[late]

you really are not good at this

I do alright.

The campaign this time is a fight between the rich, the corporate wing (Biden, Pete and some wannabees) and the Progressives.

Usually, the establishment types win. But the Progressives have a lot of momentum. Bernie or Liz just might cross the finish line.

This is inherently unpredictable. Liz worked hard, and rose to the top of the pile. And then everyone attacked her, Corporate Dems, other candidates, Republicans, I am pretty sure she got a few Russian trolls.

But that means she's down, not out, although the odds of a comeback are steep.

A lot of this depends on the mood of the voters. Some years the guy that wins Iowa is the guy that wins. They want to rally around a warm body, and they don't care much who that is.

This year, it's a fight (which I've been saying for a couple years). Who is left standing depends on a hundred different things. Luck, the mood of the voters, the mood of the media.

If I had to guess, and I don't particularly want to, I think Pete will come out of Iowa strong. Warren will hang on in NH, maybe not a win, but a good showing. Biden will do well on Super Tuesday, which is usually enough. But between Biden's weakness at campaigning, the energy of the kids, I don't think it will be enough.

These days it always gets settled before the convention. So somewhere in the middle of this overly long catfight, Dems will rally around somebody.

Or not.

[Stormsmith]

I asked who you what Democrat is going to be president?.

When do the Democrats select their candidate?

Biden will do well on Super Tuesday, which is usually enough. But between Biden's weakness at campaigning, the energy of the kids, I don't think it will be enough. 

Thing is, Biden's the only one with a significant amount of international workmanship. Your next president probably will need to reestablish these relationships, however s/he would do well to select a strong economic specialist to deal with the world and Trump's tariff situations which must be contributing to annoying world leaders

[Finfinder]

When do the Democrats select their candidate?

They officially select their candidate in July at the convention but we will know before then .

Here is a good link of the schedule
https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/201 ... endar.html

[blackjack21]

I'm 68, when I get up, my back always hurts. So it takes a while to get to something vaguely normal.

So you're saying Donald Trump is in better shape than you?

They've been running an absolutely crazy bunch of contradictory propaganda attempts. But when things get real, like when Fiona Hill (our top expert on Russia and Putin) testified. She said straight to their faces that (using diplomatic language) that they were lying, and that they were Putin's lies.

Fiona Hill wasn't on the call, never met Trump, never communicated with Trump and didn't offer any direct evidence of impeachable offenses. The rest of it was just window dressing--superfluous and irrelevant.

Republicans could have called witnesses, and mounted a defense.

Schiff controlled the witnesses. Otherwise, you probably would have seen Hunter and Joe Biden testifying.

Everybody knows Republicans are too corrupt, too deep in Putin's pocket, to do their job.

Generally, politicians sell out to people who have more power than they do or can grant them more power than they have. Putin is basically a non-entity in US domestic politics.

Amazing how cowardly the Bernie supporters and the rest of the liberals were to just let Hillary and the DNC rig the primary against him.

And still are. They are running Warren as this year's Hillary (say one thing to Wall Street donors and another thing to the masses) to undercut Bernie Sanders. Obama has already indicated he'll work to undercut Sanders if Sanders grows any stronger; yet, Obama won't endorse Biden.

The campaign this time is a fight between the rich, the corporate wing (Biden, Pete and some wannabees) and the Progressives.

You've got two billionaires running this time. The Democrats are so out of touch with the American voter, it's almost sad to watch.

[Stormsmith]

They officially select their candidate in July at the convention but we will know before then .

Here is a good link of the schedule
https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/201 ... endar.html

Oh, that Is a good site. Thank you

[late]

1) Fiona Hill wasn't on the call, never met Trump, never communicated with Trump and didn't offer any direct evidence of impeachable offenses. The rest of it was just window dressing--superfluous and irrelevant.


2) Schiff controlled the witnesses. Otherwise, you probably would have seen Hunter and Joe Biden testifying.


3) Generally, politicians sell out to people who have more power than they do or can grant them more power than they have. Putin is basically a non-entity in US domestic politics.


4) And still are. They are running Warren as this year's Hillary (say one thing to Wall Street donors and another thing to the masses) to undercut Bernie Sanders. Obama has already indicated he'll work to undercut Sanders if Sanders grows any stronger; yet, Obama won't endorse Biden.


5) You've got two billionaires running this time.

6) The Democrats are so out of touch with the American voter, it's almost sad to watch.

1) Fiona is part of a team, that advances American interests. Which is the opposite of what Trump is doing. Which is what she talked about. Oh and Putin's "fictional narrative". You know, the one you like.

2) Sigh. They could have called witnesses to mount a defense. But there was no defense. Nor could there be one, since the principle has admitted his guilt.

3) "Russia, if you're listening..."

4) You do love your fiction. The establishment Dems have been sticking knives in Liz Warren's back. Perhaps that's true love on your side of the fence?

5) One rich guy dropped out this weekend. They don't have a chance.

6) So out of touch, that the Blue wave in the midterms:

"The 2018 midterms are a massive victory for Democrats, who managed to flip enough Republican-held congressional seats to take back control of the House...."
https://www.vox.com/2018/11/7/18041006/midterm-election-results-democrat-win-house-gerrymander

You write fiction.

[Finfinder]

1) Fiona is part of a team, that advances American interests. Which is the opposite of what Trump is doing. Which is what she talked about. Oh and Putin's "fictional narrative". You know, the one you like.
.

You are delusional Fiona Hill is an unelected bureaucrat appointed by president Obama who works at the will of the president of the United States advancing the elected presidents policies . She is a presidential advisor which is part of the executive branch , and she can be fired for any reason anytime. She should have been out the day Trump was in office. Why do you like unelected swamp bureaucrats so much? I don't care Democrat or Republican we need to do something about these people.

[blackjack21]

You write fiction.

You write disjointed sentence fragments.

1) Fiona is part of a team,{sic} that advances American interests. Which is the opposite of what Trump is doing. Which is what she talked about. Oh and Putin's "fictional narrative". You know,{sic} the one you like.

Trump is president. Trump gets to define America's interests.

2) Sigh. They could have called witnesses to mount a defense. But there was no defense. Nor could there be one, since the principle has admitted his guilt.

Hill made no specific charge. You have simply interpolated that meaning into her irrelevant ramblings and then suggested that somebody, somewhere, for some reason should offer some sort of defense.

3) "Russia, if you're listening..."

Russia doesn't even have a GDP in the top 10 of countries of the world, yet it's the largest country on Earth. People are interested in exploiting Russia, because Russia is too hapless to figure out how to do it themselves. Journalists might sell out to Russia. Politicians are a little more expensive.

4) You do love your fiction. The establishment Dems have been sticking knives in Liz Warren's back. Perhaps that's true love on your side of the fence?

Warren needs to weigh popularity with the masses and the ability to raise funds. Her suggestions of a wealth tax (something I think is hilarious, as I have suggested it before to cripple the hypocrisy of the upper classes) scares the wealthy, who have long been calling for tax increases on the rich (read middle class). A wealth tax is calling them out on it, and that's a good thing. As you already know, Warren isn't going to be president.

5) One rich guy dropped out this weekend. They don't have a chance.

Who? Mike Bloomberg and Tom Steyer are still in it as far as I know.

6) So out of touch, that the Blue wave in the midterms:

Not much of a wave, and one that's going to have quite an undertow as they lied to voters.

[Stormsmith]

You are delusional Fiona Hill is an unelected bureaucrat appointed by president Obama who works at the will of the president of the United States advancing the elected presidents policies . She is a presidential advisor which is part of the executive branch , and she can be fired for any reason anytime. She should have been out the day Trump was in office. Why do you like unelected swamp bureaucrats so much? I don't care Democrat or Republican we need to do something about these people.

From Wiki:

Hill was an intelligence analyst under Presidents George W. Bush and Barack Obama from 2006 to 2009. She was appointed, in the first quarter of 2017, by PresidentDonald Trump as Deputy Assistant to the President and Senior Director for European and Russian Affairs on his National Security Council staff,[8][6][9] and resigned her position on July 19, 2019.[10]

As you can see, she worked for a republican president first, then a democrat. Finally, Trump appointed her. PShe struck me as being apolitical, more interested in law. She went to some pains to point out that Putin is a bit of a stinker, you know, as Romney warned us

[Stormsmith]

Delete

[Finfinder]

From Wiki:



As you can see, she worked for a republican president first, then a democrat. Finally, Trump appointed her. PShe struck me as being apolitical, more interested in law. She went to some pains to point out that Putin is a bit of a stinker, you know, as Romney warned us

correct I was conflating the two Hill and Yovanovitch

Either way Fiona Hill had no testimony that was relevant to this Ukraine Whistle blower phone call. Did you know that Fiona Hill wasn't even working for the president anymore at the time the call took place. She had nothing to offer but her bureaucratic take on the process. This is my major problem these unelected bureaucrats think they solely speak for the United States they do not. They work for the executive branch and speak for the dually elected presidents policies towards various countries. The "process" is not law and the president can use whatever process or channels he wants to communicate with a country. Why should Trump trust any of these bureaucrats there is not only 1 but now 2 coup attempts at his presidency. Hill testified about Russia and confirmed her suspicions of the DNC involvement and her knowledge of the Steal Dossier. BTW I'm betting that Russia probably has meddled in just about every election here in the US. Furthermore a 2 year 30 million dollar investigation took place and found no American colluded with the Russians in particular president Trump.

The truth will come out, it is just on a slow drip, and history is going to show how corrupt the Clintons, the partisan deep state bureaucrats , the executives in the intelligence community, and the DNC really were. This will finally break Democratic party and stain president Obama legacy.

[late]

1) Trump is president. Trump gets to define America's interests.


2) Hill made no specific charge. You have simply interpolating that meaning

3) into her irrelevant ramblings and then suggested that somebody, somewhere, for some reason should offer some sort of defense.


4) Russia doesn't even have a GDP in the top 10 of countries of the world, yet it's the largest country on Earth. People are interested in exploiting Russia, because Russia is too hapless to figure out how to do it themselves. Journalists might sell out to Russia. Politicians are a little more expensive.


5) Warren needs to weigh popularity with the masses and the ability to raise funds. Her suggestions of a wealth tax (something I think is hilarious, as I have suggested it before to cripple the hypocrisy of the upper classes) scares the wealthy, who have long been calling for tax increases on the rich (read middle class). A wealth tax is calling them out on it, and that's a good thing. As you already know, Warren isn't going to be president.


6) Who? Mike Bloomberg and Tom Steyer are still in it as far as I know.


7) Not much of a wave, and one that's going to have quite an undertow as they lied to voters.

1) Sure, why have a democracy where the interests of the people, and the country, matter? Kings don't have to pay attention the interests of their people, or their country... What you want is a king.

2) She said republicans were selling a "fictional narrative". IOW, she said they were lying. They didn't go after her for that because they knew she was right, and she would burn them badly.

3) "ramblings"? She was the smartest person in the room, also the most knowledgeable about Russia and Ukraine. She nailed it. Not only do our intelligence agencies agree with her, a bunch of foreign countries built shiny new cyberdefense programs because they agree with her, because they were also attacked!!

4) You just agreed with me.

5) And a Black man will never be president.

6) I forget the name, it was on the news over the weekend. More to the point, all rich guys have big negatives (over 20%) in the Dem party. Bloomberg is trying to do a Hail Mary, odds are it isn't going to work. Some rich guys have big egos. Really big egos

7) There is an undertow. I will give you that much. But that you haven't figured out that this is why dozens of Republicans have retired, or are simply not running... well, let's not go there.

[blackjack21]

1) Sure, why have a democracy where the interests of the people, and the country, matter? Kings don't have to pay attention the interests of their people, or their country... What you want is a king.

America has a federated republic, not a democracy. Kings do pay attention to the interests of their people and their country, or they do not remain king for long. They just don't require popular consensus.

2) She said republicans were selling a "fictional narrative". IOW, she said they were lying. They didn't go after her for that because they knew she was right, and she would burn them badly.

Even the New York Times reported on Ukraine pulling for Hillary Clinton. Is the New York Times doing Putin's bidding too?

3) "ramblings"? She was the smartest person in the room, also the most knowledgeable about Russia and Ukraine. She nailed it. Not only do our intelligence agencies agree with her, a bunch of foreign countries built shiny new cyberdefense programs because they agree with her, because they were also attacked!!

Well, apparently it wasn't noticed, because everyone else was dumber. I'm guessing foreign countries built their cyberdefenese programs based on substantially more than their agreement with Fiona Hill. For example, I don't think they needed Fiona Hill to tell them that they were attacked.

4) You just agreed with me.

Uh huh. I'm notably nonplussed by the "threat of Russia" outside of hacking information systems.

5) And a Black man will never be president.

Not in 2020. Nor a black woman for that matter.

7) There is an undertow. I will give you that much. But that you haven't figured out that this is why dozens of Republicans have retired, or are simply not running... well, let's not go there.

Do you hear me whining about it. I'm not a big fan of milquetoast Republicans. They are, as Hitler might put it, "useless eaters." Can you think of a single Republican who retired in 2018 that you miss? Paul Ryan was certainly a very capable guy, although I disagreed with him. So many of them decided not to vote to repeal ObamaCare after having done so scores of times when it didn't matter. Useless. Utterly useless people. Who cares?

[late]

1) America has a federated republic, not a democracy.

2) Even the New York Times reported on Ukraine pulling for Hillary Clinton. Is the New York Times doing Putin's bidding too?


3) Uh huh. I'm notably nonplussed by the "threat of Russia" outside of hacking information systems.


4) Not in 2020. Nor a black woman for that matter.


5)Do you hear me whining about it. I'm not a big fan of milquetoast Republicans. They are, as Hitler might put it, "useless eaters." Can you think of a single Republican who retired in 2018 that you miss? Paul Ryan was certainly a very capable guy, although I disagreed with him. So many of them decided not to vote to repeal ObamaCare after having done so scores of times when it didn't matter. Useless. Utterly useless people. Who cares?

1) It's a hybrid.

2) Good start, of course, you haven't even started to make the case... The idea that Ukraine did the cyberattack is batshit crazy.

3) You don't understand, now there's a shocker. All it would take is one country to rush to the defense of Ukraine, or some other state Putin feels like attacking. That would bring in the rest of NATO. We would suddenly be at the brink of WW3.

4) Kamala Harris dropped out today.

5) No one cares. So not the point. The Republican party is devolving into nothing but a bunch of crazies, extremists and racist. They can give up the White Supremacist crazy, or go the way of the Whigs.

[blackjack21]

2) Good start, of course, you haven't even started to make the case... The idea that Ukraine did the cyberattack is batshit crazy.

What cyberattack? Why do you think an attack originating out of Ukraine is batshit crazy? I have patents on anti-phishing, and much of the spear fishing against banks comes out of Ukraine.

3) You don't understand, now there's a shocker. All it would take is one country to rush to the defense of Ukraine, or some other state Putin feels like attacking. That would bring in the rest of NATO. We would suddenly be at the brink of WW3.

It wouldn't bring in NATO unless Russia attacked a NATO country. The Kurds attack Turkey all the time, and NATO doesn't do shit about it. This is why NATO expansion is a dumb idea.

4) Kamala Harris dropped out today.

My powers of perception are poignant, aren't they?

5) No one cares. So not the point. The Republican party is devolving into nothing but a bunch of crazies, extremists and racist. They can give up the White Supremacist crazy, or go the way of the Whigs.

If they give up on the Tea Party and evangelicals, they pretty much have gone the way of the Whigs.

[Rich]

Trump is definitely a real issue for Republicans in general. I'm sure most of them would rather not have to stick by him, but... that's what you have to do to survive in politics.

I'm not a Conservative, a supporter of the GOP, or a Trump fanboi. I don't' support his tax cuts, his meeting s with the NK regime or his demonisation of illegal immigrants. However I'm very happy to defend him in this, ridiculous show trial. I say Show trail, that's the bits haven't taken place in secret KGB style hearings. Its Biden that should be impeached, not Trump. If corrupt Joe was impeached, for his time as VP, then he could be banned from public office. I favour democratic votes, but if anyone is to be disqualified its corrupt Joe.

[late]

I'm not a Conservative, a supporter of the GOP, or a Trump fanboi. I don't' support his tax cuts, his meeting s with the NK regime or his demonisation of illegal immigrants. However I'm very happy to defend him in this, ridiculous show trial. I say Show trail, that's the bits haven't taken place in secret KGB style hearings. Its Biden that should be impeached, not Trump. If corrupt Joe was impeached, for his time as VP, then he could be banned from public office. I favour democratic votes, but if anyone is to be disqualified its corrupt Joe.

Fruit of the poisoned tree..