Election 2020 - Page 45 - Politics Forum.org | PoFo

Wandering the information superhighway, he came upon the last refuge of civilization, PoFo, the only forum on the internet ...

Political issues and parties in the USA and Canada.

Moderator: PoFo North America Mods

Forum rules: No one line posts please.
User avatar
By colliric
#15052672
No he won't drop Pence, this is a batten down the hatches situation. It's less than a year out from November 2020.

I don't think the Democrats really give a shit about this, except if they can somehow use it to win next November.

The election is too close, an impeachment is throughly useless at this point and probably be seen as a waste of time and money.

Trump wants to really run against Warren and everyone knows it. He's expecting Bernie or Biden, but he wants to continue to riff on the Pocahontas angle and we all know it.
By late
#15052677
colliric wrote:
1)No he won't drop Pence, this is a batten down the hatches situation. It's less than a year out from November 2020.

2) I don't think the Democrats really give a shit about this, except if they can somehow use it to win next November.

3) The election is too close, an impeachment is throughly useless at this point and probably be seen as a waste of time and money.

4) Trump wants to really run against Warren and everyone knows it. He's expecting Bernie or Biden, but he wants to continue to riff on the Pocahontas angle and we all know it.



1) Yes.

2) You have that pretty much backwards. Trump is a disaster.

3) Who cares if he cheats his way to a win.

4) Which doesn't explain why he risked everything on that idiotic scheme to use Ukraine to smear Biden.
User avatar
By jimjam
#15052689
blackjack21 wrote:jimjam wrote:Charisma is a powerful wild card. If it is there and is strong, it has an almost magical effect that defies all logic and empirical thinking. BETO seems to have it. Time will tell. I'm not sure Donald will know what to do with him. The usual name calling and cheap shots I doubt will have an effect on BETO. He will operate on an entirely different level than the one Donald is comfortable in and he will not permit Donald to drag him down to the level that Donald is used to operating in. Donald is a good performer who appeals to people's bad angels. BETO is also a good performer who appeals to people's good angels. It will be interesting.

Bless your heart... Of course, this is during a week when Trump's charisma is knocking his opponents silly.


I am impressed by your powers of recall in finding this tidbit and efficient brain functioning #21. I am not so lucky. Two years ago I was hospitalized with seizures and, like many here in Florida, I am now "medicated". My "cognitive" seems fine but large areas of my memory have been wiped out. Old age comes with rule changes and complications but …… you take the hand you are dealt and try to do the best you can with it. Please excuse the detour. My demeanor is, essentially, laid back (lazy :lol: ) I steal extensively the thoughts of others via cut & paste. The quote you quoted hardly represents my "bet" on Beto. I simply put it forth as an opinion/observation of possible interest. I, however, forgive you :eek: . POFO is a well run and fun forum but this format lends itself to misunderstanding.
User avatar
By jimjam
#15052692
Donald seems to have some difficulty getting along with prime minister Trudeau of Canada (and others to say the least). Don has a one track mind ……….. EVERYTHING is about money. Money is obviously of extreme importance but there are many other considerations. in typical Donald fashion he attributes his difficulties with Trudeau to money, " I can see he’s not very happy about it. He’s not paying 2% and he should be paying 2%. Canada – they have money.” Never seems to have occurred to the guy that his personal insults to the men and women he is supposed to be working with may have an effect. He is real good at dishing it out (Trudeau is “very dishonest and weak” …….. "two faced".) But when he is accused of being a wind bag he gets in a tizzy and goes home.
User avatar
By Finfinder
#15052708
jimjam wrote:Donald seems to have some difficulty getting along with prime minister Trudeau of Canada (and others to say the least). Don has a one track mind ……….. EVERYTHING is about money. Money is obviously of extreme importance but there are many other considerations. in typical Donald fashion he attributes his difficulties with Trudeau to money, " I can see he’s not very happy about it. He’s not paying 2% and he should be paying 2%. Canada – they have money.” Never seems to have occurred to the guy that his personal insults to the men and women he is supposed to be working with may have an effect. He is real good at dishing it out (Trudeau is “very dishonest and weak” …….. "two faced".) But when he is accused of being a wind bag he gets in a tizzy and goes home.


Why do you want to give these countries free money when we have poor starving people here in the US?
By Pants-of-dog
#15052711
Finfinder wrote:Why do you want to give these countries free money when we have poor starving people here in the US?


How is the US giving Canada any money?
User avatar
By Finfinder
#15052713
Pants-of-dog wrote:How is the US giving Canada any money?


Is Canada even a country? Also just curious why did you ask me and not the guy who posted it, when I never mentioned Canada?
By Pants-of-dog
#15052714
Finfinder wrote:Is Canada even a country? Also just curious why did you ask me and not the guy who posted it?


You are the one who talked about the US giving “ these countries free money”.

Are you going to explain that?
User avatar
By Finfinder
#15052715
Pants-of-dog wrote:You are the one who talked about the US giving “ these countries free money”.

Are you going to explain that?


Why would I to you when I was clearly responding to another poster about Trudeau. Feel free to start a thread on the subject, this topic is 2020 election thread . Perhaps you wanted to take the heat off that snot bubble of a president you have ,Trudeau, what an embarrassment that guy is. Gossiping like a little school girl and apologizing for more black face photos.(racists)
By Pants-of-dog
#15052716
I do not have a president.

And you do not have an explanation for your claim about free money.

But I bet Trump’s name calling and the way he portrayed himself as the victim of gossip will play well for him when it comes to getting some support from certain groups of conservatives.
User avatar
By Finfinder
#15052737
Pants-of-dog wrote:I do not have a president.

And you do not have an explanation for your claim about free money.

But I bet Trump’s name calling and the way he portrayed himself as the victim of gossip will play well for him when it comes to getting some support from certain groups of conservatives.


I already answered. It should be noted I'm impervious to your trolls that consist of the dishonest strategy of you constantly moving the goal posts and always getting the last word in.

Pants-of-dog wrote:But I bet Trump's name calling and the way he portrayed himself as the victim of gossip will play well for him when it comes to getting some support from certain groups of conservatives.


I'll bet you $100 that Trump will be president for another 4 years. I'm sure you won't take it, which makes your bet, very lame.
User avatar
By BigSteve
#15052746
Pants-of-dog wrote:I think Trump will get re-elected.

After all, you folks re-elected Bush.


Trump will get re-elected because of the abhorrent conduct of the Democrats over the last three years. Political punishment can be harsh, and the Dems are going to feel it...
User avatar
By colliric
#15052748
late wrote:4) Which doesn't explain why he risked everything on that idiotic scheme to use Ukraine to smear Biden.


He's expecting Biden or Sanders, so it does explain it because he's tried a classic political pre-emptive strike. He wants to go up against Pocahontas though, since he's obviously going to have the most fun with her.
By late
#15052753
colliric wrote:
He's expecting Biden or Sanders, so it does explain it because he's tried a classic political pre-emptive strike. He wants to go up against Pocahontas though, since he's obviously going to have the most fun with her.



Since you haven't noticed, women are pissed.

That can backfire.
User avatar
By Drlee
#15052758
@Finfinder Why do you want to give these countries free money when we have poor starving people here in the US?


Pretty cynical comment from a supporter of a president and party that has done nothing but cut money from the poor since they came to office.
User avatar
By colliric
#15052759
late wrote:Since you haven't noticed, women are pissed.

That can backfire.


It didn't backfire last time(granted that was against Hillary Clinton, probably the most hated First Lady and Secretary Of State in recent history). And his support has only dropped %3 amoung women voters since 2016 and we are still outside of the election cycle.
User avatar
By Drlee
#15052761
If it is 3% among all woman voters that is a huge number and a real game changer.


But looking at the woman vote there is a great story to tell. 62% of non college educated white women voted for trump while only 45% of college educated white women voted for Trump. But any way you cut it Trump did well with women. He also took 25% of Hispanic women by the way.

What we can tell from this is that women lied to the pollsters. The numbers looked nothing like this going into the election.

When Blackjack21 and I called the election for Trump before it happened this played into our thinking. At least it did mine. There was simply not enough outrage among women in response to the shit that was thrown at Trump. I concluded that women, and particularly uneducated women, would vote as they were told to. And they did.

How do I know this? Trump did not run on a single issue important to women with the possible exception of some very lukewarm talk about abortion. I have always felt that women, despite what the pundits would have us believe, are far more conservative than they are given credit for. I think that there is a complete misunderstanding of the relationship between evangelical women and their titular owners; their husbands.

It may seem that I am upset about women. Not at all. I am an educated, reasonably affluent, white, Christian male in my 7th decade of life. I am quite capable and certainly quite used to making decisions for women and am prepared to continue to do it for as long as necessary. And as long as necessary means until they get off their bon bon eating asses and take responsibility for their own political decisions. This means that they have to stop asking their husbands, stop watching Dr. Phil, stop listening to the preacher, learn something about politics and go vote and take another woman with them.

But if they want to keep the status quo that is OK by me. It has worked tolerably well for thousands of years. I mean really. Look at uneducated white women in America. They have it oh so good. They don't want no gov'ment hand out for chil'e care. They don't need no good payin' union job. The don't need no affordable health care. Just as long as nobody done take my husbands guns away and put him in another ter'ble takin'.

And college educated white women who voted for Trump. You bitches can't fool me. You don't want equal pay for equal work or family leave to have children. All you want is a caveman in a red tie. You want men to boss you around. 50 shades of republican give you shivers. It IS the natural order of things. Who knew when you went to college to get your Mrs. degree you might someday have to work for a living? Still. Nothing like a confident rich man to occupy one's dream life. In the end you can always put on your tight blouses, hike up the skirt and blow your way to a promotion. Men like Trump are oh so predictable that way. As long as they are one step up the ladder from you its all good for them. Can't have a Yale Law School educated woman like Hillary loosing all of this presumption of the weaker sex for us. The woman is dangerous. Make her president and we are loosing those same thousands of years of excuses, door opening and hubby bringing home the bacon goodness. Not this decade honey, we have a headache.

Like it or not Trump is killing it with white women. He will likely do it again. And he will likely win.
By blackjack21
#15052781
Drlee wrote:1. The biggest mistake is that they are moving WAY to fast.

That's kind of a cosmetic critique that still fails to give Trump credit where credit is due. The Democrat's biggest mistake is signing up to identify politics and abandoning blue collar working class voters. That's a long-term strategic error. Moving way too fast on impeachment is a short-term tactical error. The talking head who personifies middle America's sensibilities on this is FoxNews' Tucker Carlson--not because he's a Christian evangelical, a conservative, or some sort of intellectual. Rather, because Carlson takes the Democratic field at face value--especially with all the transgender and LGBTQ issues, cocks his head, and sort of says, "What the hell is this?" When the Democrats hold an LGBTQ town hall with their candidates, what do you think a Democrat coal miner or an auto worker is thinking? It's sort of the same thing. They just look at the TV like a dog who has heard a strange noise, and they are frankly baffled by what's coming out of the Democratic party these days.

Drlee wrote:2. They should wait for the courts to rule and compel testimony from Barr, Giuliani and others if the decisions fall their way.

What you are mistaking here is that you are assuming the Democrats are serious about impeachment in a legal sense. They aren't. It's strictly a move to try to undermine Trump politically and shore up their scattered base.

Drlee wrote:3. They should push New York to indite{sic} Trump on the many charges they could.

(indict) Again, that's you signing off on the Democratic party strategy of personal destruction. It fails to address why Trump became president in the first place: he spoke to Middle America's issues on trade and immigration. He took on the establishment. The only purpose of NY indicting Trump would be to cripple him politically. The subtext in Middle America is that the establishment hates the political will of the majority of the American people. This is the lesson the Democrats are not learning.

Drlee wrote:They will vote for impeachment and make a lot of speeches.

In the Senate the republicans will turn it into a media circus painting Trump as the victim of a partisan attack.

Exactly. The Democrats have fallen right into a much bigger strategic trap. The Democrats moved way too far to the left in the primaries, and they cannot tack back to the center now in part because of impeachment. In fact, they won't even be addressing issues that concern the American people. That's the genius of this whole thing. The Republicans can make a very simple charge that resonates with the average voter: the Democrats do not care about issues that are important to average voters.

Drlee wrote:The evidence and the truth will have absolutely no effect on the outcome which is baked in right now.

The whole thing was the neocons trying to get back to the White House, but Trump has foiled Biden. What does Biden stand for? What are his political positions? Basically, people now think about how Biden helped his son line his pockets and protected him, while likely selling out the US on trade in places like China. Getting bogged down in detail is beside the point. Like I've said before, as someone who works for a publicly traded company, every year I have to do ethics training. The anti-corruption curriculum could be summed up as "Don't do anything the Clintons or Bidens are doing, as it is either illegal or unethical."

Remember what I said years and years ago about Hillary and the email scandal? She was guilty as a matter of law without question, that she would never be prosecuted for it, and that the media would miss the important part of the story--that her actions undermined US foreign policy by giving adversaries a view into her communications. Putin knew what the US was going to do next. It's literally how Putin was able to annex Ukraine. It's yet another strategic failure. Russia is not a strong point for the Democratic party and neither is Ukraine. Trying to use it as a cudgel against Trump just reminds everybody of the failures of Bush (Georgia) and Obama (Donbass, Crimea, Syria, Libya, etc). Think about this militarily: if you're going to attack someone, you want to do it from a position of strength. The Democrats are attacking Trump on positions where they are quite weak.

Drlee wrote:Trump will be acquitted and will immediately begin a stadium tour proclaiming his "exoneration" to the American people.

Exactly. Meanwhile, Trump is running on his record and the Democrats can't agree on anything save LGBTQ issues, and extreme environmental positions, leaving their erstwhile blue collar working class base scratching their heads.

Drlee wrote:Trump will win election again because the main guy who could have beaten him (Biden) will be down for the count. (The republicans will destroy him in the Senate hearings.)

Beyond politics, Biden doesn't seem to be all there. The neoliberal/neoconservative cabal has run out of viable candidates with Elizabeth Warren trying to run as a crypto neoliberal while trying to mirror Sanders, who strangely has a very solid base of support for a 78-year old socialist.

Drlee wrote:As the democrats see their poll numbers plummet they will be concerned about losing the house again.

That's the other strategic failure. Keep in mind, Democrats won in 2018 in places like Orange County. Why? Republicans didn't repeal ObamaCare, and the tax cuts hurt Republicans in blue states, because of SALT limitations. Killing off the RINOs was a necessary evil for them. They have no incentive to stick with the Democrats in this election cycle. So there are 30 vulnerable seats, and the Republicans are targeting 50! That's not even the half of it. The DNC is effectively bankrupt, while the RNC is flush with cash.

It's not just that Trump is going to win, it's that the Democrats are going to be profoundly distraught, despondent, dejected, demoralized by his victory. They are using every dirty trick in the book, and it's not working.

Drlee wrote:Warren is electable if she would drop the outrageous plans and run hard for the center but she is fucked now because she needs the progressive voters to beat Bernie.

Indeed. That's what I mean. The establishment is using her as a foil. Once again, they will use super delegates to ensure Sanders is toast. However, that will leave fans of the squad deeply disaffected.

Drlee wrote:The democrats are simply screwing the pooch in numbers and the only one who seems to know it and to have predicted it is Pelosi.

Yes, and she's gone along with it to hang on to the speakership, which will likely lead her to the unique historical footnote of being the only House speaker in American history to lose a political majority twice.

colliric wrote:No he won't drop Pence, this is a batten down the hatches situation. It's less than a year out from November 2020.

Right. Pence is not a liability. He also is a bulwark against any residual popularity of Booty Judge.

jimjam wrote:I am impressed by your powers of recall in finding this tidbit and efficient brain functioning #21. I am not so lucky.

Hopefully I have another 20+ years of high functioning. Maybe I'll run for president when I'm 70. :-)

jimjam wrote:Donald seems to have some difficulty getting along with prime minister Trudeau of Canada (and others to say the least).

Well, Trudeau is a most ridiculous man child, but he does represent the Canadian people.

jimjam wrote:in typical Donald fashion he attributes his difficulties with Trudeau to money, " I can see he’s not very happy about it. He’s not paying 2% and he should be paying 2%. Canada – they have money.”

At one time, Canada had the fourth largest navy in the world. Believe it or not, little Canada was formidable.

Finfinder wrote:As I have been saying all along Hillary 2020. Hillary /Booty Judge.

That would be amusing. Gays and lesbians typically hate each other.

colliric wrote:He's expecting Biden or Sanders, so it does explain it because he's tried a classic political pre-emptive strike. He wants to go up against Pocahontas though, since he's obviously going to have the most fun with her.

I don't know. Biden called a 83 year old guy a liar and fat and challenged him to push ups. It wasn't a great moment for him. Biden's sort of affable, but he's obviously kind of out there--biting his wife's finger in front of a crowd, etc. He seems sort of happily out to lunch.

late wrote:Since you haven't noticed, women are pissed.

Like Nancy Pelosi and that crazy bi-sexual Karlan broad we were supposed to find enlightening?

Drlee wrote:But looking at the woman vote there is a great story to tell. 62% of non college educated white women voted for trump while only 45% of college educated white women voted for Trump. But any way you cut it Trump did well with women. He also took 25% of Hispanic women by the way.

Inexplicably to the Democrats, Trump is also stronger with Hispanics and blacks.

Drlee wrote:I concluded that women, and particularly uneducated women, would vote as they were told to. And they did.

Women get pregnant from their husbands and they bear sons. This is not intuitive to Hillary Clinton or people like that Karlan woman who dominate feminist thinking in the Democratic party. Working class women with husbands and sons straight up don't understand that kind of feminism. They are looking primarily for better pay and good working conditions. Careerism isn't their thing. They work because they have to.

Drlee wrote:I have always felt that women, despite what the pundits would have us believe, are far more conservative than they are given credit for.

Women vote like whores when they are single, and reconstituted virgins when they are married. It's like night and day.

Drlee wrote:They have it oh so good. They don't want no gov'ment hand out for chil'e care. They don't need no good payin' union job.

A lot of them never asked for any of that. As I said, many women are not interested in careers, etc. They work for money, because they have to. Feminists--typically lesbians--think more like men and wanted a life outside of a family life they would find stifling. Hillary Clinton personified that with her derisive comments about staying home baking cookies. The welfare state was looking for a way to tax untaxed female domestic labor. You can tax a child care worker and a woman working outside the home. You can't tax a stay at home mom. Frankly, women with multiple children are better off staying at home and doing house work than working outside the home, paying tax, paying for child care workers who are also taxed, and paying for a house keeper who is also taxed. A lot of those women want a good job--for their husbands.

Drlee wrote:You don't want equal pay for equal work or family leave to have children.

Women generally get equal pay for equal work. They just generally don't do as much work. They take more time off than men do.

Drlee wrote:Nothing like a confident rich man to occupy one's dream life.

It's not a bad gig if you can get it. The dream life is being an American dog. Nice digs, good food, no taxes, no mortgages, no payroll to make, everyone loves you and massages you. The downside is the compulsion to sniff the butts of the people and dogs you meet, but otherwise that seems like the dream life.

Drlee wrote:Like it or not Trump is killing it with white women. He will likely do it again. And he will likely win.

He may also do better with black and Hispanic women than many expect. I think the Democrats are headed for what Gartner Group calls "the trough of disillusionment".
  • 1
  • 43
  • 44
  • 45
  • 46
  • 47
  • 57
Election 2020

I am not going to play this game. If you wish to[…]

@Patrickov leaving now may induce a risk that[…]

Trump has been impeached

And I wonder why nobody dares to make a war on Tr[…]

Red Rackham is surprised that the most powerful pe[…]