US Politics Thread

[Sabrefan1]

14 minutes ago, RupertKBD said:

Doesn't mean much, but it is interesting:

Reactions ranged from some theorizing the poll was "rigged," to others flatly saying many would "rather vote for a rock before they vote for Trump." (At least two people directly supported the latter statement.)

"Character still matters to some of us," wrote @slanderson2474.

"Yep, they saw Trump lie incessantly and never answer a question," said Dana_Molly_Reid.

"Turns out, Trump's lies and racism were more of a deal breaker than Biden being sick," wrote @Thecolours.

And perhaps most appropriate for the moment, chimed in @Drugged_Atlas, who channeled the philosopher Socrates: "All I know is that I don’t know nothing."

 

 

People know who they are going to vote for and have for months.

 

 

It also means that polls have a 3 to 4% margin of error.  Take that same poll 100 times and you'll even get both candidates in the lead.

 

The battle/swing states will decide this election.  If Biden gets his base to show up at the polls, he wins.  Same with Trump.

 

I wouldn't be the least bit surprised if Biden wins the popular vote by a full 2 or 3%, but loses the election.

 

[Sabrefan1]

4 minutes ago, RupertKBD said:

I think you're overestimating congress....if the House is controlled by Republicans there won't be a single bill or piece of legislation passed that isn't approved by the Dear Leader....

 

Very possible.  I can see it go either way.  Maybe the howler monkey, theatre hooker, and the Florida pedo will get jobs in Trump's administration and they won't be able to interfere.

 

Personally, I'm not for giving Ukraine an endless supply of money.  Let the EU pick up way more of the tab.  They have even more at stake with the outcome of that war than we do.

[RupertKBD]

7 minutes ago, Sabrefan1 said:

 

 

People know who they are going to vote for and have for months.

 

 

It also means that polls have a 3 to 4% margin of error.  Take that same poll 100 times and you'll even get both candidates in the lead.

 

The battle/swing states will decide this election.  If Biden gets his base to show up at the polls, he wins.  Same with Trump.

 

I wouldn't be the least bit surprised if Biden wins the popular vote by a full 2 or 3%, but loses the election.

 

That's all a bit beside the point, Sabre....

 

The consensus was that JB's debate performance was supposed to crater his support....meaning Trump should have gotten a big bump. Margin of error or not....

[Sabrefan1]

1 minute ago, RupertKBD said:

That's all a bit beside the point, Sabre....

 

The consensus was that JB's debate performance was supposed to crater his support....meaning Trump should have gotten a big bump. Margin of error or not....

 

My point is that Biden could have crapped his pants on stage and he wasn't going to lose the massive support that CNN was whining about.

 

People already know who they are going to vote for including 90% of independents.  If you're on team D, you're a Biden voter.  If you're on team R, Trump gets your vote.

[RupertKBD]

4 minutes ago, Sabrefan1 said:

Very possible.  I can see it go either way.  Maybe the howler monkey, theatre hooker, and the Florida pedo will get jobs in Trump's administration and they won't be able to interfere.

 

Personally, I'm not for giving Ukraine an endless supply of money.  Let the EU pick up way more of the tab.  They have even more at stake with the outcome of that war than we do.

 

I guess it comes down to how concerned people are with Russian aggression and expansionism....It used to be a big deal to Republicans, but apparently that party doesn't exist any more...

[RupertKBD]

Just now, Sabrefan1 said:

My point is that Biden could have crapped his pants on stage and he wasn't going to lose the massive support that CNN was whining about.

 

People already know who they are going to vote for including 90% of independents.  If you're on team D, you're a Biden voter.  If you're on team R, Trump gets your vote.

 

I hope this is the case, but if I'm being honest, I fully expected Biden to lose points. There are always fence sitters and the expectation was that the debate was going to push them into Orange country....

 

It's a bit heartening to see that it wasn't such a foregone conclusion.

[bolt]

 

 

[Sabrefan1]

5 minutes ago, RupertKBD said:

 

I guess it comes down to how concerned people are with Russian aggression and expansionism....It used to be a big deal to Republicans, but apparently that party doesn't exist any more...

 

I prefer that other parts of the world chip in more.  We are going to have our Social Security and Medicare messed with soon.  The rest of the world is enjoying free medical care from cradle to grave.  We can't afford to shore ours up because we are giving our money away to any hot spot that pops up on the planet. 

 

I'm tired of being the world's police force. 

[RupertKBD]

26 minutes ago, Sabrefan1 said:

 

I prefer that other parts of the world chip in more.  We are going to have our Social Security and Medicare messed with soon.  The rest of the world is enjoying free medical care from cradle to grave.  We can't afford to shore ours up because we are giving our money away to any hot spot that pops up on the planet. 

 

I'm tired of being the world's police force. 

 

Do you honestly believe foreign military aid is the reason for healthcare shortages?

 

I'd say it's a combination of Americans' silly aversion to "socialism" and this:

 

 

I did the math.....adding the rest of the countries together, it doesn't equal the USA's output until you get to Italy....

[the destroyer of worlds]

12 minutes ago, RupertKBD said:

 

Do you honestly believe foreign military aid is the reason for healthcare shortages?

 

I'd say it's a combination of Americans' silly aversion to "socialism" and this:

 

 

I did the math.....adding the rest of the countries together, it doesn't equal the USA's output until you get to Italy....

Also America already pays more than enough that they could have universal healthcare.  They don't because SoCiAliSm

[kilgore]

59 minutes ago, Sabrefan1 said:

 

My point is that Biden could have crapped his pants on stage and he wasn't going to lose the massive support that CNN was whining about.

 

People already know who they are going to vote for including 90% of independents.  If you're on team D, you're a Biden voter.  If you're on team R, Trump gets your vote.

This phenomenon is so uniquely American. Of course there are exceptions but it seems if one is born into a traditionally Republican voting family, you automatically vote R. Same with the Ds. 

In Canada, and I assume in most other western democracies, we can swing from one side to the other, but not just barely, where it depends on just 50,000 voters in a couple of swing states. We can go from a Liberal party big majority to a Conservative Party majority very quickly. Indicating that voters are not so rigidly loyal to one party, or one direction for the country.

 

 What is troubling from the view of folks in those other western democracies, who look to the US for world leadership, is that what that means is one party can run an openly morally bankrupt candidate, a convicted felon, a rapist, a racist , a fraudster who profited from a fake university and a fake charity, a national security risk stealing and sharing top secret docs, a serial liar, and a massive narcissist who can be easily influenced by enemies of the country, and by proxy, other western nation enemies as well, by using simple personal compliments. ………………

………. And they can still rely on half the country to vote for them

 

 I still can’t get my head around that. Like why would ANY woman no matter what party they traditionally voted for, ever vote for such a lying, sexual abusing, daughter lusting, misogynist who is leading a party hell bent on taking more of their rights to control their own bodies?

 So bizarre

 

 

Edited Saturday at 06:31 PM by kilgore

[RupertKBD]

3 minutes ago, the destroyer of worlds said:

Also America already pays more than enough that they could have universal healthcare.  They don't because SoCiAliSm

 

That's pretty much exactly what I said....

[the destroyer of worlds]

1 minute ago, RupertKBD said:

 

That's pretty much exactly what I said....

My point is that they wouldn't really have to cut the military budget.  On a whole, Americans already pay more for their healthcare than we do.  The money they already pay could easily fund a universal system.  They've just been held hostage by CON thinking for so long.

[Sabrefan1]

37 minutes ago, RupertKBD said:

 

Do you honestly believe foreign military aid is the reason for healthcare shortages?

 

I'd say it's a combination of Americans' silly aversion to "socialism" and this:

 

 

I did the math.....adding the rest of the countries together, it doesn't equal the USA's output until you get to Italy....

 

 

I honestly think that if we stop being the world's police force that we could cut back on our military and foreign wars spending and use that money here at home so people won't have to wait until just before death to get on Social Security and Medicare.  The Republicans will be raising the age a few more years as soon as they can because the program will be out of cash to pay fully by around 2035.

[Bob Long]

1 hour ago, Sabrefan1 said:

 

I prefer that other parts of the world chip in more.  We are going to have our Social Security and Medicare messed with soon.  The rest of the world is enjoying free medical care from cradle to grave.  We can't afford to shore ours up because we are giving our money away to any hot spot that pops up on the planet. 

 

I'm tired of being the world's police force. 

 

That's not really true tho. If the US could learn to stop paying insurance middle men and go single payer, it would be cheaper to for you guys.

[Sabrefan1]

28 minutes ago, kilgore said:

This phenomenon is so uniquely American. Of course there are exceptions but it seems if one is born into a traditionally Republican voting family, you automatically vote R. Same with the Ds. 

In Canada, and I assume in most other western democracies, we can swing from one side to the other, but not just barely, where it depends on just 50,000 voters in a couple of swing states. We can go from a Liberal party big majority to a Conservative Party majority very quickly. Indicating that voters are not so rigidly loyal to one party, or one direction for the country.

 

 What is troubling from the view of folks in those other western democracies, who look to the US for world leadership, is that what that means is one party can run an openly morally bankrupt candidate, a convicted felon, a rapist, a racist , a fraudster who profited from a fake university and a fake charity, a national security risk stealing and sharing top secret docs, a serial liar, and a massive narcissist who can be easily influenced by enemies of the country, and by proxy, other western nation enemies as well, by using simple personal compliments. ………………

………. And they can still rely on half the country to vote for them

 

 I still can’t get my head around that. Like why would ANY woman no matter what party they traditionally voted for, ever vote for such a lying, sexual abusing, daughter lusting, misogynist who is leading a party hell bent on taking more of their rights to control their own bodies?

 So bizarre

 

 

People have their "teams" and will stick by their "team" no matter what.  I recognized what was happening in my teens.  That's why I have always been an independent.

 

Same thing with my religious beliefs.  I'm a non-denominational Christian.  I'm not "team" Catholic, Protestant, Pentecostal, Baptist, etc.

[Sabrefan1]

5 minutes ago, Bob Long said:

 

That's not really true tho. If the US could learn to stop paying insurance middle men and go single payer, it would be cheaper to for you guys.

 

 

I agree our system is broken because of greed and corrupt politics.  I don't like being the world's protective parent and constantly pissing away our money.  Let the rest of the west chip in their share.  Country by country.  The US doesn't need to run headlong into every single conflict and yet we do because we have an incessant need to be a defacto empire that the rest of the western world is more or less content with.

[Bob Long]

8 minutes ago, Sabrefan1 said:

 

 

I agree our system is broken because of greed and corrupt politics. 

 

I've seen a number of studies over the years that prove between 20-30% of us healthcare costs are simply to prop up insurance companies that literally provide no value, and often deny legitimate services. 

 

I think it could change, sanders has been trying for years, but the the "s" word comes out. It's a shame.

 

8 minutes ago, Sabrefan1 said:

 

I don't like being the world's protective parent and constantly pissing away our money.  Let the rest of the west chip in their share.  Country by country.  The US doesn't need to run headlong into every single conflict and yet we do because we have an incessant need to be a defacto empire that the rest of the western world is more or less content with.

 

I can see that. I guess I'd ask how important is US standing and influence to most Americans? If the US gets out of this game, who blocks China or Putin? 

 

But I also agree countries like Canada are not stepping up.

Edited Saturday at 07:15 PM by Bob Long

[Artemus]

44 minutes ago, Sabrefan1 said:

 

Very possible.  I can see it go either way.  Maybe the howler monkey, theatre hooker, and the Florida pedo will get jobs in Trump's administration and they won't be able to interfere.

 

Personally, I'm not for giving Ukraine an endless supply of money.  Let the EU pick up way more of the tab.  They have even more at stake with the outcome of that war than we do.

 

 

Always interested to read what your perspectives are regarding matters pertinent to American politics and what the average American perspectives are on global issues.

I recognize that the USA is in the midst of some complicated times and there are probably many areas that this endless supply of money, earmarked for Ukraine, could be spent.

 

A couple of reasons why the USA may be giving Ukraine an endless supply of money:

- the Budapest Memorandum, whereby the USA gave assurances in 1994 to Ukraine that they would guarantee Ukraine's sovereignty and it's border locations in return for Ukraine giving up it's nuclear weapons, the world's third largest contingent at that time. They might and IMO should feel obligated to assist Ukraine, at least to this extent.

- IIRC the vast majority of this endless supply of money is spent in the States on the creation of ammunition and weapons systems. Also funds the transfer of some existing and often obsolete equipment that is to be decommissioned. A portion is spent on ammunition that has reached or is close to it's expiration dates. This endless supply of money is not just transferred to Ukraine's Central Bank. This money, for the most part, stays in the USA and is contributing to the most robust economy in the world.

- I agree that Europe has more skin in the immediate outcome of this war than us but to say that the Europeans are not spending significant money is incorrect.

In total aid (military, financial and humanitarian combined), the European Union and its countries have provided the most to Ukraine, according to the Kiel Institute, whereas the United States has by far provided the most in military aid.

 

As history has shown, appeasement to a dictator with territorial aspirations, is often viewed by that dictator as an invitation to further invasions.

 

We may not agree on this matter but I believe that your country (and many others) have correctly foreseen that the cost of not assisting Ukraine could have devastating consequences for the world, including the United States.

 

 

 

[Sabrefan1]

3 minutes ago, Bob Long said:

I've seen a number of studies over the years that prove between 20-30% of us healthcare costs are simply to prop up insurance companies that literally provide no value, and often deny legitimate services. 

 

I think it could change, sanders has been trying for years, but the the "s" word comes out. It's a shame.

 

Socialism is used as a scare tactic to keep campaign bribes rolling in.

 

Money in politics is ruining this country.  The insurance companies have armies of lobbyists who are dumping mountains of cash into Super-PACs of both parties so they can continue to fleece the country.  And yet, we keep putting the same well-bribed individuals back into office cycle after cycle after cycle.

 

7 minutes ago, Bob Long said:

I can see that. I guess I'd ask how important is US standing and influence to most Americans? If the US gets out of this game, who blocks China or Putin? 

 

But I also agree countries like Canada are not stepping up.

 

 

I don't want to go full isolationist.  I want near-equal partners.  It would be nice if Canada did more militarily but I can't toss too much blame Canada's way because the US has no choice but to protect Canada since we share a countrywide border with it. 

 

Canada also goes out of it's way to keep oil and other raw materials flowing into the US.  I don't doubt that if any benefits open up through the Arctic that the US will have favored nation status with Canada's parts of their Arctic resources.  Europe does not offer such benefits.

[Bob Long]

2 minutes ago, Sabrefan1 said:

 

Socialism is used as a scare tactic to keep campaign bribes rolling in.

 

Money in politics is ruining this country.  The insurance companies have armies of lobbyists who are dumping mountains of cash into Super-PACs of both parties so they can continue to fleece the country.  And yet, we keep putting the same well-bribed individuals back into office cycle after cycle after cycle.

 

 

 

I don't want to go full isolationist.  I want near-equal partners.  It would be nice if Canada did more militarily but I can't toss too much blame Canada's way because the US has no choice but to protect Canada since we share a countrywide border with it. 

 

Canada also goes out of it's way to keep oil and other raw materials flowing into the US.  I don't doubt that if any benefits open up through the Arctic that the US will have favored nation status with Canada's parts of their Arctic resources.  Europe does not offer such benefits.

 

we like selling our raw stuff to you guys, thats for sure.

 

But don't let us off the hook that easy, Justin has let things slip too long. Yes we had asshat PMs before him that started it, but thats no excuse.

 

[Sabrefan1]

1 minute ago, Artemus said:

A couple of reasons why the USA may be giving Ukraine an endless supply of money:

- the Budapest Memorandum, whereby the USA gave assurances in 1994 to Ukraine that they would guarantee Ukraine's sovereignty and it's border locations in return for Ukraine giving up it's nuclear weapons, the world's third largest contingent at that time. They might and IMO should feel obligated to assist Ukraine, at least to this extent.

 

Rightly or wrongly, we break those kind of agreements on the regular.  That's the hazard countries run into with changing administrations.  That's one of the reasons that Iran is reluctant to deal with the US.

 

We've technically already broken the Ukraine agreement twice.  Once when Russia annexed an entire region of the Ukraine by force and the second time when we didn't send troops to them when the rest of their country was invaded.

 

Quote

IIRC the vast majority of this endless supply of money is spent in the States on the creation of ammunition and weapons systems. Also funds the transfer of some existing and often obsolete equipment that is to be decommissioned. A portion is spent on ammunition that has reached or is close to it's expiration dates. This endless supply of money is not just transferred to Ukraine's Central Bank. This money, for the most part, stays in the USA and is contributing to the most robust economy in the world.

 

True, but that just makes the already rich here even richer while single mothers are struggling to feed their kids because the groceries continue to go up in price.

 

The economy is growing here in the US, but it's not contributing to the every day American's bottom line.  Millions of people are still starving in the "land of plenty".

 

Quote

- I agree that Europe has more skin in the immediate outcome of this war than us but to say that the Europeans are not spending significant money is incorrect.

In total aid (military, financial and humanitarian combined), the European Union and its countries have provided the most to Ukraine, according to the Kiel Institute, whereas the United States has by far provided the most in military aid.

 

Sure Europe is spending a good amount of money, but in my opinion they should be shouldering the lion's share of the spending since it's their rear ends that are directly in the cross hairs of a restless Russian dictator.  The Ukraine food exports alone are of great concern to more than one European country whereas in the United States, we weirdly pay some farms to produce less crops.

[Sabrefan1]

10 minutes ago, Bob Long said:

 

we like selling our raw stuff to you guys, thats for sure.

 

But don't let us off the hook that easy, Justin has let things slip too long. Yes we had asshat PMs before him that started it, but thats no excuse.

 

 

Yeah, I think it's insane that Canada doesn't use it's own raw materials to benefit itself and have said as much here on the board more than once.  However that doesn't change the fact that it's the US that primarily and heavily benefits from Canada's poor economic decisions.  We in the US have a vested interest in things staying exactly as they are.

[Gurn]

https://www.msn.com/en-ca/news/world/hello-from-my-black-job-black-democrats-share-workplace-photos-after-trump-s-bizarre-debate-line/ar-BB1p7EhX?ocid=msedgdhp&pc=U531&cvid=8792ceea9d994a98871b39b5d99d5b5d&ei=76#comments

Donald Trump’s unsubstantiated claim that migrants threaten the availability of “Black jobs” during the first presidential debate has Black people, including members of Congress, asking: what is a Black job?

“They’re taking Black jobs and they’re taking Hispanic jobs. And you haven’t seen it yet, but you’re going to see something that’s going to be the worst in our history,” Trump said on Thursday night.

The former president’s comment was seemingly an attempt to expand his political reach to more communities of color through his commonly used anti-immigration rhetoric. Enacting strict immigration policies is one of the cornerstones of the former president’s campaign.

----------------------------------------------------

multiple pics of folks- doing their black jobs, at link.

[NewbieCanuckFan]

3 hours ago, Sabrefan1 said:

 

 

People know who they are going to vote for and have for months.

 

 

It also means that polls have a 3 to 4% margin of error.  Take that same poll 100 times and you'll even get both candidates in the lead.

 

The battle/swing states will decide this election.  If Biden gets his base to show up at the polls, he wins.  Same with Trump.

 

I wouldn't be the least bit surprised if Biden wins the popular vote by a full 2 or 3%, but loses the election.

 

I actually think polls that are close (eg., within the margin of error) actually helps Sleepy Joe more.  Dotard's base support won't change no matter what (even if he told them *NOT* to vote for him lol).  But a close poll might be enough inducement for independ./dems to get out & vote out of fear of the convicted felon winning.