US Presidential Election 2020

[MC Prussian]

8 hours ago, Carl the Llama said:

Still time to give Bernie the nomination, just saying...

The Democrat establishment will never give the nomination to a (former) Communist sympathizer.

In that regard, they're still re-enacting the 60ies.

Progressive my arse.

 

The sooner left-leaning politicians and friends over here realize the Democrats have as much in common with them, as do the Chinese with the Taiwanese, the better.

Edited 4 May 2020 by MC Prussian

[MC Prussian]

6 hours ago, leicsmac said:

Ah, so you're talking about people not voting for Biden and abstaining rather than voting for Trump per se that makes more sense, as I said this costs Dems an advantage on this particular area. Perhaps (again as above) I'm expecting too much to think that voting decisions will be made based on policy rather than glorified reality TV, but what this does mean is that the Dems have to stay away from it and confront Trump on policy decisions as much as they can, because of course he'll use this.

Ok, so what policies has Biden to show for exactly?

 

Apart from groping, that is.

 

Also remember, we're talking US politics here. Entertainment and outrage is already built in, TV demands it.

[MC Prussian]

6 hours ago, Bilo said:

Has there ever been a less inspiring POTUS election than this one? Certainly not in my lifetime, and I remember Gore vs Bush. 

 

Trump has been even more hopeless than even his worst critics feared through this crisis and should be staring at a landslide, catastrophic defeat that leaves the GOP soul-searching over their electoral future.

 

Then along come the Dems to throw him a lifeline with a candidate even worse than Hilary, someone you'd only want to get the gig so Trump doesn't get a second term.

 

I honestly think AOC would have been a more inspiring candidate; at least she's young, Hispanic and has a history of something other than being groomed into wealth despite zero ****ing ability. It's honestly THAT bad.

 

The trouble is that it's tough to find rising stars in US politics. The GOP have gone full tinfoil and appealing primarily to imbeciles, and the Dems haven't a clue how to engage beyond ORANGE MAN BAD. 

 

It certainly puts a different perspective on our politics when we have two party leaders who, while unlikely to feature in anyone's list of greatest ever leaders when the history books are written, can actually articulate coherent political ideas. 

That's what you get for having a two-party system, basically an oligopoly. Given the fact that Americans favour individualism and choice so much, their political progress on a larger scale is still so backwards. Where's a viable third party or even a five-party system, so you have to win majorities across the political borders to make progress?

 

The US political caste, Democrats and Republicans alike, will never vote for a 20-something former bartender as a president. They do have still some sense, if only little.

 

There's hope that we'll be blessed with a more engaging, competent and youthful president than Trump once 2024 comes to an end.

Not that I'm saying Trump isn't competent or engaging.  But the US can do and should do better.

Otherwise, it'll turn into a pre-stage of Idiocracy.

Edited 4 May 2020 by MC Prussian

[Bilo]

1 hour ago, MC Prussian said:

That's what you get for having a two-party system, basically an oligopoly. Given the fact that Americans favour individualism and choice so much, their political progress on a larger scale is still so backwards. Where's a viable third party or even a five-party system, so you have to win majorities across the political borders to make progress?

 

The US political caste, Democrats and Republicans alike, will never vote for a 20-something former bartender as a president. They do have still some sense, if only little.

 

There's hope that we'll be blessed with a more engaging, competent and youthful president than Trump once 2024 comes to an end.

Not that I'm saying Trump isn't competent or engaging.  But the US can do and should do better.

Otherwise, it'll turn into a pre-stage of Idiocracy.

There's just seemingly nobody who you can point to right now in either party and say 'future President.' The Dems were piling forward shocker after shocker, and the GOP has lost all credibility after falling in behind the most incompetent POTUS in living memory, a guy who makes Dubya look like Roosevelt by comparison. 

 

Where they go henceforth is anyone's guess. Whoever wins in November, there'll be no cause for celebration or even expectation that the country will be better run. The place appears to have become a kakistocracy.

 

The trouble is that US politics has been horrendously dumbed down over the past few years. An idiot President with idiot supporters and the Dems having little idea how to counter other than reverting to populist rhetoric themselves. The talking heads are YouTube non-entities like Ben Shapiro "destroying" unprepared college students  only to get humiliated by the grown-ups.

Edited 4 May 2020 by Bilo

[Lionator]

10 minutes ago, Bilo said:

There's just seemingly nobody who you can point to right now in either party and say 'future President.' The Dems were piling forward shocker after shocker, and the GOP has lost all credibility after falling in behind the most incompetent POTUS in living memory, a guy who makes Dubya look like Roosevelt by comparison. 

 

Where they go henceforth is anyone's guess. Whoever wins in November, there'll be no cause for celebration or even expectation that the country will be better run. The place appears to have become a kakistocracy.

 

The trouble is that US politics has been horrendously dumbed down over the past few years. An idiot President with idiot supporters and the Dems having little idea how to counter other than reverting to populist rhetoric themselves. The talking heads are YouTube non-entities like Ben Shapiro "destroying" unprepared college students  only to get humiliated by the grown-ups.

Honestly the best outcome might be Biden winning in November then gets found to be incapacitated for whatever reason and his Vice ends up as president and they happened to be good at it.

 

 

[leicsmac]

5 hours ago, MC Prussian said:

Ok, so what policies has Biden to show for exactly?

 

Apart from groping, that is.

 

Also remember, we're talking US politics here. Entertainment and outrage is already built in, TV demands it.

Not Biden himself, but the Dems themselves are better on science purely because they actually choose to enforce environmental protection legislation some of the time rather than crippling the body that oversees it and letting things get torn up for the sake of a quick buck, for one. They're also (slightly) better at trying to ensure an accident resulting in bad injury or a chance illness doesn't mean a choice between death or a lifetime of debt, and are less in hock to the religious fundies, too.

 

Point taken on the last sentence and also on the fact that the current two-party system over there isn't fit for purpose.

[Milo]

12 hours ago, MC Prussian said:

That's what you get for having a two-party system, basically an oligopoly. Given the fact that Americans favour individualism and choice so much, their political progress on a larger scale is still so backwards. Where's a viable third party or even a five-party system, so you have to win majorities across the political borders to make progress?

 

The US political caste, Democrats and Republicans alike, will never vote for a 20-something former bartender as a president. They do have still some sense, if only little.

 

There's hope that we'll be blessed with a more engaging, competent and youthful president than Trump once 2024 comes to an end.

Not that I'm saying Trump isn't competent or engaging.  But the US can do and should do better.

Otherwise, it'll turn into a pre-stage of Idiocracy.

If he wins this one, what makes you think he will go quietly in 2024? 

[MC Prussian]

7 minutes ago, Milo said:

If he wins this one, what makes you think he will go quietly in 2024? 

There's a term limit in place.

 

What makes you think he'd either walk off the stage loudly, cause a havoc or usurp all power and reign as a dictator until the end of his days?

[Jon the Hat]

13 hours ago, MC Prussian said:

The Democrat establishment will never give the nomination to a (former) Communist sympathizer.

In that regard, they're still re-enacting the 60ies.

Progressive my arse.

 

The sooner left-leaning politicians and friends over here realize the Democrats have as much in common with them, as do the Chinese with the Taiwanese, the better.

They know damn well Sanders will never, every become president.  No more than Corbyn was ever going to be PM.  The poeple remember what Communism and Socialism actually does.

[Jon the Hat]

Just now, MC Prussian said:

There's a term limit in place.

 

What makes you think he'd either walk off the stage loudly, cause a havoc or usurp all power and reign as a dictator until the end of his days?

You can't rule it out entirely, but personally I think he has probably had enough already.

[MC Prussian]

11 hours ago, Lionator said:

Honestly the best outcome might be Biden winning in November then gets found to be incapacitated for whatever reason and his Vice ends up as president and they happened to be good at it.

 

 

Look at this list and tell me which Democrat candidate you find most apt at potentially leading the US starting after the election:

https://ballotpedia.org/Vice_presidential_candidates,_2020

 

There's a whopping 20 women out of 28 candidates, and apart from a few names. I've never heard of them at all.

The track record reads rather poorly for most of these 28.

[Dahnsouff]

13 hours ago, MC Prussian said:

That's what you get for having a two-party system, basically an oligopoly. Given the fact that Americans favour individualism and choice so much, their political progress on a larger scale is still so backwards. Where's a viable third party or even a five-party system, so you have to win majorities across the political borders to make progress?

 

The US political caste, Democrats and Republicans alike, will never vote for a 20-something former bartender as a president. They do have still some sense, if only little.

 

There's hope that we'll be blessed with a more engaging, competent and youthful president than Trump once 2024 comes to an end.

Not that I'm saying Trump isn't competent or engaging.  But the US can do and should do better.

Otherwise, it'll turn into a pre-stage of Idiocracy.

Jarrod Kushner?

[urban.spaceman]

Look at his face he's ****ing fuming 

 

 

 

[The_77]

On 04/05/2020 at 16:41, MC Prussian said:

That's what you get for having a two-party system, basically an oligopoly. Given the fact that Americans favour individualism and choice so much, their political progress on a larger scale is still so backwards. Where's a viable third party or even a five-party system, so you have to win majorities across the political borders to make progress?

 

The US political caste, Democrats and Republicans alike, will never vote for a 20-something former bartender as a president. They do have still some sense, if only little.

 

There's hope that we'll be blessed with a more engaging, competent and youthful president than Trump once 2024 comes to an end.

Not that I'm saying Trump isn't competent or engaging.  But the US can do and should do better.

Otherwise, it'll turn into a pre-stage of Idiocracy.

AOC did a bit more in her early career than just bartend (like most people who have ever bartenders or worked in the service industry when they were younger). She’s now in her thirties but you’re right: Americans will definitely not vote for her since she’d have to be at least 35 to be eligible to serve as President. 

 

 

On 05/05/2020 at 05:55, MC Prussian said:

There's a whopping 20 women out of 28 candidates, and apart from a few names. I've never heard of them at all.

I’d probably work on that before posting like I know know so much about American politics. 😂

[MC Prussian]

9 hours ago, The_77 said:

AOC did a bit more in her early career than just bartend (like most people who have ever bartenders or worked in the service industry when they were younger). She’s now in her thirties but you’re right: Americans will definitely not vote for her since she’d have to be at least 35 to be eligible to serve as President. 

 

 

I’d probably work on that before posting like I know know so much about American politics. 😂

Ok, so she turned 30 half a year ago. Still has the mindset, argumentation and ideas of a 16-year old. Besides, it's not her ideas, it's the ideas of the people who have pushed her to the forefront, as discussed a while ago.

 

Also, she'd actually have to clean up her own closet in her Covid-19-riddled precinct first, and her voters are fed up with her. Curious to find out how she fares comes June and whether she'll be able to keep her local seat.

 

As for the Dems' vice president candidates, some of them I've heard of before, such as Yang (yikes), Warren (please no), Buttigieg, Castro, Harris, Klobuchar or Booker (eurgh), most of them not. And what warrants a place for Michelle Obama? Ludicrous.

How much do you know about the 28 and which one would you favour?

From the outside, it reeks of forced diversification and gender before ability.

[Detroit Blues]

16 hours ago, MC Prussian said:

Ok, so she turned 30 half a year ago. Still has the mindset, argumentation and ideas of a 16-year old. Besides, it's not her ideas, it's the ideas of the people who have pushed her to the forefront, as discussed a while ago.

 

Also, she'd actually have to clean up her own closet in her Covid-19-riddled precinct first, and her voters are fed up with her. Curious to find out how she fares comes June and whether she'll be able to keep her local seat.

 

As for the Dems' vice president candidates, some of them I've heard of before, such as Yang (yikes), Warren (please no), Buttigieg, Castro, Harris, Klobuchar or Booker (eurgh), most of them not. And what warrants a place for Michelle Obama? Ludicrous.

How much do you know about the 28 and which one would you favour?

From the outside, it reeks of forced diversification and gender before ability.

I think something to remember is that it only took one year for Barack Obama to go from a relatively unknown Illinois Senator to winning the presidency in a relative landslide. Most of the popular candidates from both parties are well into their 70s. By 2024 I would expect some new candidates for both sides. 

 

For the Democrats -
Andrew Cuomo (Governor of New York) and Gretchen Whitmer (Governor of Michigan) have stolen the headlines for their role during the COVID -19 outbreak.

Buttigeig did little wrong in his 2020 campaign. I would assume if Biden were to win the election, he would get a cabinet position. He could certainly use some experience working in the white house.

Elizabeth Warren will certainly appreciate being labeled the progressive candidate if Bernie is not running for president. 

AOC will be eligible to run for president in 2024. 

Two more newcomers - Gavin Newsome (Governor of California) and Andy Beshear (Governor of Kentucky). Beshear would tactically make sense, as he won a southern/red state, and might appeal to broad base of support among independents and never-trump republicans.

 

For the Republicans -

If Trump and his followers still owns the Republican Party in 2024 - 

Trump Jr / Ivanka  would be options for obvious reasons. 

Matt Gaetz has been Trump's biggest defender in the House of Representatives. He is loud, brash, and unapologetic. 

Nikki Haley (Trump Cabinet Member / potential VP pick if Trump ditches Pence).

Mike Pence (VP)

 

If Trump loses in 2020, or his popular support dissipates like the tea party movement -

Mike DeWine (Ohio Governor) - has also distinguished himself during the COIVD - 19 outbreak

Mitt Romney (Utah Senator) - voted to impeach Donald Trump. 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited 8 May 2020 by Detroit Blues

[Guest MattP]

People aren't seriously talking about AOC as a genuine candidate for the presidency are they?

 

She's absolutely thick as mince.

[leicsmac]

1 minute ago, MattP said:

People aren't seriously talking about AOC as a genuine candidate for the presidency are they?

 

She's absolutely thick as mince.

That doesn't seem to be much of a barrier to the highest of offices right now tbh.

[The_77]

18 hours ago, MC Prussian said:

Ok, so she turned 30 half a year ago. Still has the mindset, argumentation and ideas of a 16-year old. Besides, it's not her ideas, it's the ideas of the people who have pushed her to the forefront, as discussed a while ago.

 

Also, she'd actually have to clean up her own closet in her Covid-19-riddled precinct first, and her voters are fed up with her. Curious to find out how she fares comes June and whether she'll be able to keep her local seat.

 

As for the Dems' vice president candidates, some of them I've heard of before, such as Yang (yikes), Warren (please no), Buttigieg, Castro, Harris, Klobuchar or Booker (eurgh), most of them not. And what warrants a place for Michelle Obama? Ludicrous.

How much do you know about the 28 and which one would you favour?

From the outside, it reeks of forced diversification and gender before ability.

You’re a bit ignorant of what an individual representative can do (also that she wouldn’t even be eligible to run for President)— much of that responsibility is on city and state governments. 

It says a lot that you’re spouting off this and that about American politics and offering plenty of assumptions and prescriptive measures without having a basic understanding of how the systems work. 
 

Oh, and I also live in one of the neighborhoods of AOC’s district, so, please, tell me more about how her constituents feel. 😂😂😂😂😂😂

 

Actually, don’t. You’re just being a tired know-it-all. But I’m sure you’re impressing someone. 

[MC Prussian]

2 hours ago, The_77 said:

You’re a bit ignorant of what an individual representative can do (also that she wouldn’t even be eligible to run for President)— much of that responsibility is on city and state governments. 

It says a lot that you’re spouting off this and that about American politics and offering plenty of assumptions and prescriptive measures without having a basic understanding of how the systems work. 
 

Oh, and I also live in one of the neighborhoods of AOC’s district, so, please, tell me more about how her constituents feel. 😂😂😂😂😂😂

 

Actually, don’t. You’re just being a tired know-it-all. But I’m sure you’re impressing someone. 

AOC wouldn't be able to run for president NOW, of course. I'm pretty sure she'll be able to stick around long enough in order to come up as a name dropped starting in - let's say - 2032.

 

She isn't the brightest, the Green New Deal still lingers, and she's being pushed by a whole group of people to advance their agenda left of the Democrats. Remember that she was chosen to run against Crowley in what you could describe as an audition.

She is responsible for her precinct and most of the constituents don't agree with her democrat socialist mindset, based on an April 2019 poll:

https://www.businessinsider.com/alexandria-ocasio-cortez-voters-like-policies-not-socialism-2019-4?r=US&IR=T

 

And with regards to the handling of Covid-19 in her precinct:

Quote

Public persuasion is more important than any individual vote.

https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2020/04/alexandria-ocasio-cortez-congress-coronavirus-interim-relief-bill

 

Feel free to weigh in with some actual insights, instead of quasi ad-hominem attacks. Much appreciated.

 

For example, we could debate Cabrera's argument against AOC - her not advancing any bill, not bringing in any money since she went Washington:

Quote

She prioritizes broad, attention-grabbing national issues over constituent service, and when she tries to solve problems that are, arguably, far outside her remit as a freshman congresswoman, her commitment is purely rhetorical. Or, as Cabrera puts it, “she doesn’t show up.”

 

Quote

... both police precincts that are entirely encompassed by the 14th congressional district have experienced more than twice as many gun deaths in 2019 than in the year prior, according to weekly NYPD crime reports.

https://www.nationalreview.com/2019/10/fernando-cabrera-social-conservative-democrat-challenges-alexandria-ocasio-cortez/

[MC Prussian]

4 hours ago, leicsmac said:

That doesn't seem to be much of a barrier to the highest of offices right now tbh.

Was it ever? For every Winston Churchill, there's a Neville Chamberlain.

Germany elected an irate, sick second-rate WWI veteran to lead them to alleged glory in 1933.

 

Thanks to the media and the internet, we now have more access to pretty much everything that reporters can get their hands on. No matter how relevant.

Imagine the field day we could've had with George Walker Bush before 2004.

Edited 8 May 2020 by MC Prussian

[Guest MattP]

5 hours ago, The_77 said:

Oh, and I also live in one of the neighborhoods of AOC’s district, so, please, tell me more about how her constituents feel. 😂😂😂😂😂😂

 

Actually, don’t. You’re just being a tired know-it-all. But I’m sure you’re impressing someone. 

Living somewhere doesn't automatically mean you are omniscient about local politics and how the electorate are moving.

 

I've got a Labour supporting friend in Bolsover who refused to even contemplate Dennis Skinner could lose in December, even when I sent him odds, polling of him in trouble he just told me it was nonsense and he knew he was fine as he "lived there".

 

(I have no idea on AOC btw and aren't putting an opinion on her, only thing I know is a lot of left wing incels fancy her and she's a bit dim - the famous economist Milton Keynes )

[leicsmac]

6 hours ago, MC Prussian said:

Was it ever? For every Winston Churchill, there's a Neville Chamberlain.

Germany elected an irate, sick second-rate WWI veteran to lead them to alleged glory in 1933.

 

Thanks to the media and the internet, we now have more access to pretty much everything that reporters can get their hands on. No matter how relevant.

Imagine the field day we could've had with George Walker Bush before 2004.

Fair point well made.

 

Social media has certainly acted as a "force multiplier" of sorts on that score, I think.

[The_77]

5 hours ago, MattP said:

Living somewhere doesn't automatically mean you are omniscient about local politics and how the electorate are moving.

 

I've got a Labour supporting friend in Bolsover who refused to even contemplate Dennis Skinner could lose in December, even when I sent him odds, polling of him in trouble he just told me it was nonsense and he knew he was fine as he "lived there".

 

(I have no idea on AOC btw and aren't putting an opinion on her, only thing I know is a lot of left wing incels fancy her and she's a bit dim - the famous economist Milton Keynes )

Plenty of right-wing incels do to. And everyone has a friend like that— I’m not claiming to be omni-prescient but I have a helluva lot more experience with the people of these neighborhoods than he ever will (he also posted two articles as sources that don’t back up his points). 

[The_77]

9 hours ago, MC Prussian said:

AOC wouldn't be able to run for president NOW, of course. I'm pretty sure she'll be able to stick around long enough in order to come up as a name dropped starting in - let's say - 2032.

 

She isn't the brightest, the Green New Deal still lingers, and she's being pushed by a whole group of people to advance their agenda left of the Democrats. Remember that she was chosen to run against Crowley in what you could describe as an audition.

She is responsible for her precinct and most of the constituents don't agree with her democrat socialist mindset, based on an April 2019 poll:

https://www.businessinsider.com/alexandria-ocasio-cortez-voters-like-policies-not-socialism-2019-4?r=US&IR=T

 

And with regards to the handling of Covid-19 in her precinct:

https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2020/04/alexandria-ocasio-cortez-congress-coronavirus-interim-relief-bill

 

Feel free to weigh in with some actual insights, instead of quasi ad-hominem attacks. Much appreciated.

 

For example, we could debate Cabrera's argument against AOC - her not advancing any bill, not bringing in any money since she went Washington:

 

https://www.nationalreview.com/2019/10/fernando-cabrera-social-conservative-democrat-challenges-alexandria-ocasio-cortez/

1. You decided and then claimed that her constituents are fed up with her. The Business Insider piece you linked shows that the majority of her constituents support most of her positions and that the majority of her constituents *approve* of the job she’s doing. In fact, “With a 52% approval rating, the congresswoman had higher net favorability rating than any other major politician in her state, including Gov. Andrew Cuomo, Sen. Chuck Schumer, and Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand. She also had a slightly higher net favorability than House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, the Siena poll found.”

 

Now you moved the goal posts to say that most of her constituents aren’t socialists. Of course that’s the case. We could probably say that about every district in the country. 😂

 

Also, Business Insider? Really?

 

2. That Vanity Fair piece doesn’t show any evidence of AOC’s mismanagement of the COVID-19 crisis in the Bronx. If anything, the last few weeks prove she was right: the stimulus bill was indeed “a Band-Aid over a gunshot wound.” We’re at Great Depression levels of unemployment and joblessness. 
 

The article also suggested that, considering the constituents she represents, she was “warranted” to speak out against the bill. 
 

3. If Fernando Cabrera gets within 15 points of AOC on primary night, he can count that as a victory. We’ll see what happens but judging by his quotes in the National Review piece, he can’t even count the number of Democrats in the U.S. Senate. 
 

AOC is not perfect and I’m not here to be her campaign surrogate; I was calling you out on all the BS you’re spouting (and continue to spout) on this thread, and you couldn’t back up an ounce of it. 
 

I’m also not here to give you a lessons in American civics, so have a nice rest of 2020 on this thread. 

P.S. I would never imagine daring to come on here acting like an expert on British politics, and I certainly wouldn’t dare to make claims about the whims of a political district from another country (and not to someone who’s from there), especially if I had to resort to haphazard google searches to try to back up my points. 

Edited 9 May 2020 by The_77
Added a little post script