bigots and racists to spew their hate freely.
Well put? Hardly. First paragraph was on point and reasonable....second is a sweeping false generalization and the third is nonsense as well.
See dumpster has silenced all folks on the virus. Idiot Mike has to approve all press releases. No more truth. As a side note if the idiot is supposed to be heading up virus team, when is he coming here to give a speech on economy, that is closed to media?
Biden, in his stirring victory speech tonight spoke of such things as decency, humility and service. We may just eek this out if enough Americans still think those things are important.