US Politics Thread

[Smashian Kassian]

47 minutes ago, 4petesake said:

 

I guess this is where we differ. What you see as panic I see as pausing to think. Being a former prosecutor she is well aware of leading questions and has a pretty good idea of the point the interviewer is trying to take her to. For me I’d rather a person slow and put some thought into their answer than blurt out “they’re eating the cats” when they feel cornered.

 

I think a good public speaker can inspire people to be better like Kennedy and Obama, or even Reagan at times. As for sending children off to war I don’t see a correlation, it’s been done by the best and the worst speakers imo.

 

(ignore the blurb, just posting for the clip) 

 

I can appreciate the bolded, but I don't think she's that though. To me she just comes off as scrambling & often says nothing of substance.

 

The thing with her is, I don't think she has strong principled positions besides abortion (which is why she's flipped on some since the 2019/20 campaign, and that's fine most politicians don't), so that could play a role in her not knowing what to say, but youd think she would have developed a general perspective & ingrained some narratives to lean on when answering these questions (Hillary for example did this very well), but she just produces these word salads where she tries to sound reasonable/professional but instead shakily talks in circles as she searches for what to say & effectively says nothing to answer the question.

 

Good speakers can be inspiring for sure. But my point is there's utility in regarding leadership as a buffoonish. Because these politicians are often driven by maintaining/advancing their power rather than improving the lives of their constituents, & are perfectly willing to sacrifice the well being of their constituents for their own purpose. So in democracy politicians should be regarded with ever present skepticism until proven otherwise rather than valorization imo. It wasn't always this way, but the 60's are long gone. Some of the stuff that happens now to me is worse than what Nixon did & nothing ever happens to them.

 

Edited yesterday at 05:46 AM by Smashian Kassian

[Spur1]

5 hours ago, Elias Pettersson said:

Bill Clinton was impeached, paid off at least one woman for sexual assault and apparently went to Epstein’s Island.  
 

Would he qualify to be on the naughty list? 

He just liked cross dressing and blow jobs. 
Check out Hoover sometime. 

Edited yesterday at 05:45 AM by Spur1

[Bob Long]

21 minutes ago, Elias Pettersson said:

 

No, you can't discuss my character Bob...  

 

[DSVII]

30 minutes ago, Smashian Kassian said:

 

(ignore the blurb, just posting for the clip) 

 

I can appreciate the bolded, but I don't think she's that though. To me she just comes off as scrambling & often says nothing of substance.

 

The thing with her is, I don't think she has strong principled positions besides abortion (which is why she's flipped on some since the 2019/20 campaign, and that's fine most politicians don't), so that could play a role in her not knowing what to say, but youd think she would have developed a general perspective & ingrained some narratives to lean on when answering these questions (Hillary for example did this very well), but she just produces these word salads where she tries to sound reasonable/professional but instead shakily talks in circles as she searches for what to say & effectively says nothing to answer the question.

 

Good speakers can be inspiring for sure. But my point is there's utility in regarding leadership as a buffoonish. Because these politicians are often driven by maintaining/advancing their power rather than improving the lives of their constituents, & are perfectly willing to sacrifice the well being of their constituents for their own purpose. So in democracy politicians should be regarded with ever present skepticism until proven otherwise rather than valorization imo. It wasn't always this way, but the 60's are long gone. Some of the stuff that happens now to me is worse than what Nixon did & nothing ever happens to them.

 

 

Again, I feel like even if everything is true here, Trump is still a vastly inferior candidate if you apply this same standard to him. He's to be getting a huge pass on that. Even down to the wire when he's dodging debates (the 2nd was supposed to be tonight) and cancelling appearances. 

 

[kilgore]

19 minutes ago, Smashian Kassian said:

 

(ignore the blurb, just posting for the clip) 

 

I can appreciate the bolded, but I don't think she's that though. To me she just comes off as scrambling & often says nothing of substance.

 

The thing with her is, I don't think she has strong principled positions besides abortion (which is why she's flipped on some since the 2019/20 campaign, and that's fine most politicians don't), so that could play a role in her not knowing what to say, but youd think she would have developed a general perspective & ingrained some narratives to lean on when answering these questions (Hillary for example did this very well), but she just produces these word salads where she tries to sound reasonable/professional but instead shakily talks in circles as she searches for what to say & effectively says nothing to answer the question.

 

Good speakers can be inspiring for sure. But my point is there's utility in regarding leadership as a buffoonish. Because these politicians are often driven by maintaining/advancing their power rather than improving the lives of their constituents, & are perfectly willing to sacrifice the well being of their constituents for their own purpose. So in democracy politicians should be regarded with ever present skepticism until proven otherwise rather than valorization imo. It wasn't always this way, but the 60's are long gone. Some of the stuff that happens now to me is worse than what Nixon did & nothing ever happens to them.

 

 

I think in spite of having experience as a prosecutor and DA and AG, she was still nervous being thrust into the spotlight, maybe the brightest spotlight on the planet. I also think her Democratic handlers helped that pressure by training her with talking points she could recite if she got nervous in an interview.  Provably over trained her so she was fully ready, while the MSM was screaming for an interview. She is obviously not a natural speaker.  Court room speeches are different than in front of an audience of many millions. And you are made well aware that anything you say can and will be used against you in.....the court of public opinion.  Going off script too much can set the ball on the tee for Trump's team.  And this is not just about her, she knows, the countries stability and good standing is on the line, at least in her mind. A tremendous amount on her shoulders and she must feel it.  So I don't blame her for being a little robotic, right now.  I think she'll grow into it more if she wins. She's improved by a lot since the primaries of 2020.

 

I do think she should just trust her instincts more. Or not listen to her handlers all the time. I think her Oprah moment of "Someone's gonna get shot!" was one example.  I find her interview responses to be too much like her rally speeches. Same exact talking points.  I wish she'd at least get a Thesaurus and find different ways to say the same phrases.  But maybe that's what works. Those that are voting for her, aren't going to change their minds because of the repetition. Its meant for anyone just tuning in to her. I get it. 

 

She should have had an answer though for that gotcha question about learning from one mistake she'd made.  Unfortunately, any mistake she admitted to, she knew would be used in an ad and on Fox News the next day ad nauseam. But she still should have had one handy.  Like Walz with his book dates.

[Elias Pettersson]

The Wall Street Journal has Trump winning the election...

 

Kamala was one point ahead on September 28 and collapsed in the last month, Trump now with a 3-point advantage...

 

 

Edited yesterday at 06:24 AM by Elias Pettersson

[Elias Pettersson]

In a national poll, Forbes magazine has Trump up by 2 points.  Last month, they had Kamala up by 4 points.  In the battleground states, Trump is up by 8 points...

 

 

[Elias Pettersson]

This is wild.  The Economist had Kamala with a 54% chance of winning the election on October 15.  On October 23, the Economist now has Trump with a 56% chance of winning the election.  What has happened over the last week?  

 

 

[Elias Pettersson]

Even 538 has flipped over to Trump...

 

 

[Elias Pettersson]

538 says there is an 87% chance that the Republicans win the Senate...

 

 

[Elias Pettersson]

So, I found the video of the woman accusing Trump of groping her 31 years ago.  Something tells me this isn't going to move the needle much.  The alleged video of Trump molesting a minor might have more of an impact.  However, I have yet to source that video...

 

 

[PistolPete13]

14 hours ago, bolt said:

I wonder what was the concert?

Kid Rock and Lee Greenwood. And still they drew flies. 
Amazing that it was indoors. Not too many places left that haven’t been stiffed by the MAGs.

[SilentSam]

     Wonder why she “fell” down the stairs ?

 

[-dlc-]

On 10/20/2024 at 2:44 PM, bolt said:

Kamala Harris would have needed a teleprompter telling her what to say.

 

Ridiculous.

 

After he slammed her for once having worked at McDonalds....now he's trying to BE her? To join the crowd of normal people who, yes, held jobs when they were young.

 

What a turd. He needed to be handheld through the very difficult task of....taking fries from the fryer to the warmer and salting them.

 

Yet some want him to be in charge of a country. 

[Silent Man]

5 minutes ago, -dlc- said:

 

Ridiculous.

 

After he slammed her for once having worked at McDonalds....now he's trying to BE her? To join the crowd of normal people who, yes, held jobs when they were young.

 

What a turd. He needed to be handheld through the very difficult task of....taking fries from the fryer to the warmer and salting them.

 

Yet some want him to be in charge of a country. 

What really amazes me- Trump did and said so many very bad things and it is very obvious where he will take country if elected, but still looks like he is going to win.

And this is very sad indeed. 

[-dlc-]

1 minute ago, Silent Man said:

What really amazes me- Trump did and said so many very bad things and it is very obvious where he will take country if elected, but still looks like he is going to win.

And this is very sad indeed. 

My kids were planning a trip to the US in November but are since cancelling. "Just in case"

[PistolPete13]

14 hours ago, bolt said:

Oh the same buddy where Clinton frequented Epstein Island whereas there is no record of Trump on Epstein Island .  But Democrats are such a great party?  Locking up political opponents is great policy.

 

[Boudrias]

7 hours ago, Elias Pettersson said:

In a national poll, Forbes magazine has Trump up by 2 points.  Last month, they had Kamala up by 4 points.  In the battleground states, Trump is up by 8 points...

 

 

Business news is indicating a Trump win but more disconcerting is the GOP winning both the Senate and House. Why is Harris dropping? IMO her platform content is not particularly strong in the context of real life in America. People are hurting across a wide swath of society. Harris is the incumbent and globally that has not worked well. Earlier you mentioned the fact that the Dems were prepared to ride Biden into the election until his health could not be debated any longer. Many Americans will question how the Dems could put national security at such risk by having a POTUS with dementia. Critics of Trump also have a long list of character flaws and possibly health concerns which questions his electability. It is significant that GOP supporters are ignoring these concerns. The nasty side of politics is the ongoing efforts at character assassination. I doubt either Harris or Trump are as incompetent as they are made out. 

 

A Trump win will reinenforce the American drift to isolationism. I would argue that started with Obama and has continued to date. In fact Biden/Harris have engaged more but in a lukewarm way. But the fact remains that Biden supported Ukraine when he needed to and by appearances Harris would continue that. For the sake of world stability this is why Harris has to win. But that might not be the case. In an earlier post I expressed concerns about Canada/USA relations with Trump as POTUS. It should concern all Canadians. Canada's debt situation puts us in a very weak position to fend off any hostile trade demands by a Trump government. Those demands are inevitable. I doubt it will matter who the PM is Tradeau or Poilievre. 

[Sabrefan1]

I didn't personally watch the CNN town hall with Kamala last night, but it seems according to CNN pundits, it didn't go well for her and she wouldn't give answers to the questions asked.

 

Did anyone here watch it?  The clips I'm seeing are not any better than when she ran against Biden for the nomination in 2020.

Edited 22 hours ago by Sabrefan1
added 2020

[Bob Long]

23 minutes ago, Boudrias said:

Business news is indicating a Trump win but more disconcerting is the GOP winning both the Senate and House. Why is Harris dropping? IMO her platform content is not particularly strong in the context of real life in America. People are hurting across a wide swath of society. Harris is the incumbent and globally that has not worked well. Earlier you mentioned the fact that the Dems were prepared to ride Biden into the election until his health could not be debated any longer. Many Americans will question how the Dems could put national security at such risk by having a POTUS with dementia. Critics of Trump also have a long list of character flaws and possibly health concerns which questions his electability. It is significant that GOP supporters are ignoring these concerns. The nasty side of politics is the ongoing efforts at character assassination. I doubt either Harris or Trump are as incompetent as they are made out. 

 

A Trump win will reinenforce the American drift to isolationism. I would argue that started with Obama and has continued to date. In fact Biden/Harris have engaged more but in a lukewarm way. But the fact remains that Biden supported Ukraine when he needed to and by appearances Harris would continue that. For the sake of world stability this is why Harris has to win. But that might not be the case. In an earlier post I expressed concerns about Canada/USA relations with Trump as POTUS. It should concern all Canadians. Canada's debt situation puts us in a very weak position to fend off any hostile trade demands by a Trump government. Those demands are inevitable. I doubt it will matter who the PM is Tradeau or Poilievre. 

 

Seems more likely by the day that we will see a sweep by the GOP. Yikes.

 

As far as trade goes with Canada, yes it does matter who is in. Why you would not want an experienced trade team dealing with trump is odd to me. Particularly one that has done well vs Trump.

[bishopshodan]

25 minutes ago, Boudrias said:

Business news is indicating a Trump win but more disconcerting is the GOP winning both the Senate and House. Why is Harris dropping? IMO her platform content is not particularly strong in the context of real life in America. People are hurting across a wide swath of society. Harris is the incumbent and globally that has not worked well. Earlier you mentioned the fact that the Dems were prepared to ride Biden into the election until his health could not be debated any longer. Many Americans will question how the Dems could put national security at such risk by having a POTUS with dementia. Critics of Trump also have a long list of character flaws and possibly health concerns which questions his electability. It is significant that GOP supporters are ignoring these concerns. The nasty side of politics is the ongoing efforts at character assassination. I doubt either Harris or Trump are as incompetent as they are made out. 

 

A Trump win will reinenforce the American drift to isolationism. I would argue that started with Obama and has continued to date. In fact Biden/Harris have engaged more but in a lukewarm way. But the fact remains that Biden supported Ukraine when he needed to and by appearances Harris would continue that. For the sake of world stability this is why Harris has to win. But that might not be the case. In an earlier post I expressed concerns about Canada/USA relations with Trump as POTUS. It should concern all Canadians. Canada's debt situation puts us in a very weak position to fend off any hostile trade demands by a Trump government. Those demands are inevitable. I doubt it will matter who the PM is Tradeau or Poilievre. 

 

Posts like this is why I point out that you are a smart man.

 

Even though I grind your gears, quite a bit at times. I appreciate your contributions ( well, most of them  )

[Sabrefan1]

3 minutes ago, Bob Long said:

 

Seems more likely by the day that we will see a sweep by the GOP. Yikes.

 

 

I'm still holding out hope that the government will be split by the House of Representatives.  Although it does seem that Kamala is starting to drag them down with her.  She's dropping like a rock.

[Bob Long]

5 minutes ago, Sabrefan1 said:

 

 

I'm still holding out hope that the government will be split by the House of Representatives.  Although it does seem that Kamala is starting to drag them down with her.  She's dropping like a rock.

 

The only thing that comes to mind is my usual rant about the dems dropping the ball on kitchen table issues.

 

This reminds me of the 80s when Maggie, Ronnie and Brian were popular. Except this time the right is coalescing around dumb shit. 

[Sabrefan1]

6 minutes ago, Bob Long said:

 

The only thing that comes to mind is my usual rant about the dems dropping the ball on kitchen table issues.

 

That's one of the things sinking Kamala.  She won't say how her policies will differ from Biden's in that regard.  For food prices, she's threatened to prosecute companies.  Suing companies, or even heavily regulating them if you go that route instead, doesn't lower prices.  It raises them.

 

 

Quote

This reminds me of the 80s when Maggie, Ronnie and Brian were popular. Except this time the right is coalescing around dumb shit. 

 

The 80's is when I was learning the political system.  Leaders back then were chosen to face down the bogeyman that was the USSR.  The crappy jobs they all did domestically still reverberate to this day.

[bishopshodan]

I saw my friends heart drop in the gym today.

IT was actually quite sad.

 

He loves the Rock. Just yesterday He was talking about something he saw that inspired him about fitness from The Rock's insta. I like to tease him and point out the Rock is full of juice but thats about it.

 

My friend is a Con. He drives me a bit nuts cause he doesnt keep up on things and says old school stuff like i've mentioned before, ' Cons are good at business'

 

i told him today that there were rumours that The Rock might endorse Trump.

 

He looked stunned. He said " why would he do that? He's a black man, Trump is a racist"

 

My buddy is an ex-US Marine. Has a sister that lives in Texas and is Repub. He just sent his boy off the Alabama Uni on a lacrosse scholarship. His boy is dark skinned from his wife's side.  He lives in the middle of all this, in both contries. You could see the fear in his face. A man that is a law enforcement officer , ex-marine, ex-pro fighter...had real fear. 

 

Trump is bad for the world. 

Edited 21 hours ago by bishopshodan