3 minutes ago, Khan said:

 

Frankly, I'm starting to think it never will.  Or, if it does, it'll be right as Trump finally heads for the exit door, after the 2024 election.  (Provided, of course, Trump isn't allowed to run for a third term).  Then, if a Democrat succeeds as president, he or she will be unfairly blamed for the economic collapse.

 

Just. Like. Obama.

It probably would have crashed or be worse off than it is if the Federal Reserve wasn't pumping Wall Street to prop it up. I wascan imagine what Fox News and the conservative talk radio would be saying if Obama was propping up the economy by the pumping into Wall Street.

https://wallstreetonparade.com/2020/01/federal-reserve-admits-it-pumped-more-than-6-trillion-to-wall-street-in-recent-six-week-period/

Manufacturing is heading for a bad fall too. It's been slowly getting there. It's just we won't see the results until after November. 

8 minutes ago, DRW50 said:

Manufacturing is heading for a bad fall too. It's been slowly getting there. It's just we won't see the results until after November. 

They are already experiencing their own recession and the stupid tariffs certainly haven't helped. Nafta part 2 was  a big waste of time, although it did require wage hikes and improvements on labor conditions in Mexico so I guess good for them.

I know it's petty to enjoy this outright trolling of shitburgers, but I do:

 

 

There's probably both Democrats and Republicans who wish the Clintons would stay out of the election altogether.

Edited January 22, 20206 yr by Khan

17 minutes ago, Khan said:

There's probably both Democrats and Republicans who wish the Clintons would stay out of the election altogether.

 

The Republicans are probably thrilled if she's involved. Democrats not so much, but I don't blame her for just not caring anymore.

1 hour ago, DRW50 said:

The Republicans are probably thrilled if she's involved. Democrats not so much, but I don't blame her for just not caring anymore.

 

Me neither.  If I were Hillary, I would be like, "If you just INSIST on always making me the villain of the story....".

 

Hey, speaking of the vilification of Hillary Clinton:

 

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/tulsi-gabbard-hillary-clinton-defamation-lawsuit-50-million-russian-asset-comment/

 

You know, the problem isn't that the Clintons stay in the headlines.  It's that others keep them there.  If I didn't know that before, I certainly know that now.

 

What purpose does it serve (besides to keep Tulsi's name on everyone's lips as we head into primary season) to dredge up Hillary's remarks and sue her over them?  For that matter, why must the press bring up remarks Hillary made about Bernie in some documentary about the last election, as if she made them only yesterday?  Especially when we have other, proverbial fish -- namely, the impeachment trial -- to fry?

 

Neither Hillary nor Bill are running for office in 2020, nor have they been in actual power since she stepped down as Secretary of State.  Yet, between Tulsi Gabbard, the "mainstream" press and the Republicans' constant invoking of their names like curse words, I'm worried the 2020 election is gonna turn into one more referendum against them.

 

I'm not defending or disparaging the Clintons, by the way.  I'm just saying, why can't everyone else move the hell on?

Edited January 22, 20206 yr by Khan

Considering the fact that Hillary never mentioned Gabbard's name, I'd say Tulsi is going to have one hell of a task proving her claims.  I guess she figures a frivolous lawsuit will bring attention and maybe some campaign cash. The Hindutvas must have closed their wallets and bots don't bring in money, unless you're a web operator. 

I'm repeating myself, but I firmly believe there is a section of Americans who honest-to-God believe Hillary Clinton is somehow responsible for their problems. They have convinced themselves they need a boogeywoman.

8 minutes ago, DramatistDreamer said:

bots don't bring in money, unless you're a web operator. 

 

LOL!  Thank you, @DramatistDreamer!  Under these circumstances, I needed the laugh!

 

(And you're absolutely right.)

 

4 minutes ago, Franko said:

I'm repeating myself, but I firmly believe there is a section of Americans who honest-to-God believe Hillary Clinton is somehow responsible for their problems. They have convinced themselves they need a boogeywoman.

 

I feel like many Americans have never forgiven her for those "I'm no Tammy Wynette!" cracks she made in that "60 Minutes" piece way the hell back in '92 (or whenever), even though she has apologized since then; nor have they forgiven Bill for lying about the nature of his relationship with Monica Lewinsky and neither being removed nor resigning from office (despite the fact that ANY married man would have done the exact same thing under the exact same circumstances).

 

@DRW50's right.  We can't leave the '90's (or even the '80's) behind.  Ever.

Edited January 22, 20206 yr by Khan

When you have Bernie Sanders practically hitting another candidate, I think it's perfectly relevant for his likeability among colleagues and others to be highlighted. In a general election these things would be a problem and make voters feel as if their choices are between two angry, elderly men with delusions of grandeur. Clinton merely voiced an opinion and Sanders supporters are angry because it was a valid one.

10 minutes ago, ReddFoxx said:

Clinton merely voiced an opinion and Sanders supporters are angry because it was a valid one.

 

True.  Definitely true.  And you are right, @ReddFoxx, when you say his likability among colleagues and such needs to be highlighted.  But, guess what?  That isn't what's happening.  Instead of using this opportunity to examine fully whether Bernie is fit to be president in this aspect, they're reminding folks one more time that Hillary is a loud-mouthed c**t and she needs to die.

 

Otherwise, this isn't going to hurt Bernie in any way until or if he becomes the actual nominee; and then, the press will spin Hillary's remarks against him in a way to keep him from being elected.  That way, the Bernie bros and everyone else can go on blaming her for Trump getting re-elected (even though she isn't running again).

Edited January 22, 20206 yr by Khan

In a way, I feel the Boomers deserve nothing less.  After all, they're largely responsible for installing this person in the WH:

 

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/01/22/us/politics/medicare-trump.html?fbclid=IwAR1iifuiwCdE9_FwV8VSl1DP-nn8M8hLzTLtYx9kbz7-KpRLKy9p7XVnIJ4

1 hour ago, Franko said:

I'm repeating myself, but I firmly believe there is a section of Americans who honest-to-God believe Hillary Clinton is somehow responsible for their problems. They have convinced themselves they need a boogeywoman.

 

Total clickbait. Love her or hate her, people are going to read and respond to what she has to say. But yes, there is an unnatural, unjustifiable hatred towards this woman and all the evils she hasn't done. 

 

Sigh... We should've done away with the electoral college after Bush/Gore 2000... 

23 minutes ago, Gray Bunny said:

Sigh... We should've done away with the electoral college after Bush/Gore 2000... 

 

Same.  The fact that we STILL won't seriously consider abolishing it proves how lightly we're still taking everything.