Election 2020 - Page 64 - 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 JohnRawls
#15067131
Drlee wrote:Ok. So here is the deal. There is no way that the Vice President of the United States should have allowed, not to mention facilitated, his son's being employed by a foreign company.

Any Roman Catholic will tell you......Avoid sin and the near occasion of sin.

Buttigieg is the almost perfect candidate. He is a genuine Washington outsider. He is young. He is handsome. He is a good speaker. He graduated Magna cum Laude, Phi Beta Kappa, Rhodes Scholar, received a Masters of Arts degree with first-class honors in philosophy, politics, and economics after studying at Pembroke College, Oxford. War veteran former naval officer. He is a former consultant and perfectly acceptable to the business community. Fellow at the Truman Institute. Party insider and candidate in 2017 for DNC Chairman. He is a practicing Christian and the very best Episcopalian flavor. He plays piano and guitar. He is happily married and that is what makes him unelectable. He is married to a dude.

But you know what? The world is full of democrats every bit as qualified as he is. The democrats just can't bring themselves to hire one. Now if they could just fine an overweight, Native American, lesbian to run with him the democrats will be in heaven. Out of office but oh so smug.


I don't think that him being married to a dude is such a large disadvantage or advantage that everyone makes it out to be. Most people will frankly not care that much.
User avatar
By fokker
#15067632
There is speculation flying Bloomberg is considering Hillary Clinton as his VP. Biden is a flop so Bloomberg could represent the traditional corporate Democrats that although hated by progressives, they did manage to win primaries last time and also get more votes overall than Trump in the last presidential elections. I find this combination quite likely.

User avatar
By maz
#15067700
fokker wrote:There is speculation flying Bloomberg is considering Hillary Clinton as his VP. Biden is a flop so Bloomberg could represent the traditional corporate Democrats that although hated by progressives, they did manage to win primaries last time and also get more votes overall than Trump in the last presidential elections. I find this combination quite likely.


I am going to go on the record here and say that a Bloomberg/Clinton ticket is just not going to happen. For one, they might win California, New York and some of the coastal states but they would lose the entire midwest and most of the south.

Second, they are both well documented to have said disparaging things about black street criminals, and rightly so, but their critics will take this to mean that they mean ALL black people instead of just the criminals.
User avatar
By blackjack21
#15067716
late wrote:After I posted that, I realised you wouldn't know. Although that's not how I first phrased it. When a bank is thinking about loaning millions, they will go through your financials with a fine tooth comb.

It's a hotel. Naturally, they have a security interest in the hotel.

late wrote:No other bank on the planet would touch Trump with a hundred foot pole. He was toxic.

He was making $50M a year on his television show alone. Generally, when you have a $50M income, banks will touch you. They'll fall all over themselves to get your business.

late wrote:What you need to know is that VTB is a slush fund for Putin's dirty fun.

You do realize that Russia is a sovereign country, right? It's not subject to US law. So "dirty fun" doesn't mean anything in US law. Nor does VTB depositing funds with Deutsche Bank.

late wrote:And Deutsche Bank got fined millions for playing dirty under the table games with VTB, meaning Putin.

It was a stock trading scheme that involved their US branch and US stock markets. Under sanctions, sanction targets cannot use US markets.

What you guys are dreaming up is this idea that Russia put say $100M into Deutsche Bank and Deutsche Bank turned around and lent $100M to Donald Trump. Fractional reserve lending doesn't work like that. You guys are grasping at straws here.

late wrote:Get me a Dem attorney general, and providing the proof will be as easy as pie. Or pi.

It next to impossible to prove something like that, because that's frankly not how banking works. If Donald Trump received a loan from Deutsche Bank, his business relationship is contractually with Deutsche Bank, not some depositor. Maybe some Russian owns the note on my house, but I don't write checks to some Russian. I write it to Cenlar. If I default, they will come after me, not some Russian. You guys have a really weird idea of how banking systems work.

JohnRawls wrote:I don't think that him being married to a dude is such a large disadvantage or advantage that everyone makes it out to be. Most people will frankly not care that much.

Evangelicals care, blacks care, Hispanics care and conservatives care. When California voters voted against gay marriage, the Democrats were shocked because black voters voted with Republicans. Watch @late's reaction after November when his "Black voters are the most pragmatic voters in the country" comes back to bite him. Trump promised black voters lower unemployment and he delivered. He also didn't promise prison sentencing reform, but he did that too with Senator Tim Scott of South Carolina with prodding from Kanye West and Kim Kardashian. Trump can successfully campaign for black votes, whereas for many Republicans it's a lost cause.

fokker wrote:There is speculation flying Bloomberg is considering Hillary Clinton as his VP. Biden is a flop so Bloomberg could represent the traditional corporate Democrats that although hated by progressives, they did manage to win primaries last time and also get more votes overall than Trump in the last presidential elections. I find this combination quite likely.

If he doesn't want to be dead six weeks after inauguration, I'd think it a bad idea. People have a habit of getting dead around the Clintons. Maybe he'd try to win and then resign--letting Hillary become president.

He does have to be taken seriously for no other reason than he is spending one hell of a lot of money. He's already spent $300M. That's 4 times as much as Trump spent of his own money for the entire campaign. Word has it he's willing to spend up to $2B of his own money on this campaign. That's relevant, because there is nothing liberals love more than other people's money.

maz wrote:I am going to go on the record here and say that a Bloomberg/Clinton ticket is just not going to happen. For one, they might win California, New York and some of the coastal states but they would lose the entire midwest and most of the south.

Yeah, it may be more to fire up Hillary's base than anything else. Although, Hillary wants to kill off Sanders again. It is a humorous video though. The leading Democrat is an independent socialist and the #3 candidate (if we believe the polls) is a multi-billionaire Republican Mayor of New York who suddenly decides he's a Democrat, because Trump won. The Democrats have no soul left.

maz wrote:Second, they are both well documented to have said disparaging things about black street criminals, and rightly so, but their critics will take this to mean that they mean ALL black people instead of just the criminals.

Ungenerously, Bloomberg said minorities committed ALL of the crimes, so he put ALL of the cops in their neighborhoods. He's on tape saying that, so it will be a nice Trump campaign commercial as he juxtaposes his First Step Act with Bloomberg's openly racist comments. While I find it hard to believe that Democratic voters would go for Bloomberg, a contested convention might, because he can pay everyone off rather easily. Bribing public officials is a crime. I rather doubt bribing party leaders is a crime.
User avatar
By Wulfschilde
#15067749
Image
Bernie my bro please save some states for the rest of us.

A topless DNC plant recently stole Bernie’s mic to talk about saving the cows. So obvious.

Meanwhile, Trump is literally doing laps on the Daytona 500 in the Presidential limousine.

You can tell who really cares about America.
User avatar
By Donna
#15067750
The cruelty of the dairy industry eh. Those cows should try being a human for a day.
User avatar
By Wulfschilde
#15067751
We live in a factory farmed society
We live in a factory farmed society
Only old men have notoriety
Why is healthcare free for the old and not the young
All I want to do is have fun
Raaaooooaaaaarrrrggh
Mooooooooooooooooo!
By Hindsite
#15067752
Wulfschilde wrote:We live in a factory farmed society
We live in a factory farmed society
Only old men have notoriety
Why is healthcare free for the old and not the young
All I want to do is have fun
Raaaooooaaaaarrrrggh
Mooooooooooooooooo!

I am 75 years old and my wife is 72 and I can tell you for a fact that healthcare is not free for us even though we have Medicare insurance. We both have to pay for that insurance every month by deduction from our Social Security. We even paid for it every month for around 40 years before we could use it. So stop believing all the lies you hear from Bernie Sanders and his bunch.
User avatar
By Godstud
#15067755
Yes, @Hindsite, and you'll happily vote against your best interests time and time again, because you believe the lies about rich people giving to the middle class, or corporations having your best interest at heart. :roll:

No one said it would Universal healthcare is "Free". But you'd be paying a great deal less if you DID have Universal healthcare. It's covered by taxes, for the most part, but you're still in a very expensive country for healthcare(about twice that of comparable healthcare in a Universal Healthcare System).

The "free" part would be when you have to go to the hospital, you won't have to check for pre-existing conditions or for coverage of this, or that. It's called "Peace of Mind".

Yes, I know the costs:
https://www.cnbc.com/2019/05/02/if-near ... -free.html

Note: Trump did help farmers. He spent more bailing them out than Obama did with the banks, and farm bankruptcies are higher than ever.

Farm Bankruptcies Rise Again
Chapter 12 Filings Increase 24% Compared to Year-Ago Levels
https://www.fb.org/market-intel/farm-ba ... rise-again

I can't see any farmers with a lick of sense voting for Trump in 2020.
User avatar
By Wulfschilde
#15067763
Wait it’s not free? What the fuck is this. I’m going to demand my money back if it isn’t free I thought that was the point. Why are we doing this if it won’t be free?
By late
#15067776
blackjack21 wrote:
1) It's a hotel. Naturally, they have a security interest in the hotel.


2) He was making $50M a year on his television show alone. Generally, when you have a $50M income, banks will touch you. They'll fall all over themselves to get your business.


3) You do realize that Russia is a sovereign country, right? It's not subject to US law. So "dirty fun" doesn't mean anything in US law. Nor does VTB depositing funds with Deutsche Bank.


4) It next to impossible to prove something like that, because that's frankly not how banking works. If Donald Trump received a loan from Deutsche Bank, his business relationship is contractually with Deutsche Bank, not some depositor. Maybe some Russian owns the note on my house, but I don't write checks to some Russian. I write it to Cenlar. If I default, they will come after me, not some Russian. You guys have a really weird idea of how banking systems work.



5) If he doesn't want to be dead six weeks after inauguration, I'd think it a bad idea. People have a habit of getting dead around the Clintons. Maybe he'd try to win and then resign--letting Hillary become president.



6) The Democrats have no soul left.





1) And he still doesn't understand, or at least pretends not to.

2) Trump is spectacularly good at losing money. What I said was true, there was only one bank on the planet that would touch him, and that was because of Putin.

3) If Putin has someone killed, they send the killers abroad and pay for them with his slush find, VTB. He does it through money laundering, which ain't legal here or in Europe. But keep defending Putin, it makes the betrayal a little more obvious.

4) The investigation side of the case is mostly done already. Deustche Band got fined for money laundering, and Trump was a beneficiary.

5) So you think lies get better with age, like wine. They don't, but they do tell us something about you.

6) Just for the sake of appearances, you really should try to restrain your impulse to project.
By late
#15067777
Wulfschilde wrote:
Why are we doing this if it won’t be free?



1) Because the country, as a whole, will spend billions less every year.

2) Because it will get millions preventative care that will keep millions healthier. Which will, over the long run, will save us billions more.

3) Because one of the major causes of bankruptcy is health care expenses. That's like a lottery, and in most developed countries, that doesn't happen.

4) Because we have diseases spreading that are poor country diseases. Nasty ones like TB.

It's a national disgrace. We have the most expensive health care in the world, and overall, other countries do better spending half what we do.
User avatar
By JohnRawls
#15067779
@blackjack21

Around 80% of people don't mind voting for a gay candidate in general or voting for Buttigeg in particular as long as they can agree with the policies, etc. If i am not mistaken 80 to 20 is the statistical standard deviation for non-biased issues. (Basically around 20% will always be against while 80% will vote/consider it)
User avatar
By blackjack21
#15067818
late wrote:1) And he still doesn't understand, or at least pretends not to.

I understand perfectly. The point is that a loan from a bank on real property is not money laundering. You people and your Russophobia aren't going to persuade with that one. How many times do you have to fail before that becomes clear to you?

late wrote:2) Trump is spectacularly good at losing money.

That doesn't change the fact that he was making upwards of $50M a year. It's more than you or I have ever made. It also wasn't in real estate. It was in television.

late wrote:What I said was true, there was only one bank on the planet that would touch him, and that was because of Putin.

That's fantasy. You are assuming Putin only does business with one bank. Try Cyprus. Even Robert Mueller was looking there.

late wrote:3) If Putin has someone killed, they send the killers abroad and pay for them with his slush find, VTB.

:roll: I can see you are very upset with Putin. When the US has someone killed abroad, it's usually with a hellfire missile from a drone.

late wrote:4) The investigation side of the case is mostly done already. Deustche Band got fined for money laundering, and Trump was a beneficiary.

Look. Without knowing any of the particulars, I can guarantee you that Trump's Chicago Tower isn't owned by him personally. It's owned by a corporation or an LLC, so the note on the hotel is not even in Trump's name.

late wrote:5) So you think lies get better with age, like wine. They don't, but they do tell us something about you.

Yeah. I wouldn't trust Hillary Clinton with anything.

late wrote:6) Just for the sake of appearances, you really should try to restrain your impulse to project.

It's going to be fun watching the DNC try to take out Bernie Sanders again and then deal with the fallout in November.

JohnRawls wrote:@blackjack21

Around 80% of people don't mind voting for a gay candidate in general or voting for Buttigeg in particular as long as they can agree with the policies, etc. If i am not mistaken 80 to 20 is the statistical standard deviation for non-biased issues. (Basically around 20% will always be against while 80% will vote/consider it)

In an election that comes down to a few 100k votes, that's all the difference in the world.
User avatar
By maz
#15067843
blackjack21 wrote:
Yeah, it may be more to fire up Hillary's base than anything else. Although, Hillary wants to kill off Sanders again. It is a humorous video though. The leading Democrat is an independent socialist and the #3 candidate (if we believe the polls) is a multi-billionaire Republican Mayor of New York who suddenly decides he's a Democrat, because Trump won. The Democrats have no soul left.


They really don't. It's got to be very demoralizing to them to have championed "getting big money out of politics" and then watching Bloomberg enter the race and throw his money around. It is funny to imagine them uncomfortably cheering on Bloomberg and having to go along with all his weird positions just because they hate Trump so much.

Bloomberg running for president is cartoonish to me. He is a Jewish billionaire who was Republican, is pro police state, pro censorship, pro war, hates blacks, is a total authoritarian, has made it his lifelong mission to the disarm middle class, appears to have no redeeming qualities, is alien and generally unlikable just as a person. He is also an elitist who looks down on farmers.



I wonder who he hates more; white farmers or blacks :lol:
Last edited by maz on 17 Feb 2020 17:11, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
By JohnRawls
#15067846
blackjack21 wrote:I understand perfectly. The point is that a loan from a bank on real property is not money laundering. You people and your Russophobia aren't going to persuade with that one. How many times do you have to fail before that becomes clear to you?


That doesn't change the fact that he was making upwards of $50M a year. It's more than you or I have ever made. It also wasn't in real estate. It was in television.


That's fantasy. You are assuming Putin only does business with one bank. Try Cyprus. Even Robert Mueller was looking there.


:roll: I can see you are very upset with Putin. When the US has someone killed abroad, it's usually with a hellfire missile from a drone.


Look. Without knowing any of the particulars, I can guarantee you that Trump's Chicago Tower isn't owned by him personally. It's owned by a corporation or an LLC, so the note on the hotel is not even in Trump's name.


Yeah. I wouldn't trust Hillary Clinton with anything.


It's going to be fun watching the DNC try to take out Bernie Sanders again and then deal with the fallout in November.


In an election that comes down to a few 100k votes, that's all the difference in the world.


Every candidate has a never something feature to him. Never Trumpers are far more populous than never Gay or something along those lines. :eh:
User avatar
By fokker
#15067848
maz wrote:I am going to go on the record here and say that a Bloomberg/Clinton ticket is just not going to happen. For one, they might win California, New York and some of the coastal states but they would lose the entire midwest and most of the south.

Second, they are both well documented to have said disparaging things about black street criminals, and rightly so, but their critics will take this to mean that they mean ALL black people instead of just the criminals.


Clinton may be able to attract her previous voters + female vote as usual. Bloomberg will not be loved by minorities, but he expects that people will fall in line and vote for him instead of Trump. It makes sense to put a former Republican against Trump, as Bloomberg may be able to get moderate Republicans who would otherwise vote for Trump, who don't like his scandalous behavior, tweets and secret recordings (grabbing women by the pu**y..). Is Bloomberg racist? What about Trump? Is he really better? Bloomberg is at least a better manager. Let's not be naive how kind these rich people are.

Fox news speculated about Clinton running for president again few months back, she doesn't give up. The latest speculations may have been spread by Bloomberg himself as he needs publicity to get out of single digit support to top two.
User avatar
By maz
#15067986
fokker wrote:Clinton may be able to attract her previous voters + female vote as usual. Bloomberg will not be loved by minorities, but he expects that people will fall in line and vote for him instead of Trump. It makes sense to put a former Republican against Trump, as Bloomberg may be able to get moderate Republicans who would otherwise vote for Trump, who don't like his scandalous behavior, tweets and secret recordings (grabbing women by the pu**y..).


Yes, I get what you are saying but I don't think Bloomberg's problem will be courting the votes of moderate conservatives as it will be courting liberals.

Actually, I don't know who Bloomberg is supposed to appeal to outside of maybe the NPR crowd. They are the kind of people who do not socialize with anyone but themselves and require teams of focus groups in order to get them to appeal to regular Americans.

User avatar
By Wulfschilde
#15067989
Boombark thinks he can buy the election. He skipped the debates, skips the first few primaries and then thinks he can get all these people behind him. I think its silly. Im not going to support a different womanizing white billionaire republican from New York just because he says hes a Democrat now.
User avatar
By annatar1914
#15067995
Wulfschilde wrote:Boombark thinks he can buy the election. He skipped the debates, skips the first few primaries and then thinks he can get all these people behind him. I think its silly. Im not going to support a different womanizing white billionaire republican from New York just because he says hes a Democrat now.


I'm going out on a limb here, but Bloomberg has an very excellent chance of buying the nomination from the DNC in a brokered convention, in order to stop Sanders. It all depends on how Biden (the Establishment's first ideal choice) does the next few states. And how Sanders does relative to that.
  • 1
  • 62
  • 63
  • 64
  • 65
  • 66
  • 90

Aw hell yes. I love it when Finfinder hulks out o[…]

Raise minimum wage to $20 an hour. Just don't do […]

Virus Hysteria For Morons

People in Australia are being fined for "blat[…]

Presumed Coronavirus Cases?

Not in my county. They are counting all presumed […]