Who will the Democratic nominee be?

[Farmer77]

10 minutes ago, DieChecker said:

8. He tried to BAN all Muslims everywhere. Except he didn't. He tried to ban some people from a handful of nations on a list created by Obama.

Giuliani: Trump asked me how to do a Muslim ban 'legally'

He wanted to ban all Muslims, he himself said he wanted to ban all Muslims, his attorney not only said he wanted to ban all Muslims but he then explained how they manipulated the law to make it look like he wasnt trying to ban all Muslims.

Honestly on this topic im much more concerned about the blatant disinformation campaign surrounding the issue than the fact that he wanted all Muslims banned. 

[Farmer77]

Fox News Anchor Says Polls Showing Major Democratic Candidates Beating Trump Are 'a Big Wake Up Call'

Quote

Poll results from Quinnipiac University, which were released on Tuesday, were then displayed on the screen. They showed former Vice President Joe Biden as the frontrunner, beating Trump by double digits at 53 to 40 percent. Senator Bernie Sanders of Vermont was close on Biden's tail, beating the president 51 to 42 percent. Senator Kamala Harris of California, Senator Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts, Mayor Pete Buttigieg of South Bend, Indiana, Senator Cory Booker of New Jersey all would also beat Trump by 5 percent or more if the election was held this week, according to the survey.

 

[RoofGardener]

34 minutes ago, Farmer77 said:

Fox News Anchor Says Polls Showing Major Democratic Candidates Beating Trump Are 'a Big Wake Up Call'

 

Hmmm.. what do we know about this "Quinnipiac University" ? Are they polling the general populace, the populace within a specific geographical area, or students ? 

*EDIT* AOK.. it appears it's a nationwide telephone poll. https://poll.qu.edu/images/polling/us/us06112019_demos_urox72.pdf/

Nevertheless, I am finding it hard to believe that Elizabeth Warren is currently ahead of President Trump in the polls. Something is screwy here ! 

Edited June 13, 2019 by RoofGardener

[DieChecker]

9 minutes ago, Farmer77 said:

Oh I actually agree with her statement from a strategical point of view, although I do think its bad form for details from a strategy session to be leaked. She didnt say "without trial" though. Her point was that no matter the evidence the sycophantic GOP senate majority wont impeach Trump so going through the impeachment process is simply giving him a pass. 

Yeah, but she'd sung that song before, and only now is she saying handcuffs.

Quote

My personal hope is that the day #46 is sworn in Trump is charged with obstruction. My gut feeling is he and his family will be charged with more than that - the vast majority of which, if not all,  will have nothing to do with politics.

I think there is a chance that such will happen. But I'd not assume he's going to spend years in general population. I imagine if found guilty, he'll do a Martha Stewart term of a couple weeks, or months, in a country club prison.

Quote

Isnt that what elections are for? Im dead set against Trump poisoning the air and killing thousands of people a year, but, you made that decision for me by voting for him. Trump Administration Casually Admits Coal Plan Will Kill 1,400 Americans a Year

Hell and in this case Trump didnt even win the most votes meaning that almost certainly nothing he does is seen the same by the majority of Americans as by he and his base. Thats just how it works. As for should it work that way? Im becoming very open to discussing it.

Well, again, them's the rules. Warren might remove the EC, but then we'll hear all Hell breaking loose when the rule of Popular Vote is used to put a Republican in office over a Democrat who otherwise would have won.

Sounds impossible? Wasn't a Trump victory "impossible" also?

Quote

What specifically are you referring to that you find tyrannical about her platform? Not the platforms of other famous socialists but hers.

Hasn't she said, repeatedly, that she will impose these ideals? If elected. Regardless of the Courts. Regardless of the Congress. Regardless of the People. Isn't that basically what she's saying? 

She's said "To return Democracy to America", but she's the one determining what "Return", and "Democracy", mean. Such plays on words are how tyrants have historically gotten into power. What she means is if she is elected, she'll take that as she's been given dictatorial rights to do what she thinks needs to get done. And not with a billion dollar wall, but with the entire Industrial Base of the US, and the entire Health Care industry, and the entire Energy Industry. Hundreds of Trillions of dollars, with HER being the dictator, by way of election, of what is right and wrong. 

You can argue that 4 years later there will be another election. But that same argument is being rejected by those who are against Trump, and insisting we do something now.

[DieChecker]

11 minutes ago, RoofGardener said:

Hmmm.. what do we know about this "Quinnipiac University" ? Are they polling the general populace, the populace within a specific geographical area, or students ? 

*EDIT* AOK.. it appears it's a nationwide telephone poll. https://poll.qu.edu/images/polling/us/us06112019_demos_urox72.pdf/

Nevertheless, I am finding it hard to believe that Elizabeth Warren is currently ahead of President Trump in the polls. Something is screwy here ! 

Democrats believing Telephone polls are what got Trump elected. maybe they're not such a horrible thing then? ... JOKING! I find them repugnant and hang up on every one.

[DieChecker]

43 minutes ago, Farmer77 said:

Giuliani: Trump asked me how to do a Muslim ban 'legally'

He wanted to ban all Muslims, he himself said he wanted to ban all Muslims, his attorney not only said he wanted to ban all Muslims but he then explained how they manipulated the law to make it look like he wasnt trying to ban all Muslims.

Honestly on this topic im much more concerned about the blatant disinformation campaign surrounding the issue than the fact that he wanted all Muslims banned. 

Meh. Here's what I'm seeing out of that....

Quote

‘Put a commission together, show me the right way to do it legally.’

You're seeing aliens flying UFOs, rather then seeing just secret research planes. Seeing Zebras in a herd of horses.

[Tatetopa]

13 hours ago, DieChecker said:

People say Trump is trying to be a tyrant. Warren wants to reshape the entire politics of the USA!! How is that messianic (my opinion on liberal opinion), and not tyrannical? Given as much as 50% of the people wouldn't want those changes.

Trump wants to spend 10 billion to build a wall... TYRANT!!

Warren wants to remove all Healthcare except what the government will control. And.. Wants to control Education entirely also. And... Remove the Electoral College. And... Establish a "net worth" tax.

How tyrannical would those be if Trump wanted them?

It is a campaign platform, a vision of a possible future if enough people want it.  I suppose if enough people think they want it, then she might be elected.  The chances of getting that program through even a liberal Congress are not high,  Now if she could do it with executive orders, that would surpass anything done before.  That might be tyranny.  But of course the Elizabeth true believers would deny it and support her saying she is finally doing right by the middle class true American citizens.  Everything would just be called fake news made up by the Warren-Haters.

Maybe Republicans could get a special investigation going and see if she really has Indian blood and impeach her by claiming Indian nations colluded to all vote and get her elected.

Every year our government gets more detached from the voters and maybe crazier.  In another few years it will be hard to predict what might happen.

[Farmer77]

12 hours ago, RoofGardener said:

Nevertheless, I am finding it hard to believe that Elizabeth Warren is currently ahead of President Trump in the polls. Something is screwy here ! 

Why? He lost the popular vote in 2016 and certainly has only endeared himself to a singular demographic overall since taking office .

[F3SS]

Farmer you're wrong. You guys aren't listening to us and you weren't listening to us in 2016. You guys are terrible at learning lessons.

[Farmer77]

7 hours ago, F3SS said:

Farmer you're wrong. You guys aren't listening to us and you weren't listening to us in 2016. You guys are terrible at learning lessons.

Pssst! I was actually rooting for Trump to beat Hillary ....dont tell anyone though....I mean i did through dozens if not hundreds of posts at the time , but , i have a reputation to keep so dont tell anyone !

On a more serious level though I think a huge part of the problem with Hillary (baggage aside) was that she wasnt liberal enough. Yeah yeah shes the "boogieman" and you hate her because she is slightly to the left of foxnews but in reality, when talking actual policy,  she was republican lite. When it came down to her and Trump there were no real major differences in policy direction that would affect the average non right wing citizen. I think the crop of candidates this cycle will add a level of excitement that hillary and her policies simply couldnt bring.

Booker and his tax credits for renters idea being a good example and we're just getting started!

Edited June 15, 2019 by Farmer77

[Farmer77]

President Trump’s internal polling data from March showed him far behind Joe Biden in key battleground states

Quote

Data from President Donald Trump's first internal reelection campaign poll conducted in March, obtained exclusively by ABC News, showed him losing a matchup by wide margins to former Vice President Joe Biden in key battleground states.

Trump has repeatedly denied that such data exists.

and just for fun

Trump lashes out about being down in internal polls

Quote

"I don't believe those polls. There's no way [former Vice President Joe Biden] beats me in Texas," Trump told ABC News Chief Anchor George Stephanopoulos on Tuesday during an exclusive interview. "No, my polls show that I'm winning everywhere."

 

[+and-then]

On 6/12/2019 at 1:09 AM, DieChecker said:

These polls are always skewed because Trump voters have better things to do then talk to a pollster for 25 minutes, and so they hang up on them.

I can't believe these guys are doing exactly as they did in 2016 and are expecting to be taken seriously? What exactly did they change since last time round? 

I was thinking the same thing but then it occurred to me that this kind of disinformation can be successfully used to set a predicate for Trump "cheating" even before the first vote is cast.  If they take it that far again we're going to have some really rough times ahead.  Calling into question every election result that does not go the D's way is a prescription for anarchy.

[Farmer77]

1 minute ago, and then said:

  Calling into question every election result that does not go the D's way is a prescription for anarchy.

Wait what?

Donald Trump: I Might Not Accept Election Results

[+and-then]

On 6/13/2019 at 3:05 PM, Tatetopa said:

Every year our government gets more detached from the voters and maybe crazier.  In another few years it will be hard to predict what might happen.

I think it will occur NEXT year.  If Trump wins even both the EC and the popular vote it still won't stop them from calling him illegitimate.  Watch it happen.  It's apt to get ugly in some of the Dem-controlled bastions.  Ferguson style.

[+and-then]

Just now, Farmer77 said:

Wait what?

Donald Trump: I Might Not Accept Election Results

Yep, he said it, along with lots of other ridiculous stuff.  He doesn't have many filters but most on the Right see what the Dems have been up to for 2+ years as refusing to accept the will of the voters.  The harder they go after him the more loyal his supporters become.  I believe he has a very good chance of winning another four years and if he does you can look for it to get UGLY.

[Farmer77]

Just now, and then said:

He doesn't have many filters but most on the Right see what the Dems have been up to for 2+ years as refusing to accept the will of the voters. 

Which honestly ive never ever understood.

1 minute ago, and then said:

I believe he has a very good chance of winning another four years and if he does you can look for it to get UGLY.

IDK he really hasnt done anything to expand his base but I think his chances of reelection fully depend on the US education system. If folks are truly paying attention I dont think he will get reelected. If they just listen to headlines then he certainly has a shot. The economy largely being what makes me say that.

Honestly man after the recent Kellyanne debacle ive decided its time to get ready(er) for things to get ugly. There seems to be no end to his disrespect for the rule of law, standards or traditions and considering that his job title very well could be the only thing keeping him out of jail my fear is the necessity for ugly (no not ferguson style)  just might become apparent.

 

[DieChecker]

The leftist side of the media is trying to tell the world that Biden is in free fall and on his way out.

So, then assuming that... I'm thinking Warren might be the candidate. I can't wait to see the 1 on 1 with Trump debates. 

Supposedly Sanders is being Told by the same media sources that he's also Too Old, and on his way out, as well.

[preacherman76]

I think Trump has a great chance. Democrats who have money, own businesses and such will probably hold their noses and vote for him secretly. They don't want their taxes raised anymore then anyone else does.

[DieChecker]

An idea I came up with today....

Get the House and Senate to pass a law that EVERYONE will have to pay 50% of their income, flat tax, and 10% of their wealth, for two months. And see if people really wouldn't mind paying European levels of taxes to support these Utopian dreams. Then after two months the FedGov will give the money back. I think if people EXPERIENCE these taxes... They'll not think they are so great. The people that love high taxes are usually the ones not paying ANY taxes.

Sanders said that he believes people will LOVE paying more taxes once they experience his brave new world.

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/bernie-sanders-americans-would-be-delighted-to-pay-more-in-taxes-for-socialist-policies

Quote

"Yeah, but I suspect a lot of people in the country would be delighted to pay more in taxes if they had comprehensive healthcare as a human right," Sanders said.

"I live 50 miles away from the Canadian border. You go to the doctor any time you want. You don’t take out your wallet. You have heart surgery, you have a heart transplant and you come out of the hospital and it costs you nothing. Your kids in many countries around the world can go to the public colleges and universities tuition-free and wages in many cases are higher."

Yeah, but what Sanders didn't say is that guy waiting on a heart transplant has to wait like two years, and might die during that time. But, in the US it probably would be a matter of weeks.

So, pay nothing and WAIT, and possibly die waiting.

Or, pay plenty, and get immediate treatment.

Personally, I think they just need to open Medicare/Medicaid so that poverty is a qualifier, and not just age and disability. Boom! A few votes taken and DONE!

Edited June 15, 2019 by DieChecker

[Farmer77]

 

56 minutes ago, DieChecker said:

So, then assuming that... I'm thinking Warren might be the candidate. I can't wait to see the 1 on 1 with Trump debates. 

Me either. Out of all the candidates I would want to see she or Mayor Pete on the stage debating Trump. 

The contrast would be a wonderful thing for the American populace to see.

[DieChecker]

I just saw this....

https://www.politico.com/story/2019/06/14/2020-democratic-debate-winners-losers-1365629

Quote

The two front-runners, Joe Biden and Bernie Sanders, will both appear on the same night, based on the DNC’s random drawing Friday. They’ll be joined by two other major candidates, Kamala Harris and Pete Buttigieg.

Only one contender from the Morning Consult poll’s latest top five, Elizabeth Warren, will appear on the other stage.

I think this may set up Warren to dominate one debate and the other will be a feeding frenzy.

Quote

By chance, Warren was left out of the debate featuring most of the other top-polling candidates — an unlucky draw, according to many Democratic strategists.

But NBC News’ decision to run her debate on the first night, when viewership is expected to be high no matter who is participating, is a consolation prize for the surging Massachusetts senator.

The first night’s stage will include former Rep. Beto O’Rourke, as well as Sens. Cory Booker and Amy Klobuchar. For Warren and any of those candidates, not having to contend with Biden and Sanders could give them more room to stand out.

Yeah, Warren has the first debate, so I think she'll get the most viewers too.

Edited June 15, 2019 by DieChecker

[Stardrive]

3 hours ago, DieChecker said:

Sanders said that he believes people will LOVE paying more taxes once they experience his brave new world.

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/bernie-sanders-americans-would-be-delighted-to-pay-more-in-taxes-for-socialist-policies

 

Pay more? To get something for "free"?

[docyabut2]

I think Joe Biden will win ,but Trump will over come him from all those democratic issues.

[Tatetopa]

I was thinking none of these  folks have the charisma and  national stature to beat the Prez.  Something I had forgotten, none of these people have the baggage that Hillary Clinton did and she won the popular vote by 3 million.  Even Joe and Bernie only have one suitcase compared to Hillary's one trunk, two suitcases and a carry on bag of past questionable deeds. If they put some focus on electoral votes, it might get to be a tough race.

[F3SS]

When it becomes a head on with Trump vs the final candidate they better have more than have more than racism and collusion to throw around. If it's Bernie I wonder if he'll be sick and tired of talking about the damn collusion? Trump's gonna have 4 years of actually being president, a record to bloviate, twice the confidence if that's even possible for an ego that size, momentum that hasn't let up since he's been in, zingers and nicknames galore who knows the leverage he may hold with all these deep state investigations if some big names go down.