Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

Posts posted by Juliajms

  1. 15 minutes ago, ReddFoxx said:

    Warren could have a surprisingly good showing in Nevada thanks to her debate performance and her calling out Bloomberg might have helped Biden a lot on Super Tuesday.


    I'm not sure how it will actually go over with voters, but Sanders' comment about having a summer camp made him seem a lot more out of touch than he portrays himself. He's not a billionaire, but he is still much more financially secure than most working and middle class Americans.

    That's certainly true, but it's hard to imagine any credible candidate running for president who isn't. His campaign needs to come up with a way of differentiating between having a few million dollars at the end of your life, versus having two billion dollars in income every year, simply by being alive (which Bloomberg does). Income that is in fact taxed less than the income of people who actually work for their money.  It's the difference between working for your money and having your money work for you (Thank you Claire Huxtable).


    Not that I mind Bernie taking that hit. He is such a divisive figure, I won't be surprised if we lose again in part due to his idiot Bernie Bro supporters, no matter who ultimately gets the nomination.



  2. 36 minutes ago, DRW50 said:


    I think Klobuchar's recent rise has made people see them as more valid, but I think they mostly provide short-term boosts. All I know is I'm sick of them and I think they're a big reason why turnout is down and why so many people can't stand any of the candidates.

    And at this point, I'm sad to say I really can't, except Warren who doesn't seem to have much of a chance.  It really annoys me that once again we have to pick between people who are differing levels of racists and/or misogynists.


    That piece on how Bloomberg treated women in his company was disgusting. Does it make me a purity pony to want a president who doesn't suggest happily pregnant women "kill it" to further his business interests? Then punishes them when they don't?  If so, that's what I am. Yes, I would still vote for him, but why can't we do better? Every one of these septuagenarians in the lead have varying degrees of issues with women and/or POC.


    Right now my ranking is Warren, Biden, Buttigieg, Bloomberg, whoever. I feel like the chances are very high that I'm going to have to pull the lever (again) for someone I know disdains me, but I imagine most of us here are used to that on some level.

  3. 38 minutes ago, DRW50 said:

    Some truly sickening people went to a Biden event today with a coffin. I'm not going to blame any campaign for this as there's no real evidence of who the group supports, but it's just another reminder of why I don't consider myself very tied to what this party has become.



    But really, I bet it was Bernie Bros. Would anyone else go this far?

  4. 18 hours ago, Khan said:


    Same.  I mean, a Russian bot over Donald Trump?  Couldn't I "write in" someone instead?  Please?

    Thank god she truly doesn't have a chance. As it is I can't believe we might have to choose between furthering the oligarchy (Bloomberg) and going so far left that it could end up nearly as dangerous as the far right (Bernie).


    I'm with Vee in thinking that Bernie isn't evil or dangerous, but then he doesn't have power yet. I'm not sure I trust what that will look like given the way the GOP crumbled for power. Would average Democrats do the same? That's the danger imo.

  5. 1 hour ago, Khan said:


    Exactly.  We have to remember this is just one primary (and caucus).  Yes, I include myself.


    For all we know, by this time next month, we could be looking at Tom Steyer or even (GOD! NO!) Tulsi Gabbard as the front-runner.  That probably won't happen, lol, but you never really know.

    Now that would test me when it comes to vote blue no matter who. I still would though.


    Here's some good news:


  6. 20 minutes ago, Khan said:




    I also remember people accusing Bloomberg of creating a "nanny state" with the reduction or elimination of many sugary beverages, and the demand for fast-food and other restaurants to begin printing the number of calories in each dish for consumers.  (There was also some brouhaha over the passage of some ordinance that outlawed smoking outside public buildings?  I didn't pay close enough attention, so I might have that wrong).  Even today, that type of legislation seems a bit...excessive.  But, I get where Bloomberg was coming from.  Obesity isn't just an epidemic.  It's a public health crisis that continues to put enormous strains on our hospitals and healthcare industries, and it needs to be treated as such.

    That did annoy me at first, but I have to admit it changed the way I eat at restaurants.  When you see those numbers staring back at you it can be hard to justify eating some of that stuff. Some of the soup at Panera is nearly 800 calories for pity's sake.


    None of that is here nor there though. I would absolutely vote for Bloomberg if he's the nominee. It would disgust me to have another billionaire president, but so be it, I'll take him over Bernie.

  7. I can't defend JC, but this part was funny.


    Are we really sure Sanders can’t win?

    James Carville:

    Who the hell knows? But here’s what I do know: Sanders might get 280 electoral votes and win the presidency and maybe we keep the House. But there’s no chance in hell we’ll ever win the Senate with Sanders at the top of the party defining it for the public. Eighteen percent of the country elects more than half of our senators. That’s the deal, fair or not.

    So long as [Mitch] McConnell runs the Senate, it’s game over. There’s no chance we’ll change the courts, and nothing will happen, and he’ll just be sitting up there screaming in the microphone about the revolution.

    The purpose of a political party is to acquire power. All right? Without power, nothing matters.

  8. 1 hour ago, JaneAusten said:

    James Carville who I am no lover of said it on MSNBC. Trump gets wiped out in the 2018 elections, they lose 7 governorships, lose both houses in Virginia to democrats last year, 2 more governorships in states where Trump campaigned right before (in KY Bevin polled 5 points ahead of Brashear before Trumps visit), yet Trump is winning. He said MSNBC where he was appearing must be in the tank for Trump if they think that's winning while looking directly at Stephanie Ruhle. She was speechless.


    I suppose if all those election losses are a win for Trump then he's winning. The issue is that Trump doesn't really care about anyone else losing.



    But speaking of Carville he certainly doesn't sound all that high on the Democrats 2020 prospects in this interview.


    In fact he seems to think they are f*cking it up and I'm not sure he's wrong. I think he made some solid points, especially about Bernie Sanders. He's pretty funny on that topic. I've always liked his personality, but if the behind the scenes stuff is true that's obviously problematic.

  9. 11 hours ago, marceline said:


    The sad truth is that it's entirely possible that Trump, Bernie, or Biden might not live to see election day. At least Biden seems relatively healthy. The other two scream "borrowed time."

    Good Lord, if that isn't the truth. Let's just pray that if Biden has to go it's after the damn election.

  10. 1 hour ago, Khan said:



    I realize we have to "vote blue, no matter who," but Bernie and his cult members do NOT make it easy.

    The farther we get into this process the fewer of these people I actively want to vote for. I will, but it's more a vote against Trump than a vote for any of them.

  11. 4 hours ago, DramatistDreamer said:

    Is this the country that Americans want?


    It's the country that nearly half the voters either want or will tolerate. I've mostly come to accept that, even though it's stunning. Sadly, this is where Fox news, the internet and ignorance has brought us.


    I just saw that a doctor who warned people about the virus in China has just died of it after being arrested for telling people the truth.  Now here we are punishing people for telling the truth. What could go wrong?

  12. ^ What a complete clusterf*ck. I have to admit it, I don't have confidence in the results we've been given. I certainly don't think there was a conspiracy against either of these candidates, I just think it comes down to utter incompetence. I want to slap whoever let this happen.

  13. 4 minutes ago, Khan said:

    Hey, anything's better than what we've been doing!  Anything!

    I agree.  I think there was a time decades ago when it was nice for voters to get an intimate look at candidates via their interactions with small town locals. The country has changed so much in the last 40 years though. Not just in terms of race, but in terms of urbanization. I don't see how anyone can continue to justify letting these small places have an out-sized influence.


    Plus, most of what was real about seeing the candidates meet so many people and press the flesh has been lost anyhow. It has an air of reality TV about it now. You just know that images are being crafted and polished by consultants and it's all about image and perception.


    As for Mitt Romney, I don't see anyone who stands against Trump as a hero. It does make me happy that it wasn't a completely partisan vote however. It's like McCain and the healthcare vote, every once in awhile someone's conscious comes up for air, but doing the bare minimum right thing does not a hero make.

  14. 3 hours ago, marceline said:

    For all the talk about Trump being re-elected, it's pretty obvious that he's in poor health. Watch this clip first for the word slurring then watch it again with the sound off. Notice his death grip on the podium and the muscle spasm in his back. Whatever drugs they have him on are getting less effective. This dude is dying in front of us and no one in the press will talk about it.



    Well if he is, I wish he'd do it a bit faster.

  15. 1 hour ago, DRW50 said:


    Biden had fallen in polling toward the end and had stopped contesting the state as much...a part of me thinks well that's just Iowa, but he has so little money and no real momentum. I'm hoping South Carolina will turn his campaign around but it's what happens after where I'm more wary. 


    If any other centrist alternative was viable he'd probably be done soon, but they aren't. 

    That worries me too. Even though I live very close to Iowa, I'm not that familiar with the politics of the state. I would not have expected them to have enough people on the far left to support both Sanders and Warren as strongly as they did.


    I'm so eager to return to what I see as perceived safety it surprises me that other people aren't as well. It shocks me that so many people are up for another "revolution" or willing to take a chance on someone so inexperienced for that matter. Typical bias on my part I suppose.

  16. Maybe this will be the final nail in the coffin when it comes to Iowa going first.  I understand that people who have been covering elections forever have a certain nostalgia when it comes to IA and NH, but it's time to move on from these places getting the first crack at it.

  17. 4 hours ago, DRW50 said:


    I learned a little while ago that a close relative of mine passed away, so I'm not in a mood to say what I might have said. I will just say I hope he won't suffer and he uses this time as a period of reflection.

    Here's how I feel about it.


  • Create New...