ST Democrats: Who do you want to win the 2020 Nomination?

[Millennial_Messiah]

In all seriousness. Also, practical picks only. No Oprah, Elon Musk, or Tinky Winky from the Teletubbies.

[UnWantedTheory]

In all seriousness. Also, practical picks only. No Oprah, Elon Musk, or Tinky Winky from the Teletubbies.
I will take any sane individual with the best odds of winning from either party over what we have now. Integrity should matter to us again.

[DMC]

I will take any sane individual with the best odds of winning from either party over what we have now. Integrity should matter to us again.

In this case integrity means "shrouded in secrecy" since most of these people are revealed to be pieces of shit at some point after their terms.

[Spurs Homer]

Either party should only nominate criminals and traitors.

So whichever party throws out a worse criminal than Trump.

We already took a wet shit on the office of the presidency - why stop now?

[CitizenDwayne]

In this case integrity means "shrouded in secrecy" since most of these people are revealed to be pieces of shit at some point after their terms.
It’s much better to know they’re pieces of shit upfront, right?

[CitizenDwayne]

Sanders
Gabbard
Warren
Gilibrand
O’Rourke

Any of em. Not crazy about Harris. Biden is meh. Booker is a clown

[Chucho]

Before the COMPLETE EXONERATION, I was thinking it was going to be about 55-45 the Dems would win, but now I think he's going to win again more because the Dems will trip over their own dick.

[spurraider21]

warren provided she can get past the native american shindig

dont care for harris/booker/castro or the old guard like biden

sanders as a follow up because i think he'd be able to energize young voters the way beto did in texas

[BD24]

Beto or Sanders probably have the best chance. So one of them. I think Trump will be fairly difficult to beat at this point, who knows though, still over a year until the election. Plenty of time for him to fuck up

[DMC]

It’s much better to know they’re pieces of shit upfront, right?

They are all pieces of shit. Thinking they aren't doesn't mean they aren't. The devil you know is better than the devil you don't.

[CitizenDwayne]

They are all pieces of shit. Thinking they aren't doesn't mean they aren't. The devil you know is better than the devil you don't.
Exactly! They’re all pieces of shit, so pick the biggest piece of shit you can find. Solid logic

[florige]

Sanders probably has the only real shot at beating Trump. Anyone else I think Trump rolls over unless some newbie pulls a 92 Clinton, or 08 Obama.

[DMC]

Exactly! They’re all pieces of shit, so pick the biggest piece of shit you can find. Solid logic

No, stop looking for role models and accept that the best they can do is get something done you want done.

[Pavlov]

No, stop looking for role models and accept that the best they can do is get something done you want done.Which current candidate do you think can best do something you want done?

[DMC]

Which current candidate do you think can best do something you want done?

Biden

[Pavlov]

BidenMore than Trump?

[Proxy]

Sanders

[Chris]

Pochahantas?!

:lmao

[Chris]

People here want Bernie? :lol

Dude just got eviscerated by Captain Crenshaw :lol

https://twitter.com/DanCrenshawTX/status/1113571995713769472

[Pavlov]

People here want Bernie? :lol

Dude just got eviscerated by Captain Crenshaw :lol

https://twitter.com/DanCrenshawTX/status/1113571995713769472Where's Crenshaw's plan?

[spurraider21]

People here want Bernie? :lol
i think he's got a good chance at displacing trump

like i said back in 2016, bernie is over the top with many of his policies, but realistically, even a democrat controlled congress wouldn't go so far to serve him his full agenda on a silver platter.

[Chris]

i think he's got a good chance at displacing trump

like i said back in 2016, bernie is over the top with many of his policies, but realistically, even a democrat controlled congress wouldn't go so far to serve him his full agenda on a silver platter.

Didn't figure you for a socialist, but that's your prerogative.

[Millennial_Messiah]

i think he's got a good chance at displacing trump

like i said back in 2016, bernie is over the top with many of his policies, but realistically, even a democrat controlled congress wouldn't go so far to serve him his full agenda on a silver platter.

Do you think Bernie would have a chance in a 2009 style Congress/Senate combo? Where the Dems had a significant House majority + a 60-40 Senate majority.

[Millennial_Messiah]

Sanders probably has the only real shot at beating Trump. Anyone else I think Trump rolls over unless some newbie pulls a 92 Clinton, or 08 Obama.

92 Clinton won because of a) Ross Perot, and b) people tired of 12 years of GOP policy

08 Obama won because any Democrat would have won because Bush was public enemy #1 at the time + the recession had just started. Even Hillary would have crushed twerpy McCain that year.

[DMC]

More than Trump?

He's the only one who can beat Trump.

I'd prefer someone to quell the nastiness and begin to reach across the isle again to get something done. Scoreboard politics doesn't help the people. We don't need an exciting person as POTUS. We just need someone who isn't about to cash in.

[Pavlov]

He's the only one who can beat Trump.

I'd prefer someone to quell the nastiness and begin to reach across the isle again to get something done. Scoreboard politics doesn't help the people. We don't need an exciting person as POTUS. We just need someone who isn't about to cash in.So you would vote for Biden and not Trump?

[DMC]

92 Clinton won because of a) Ross Perot, and b) people tired of 12 years of GOP policy

08 Obama won because any Democrat would have won because Bush was public enemy #1 at the time + the recession had just started. Even Hillary would have crushed twerpy McCain that year.

It's a mistake to run someone who looks like they might die at any moment. Disabled people deserve some honor and dignity but generally the American people want someone who looks like they can make it through a term. This is why Bernie isn't a good choice. It's why McCain wasn't a good choice, never mind that he picked the worst running mate anyone could have possibly picked. I think Colin Powell could have become the 1st black POTUS had he run, but he's too smart to run. Condoleeza Rice would stand a chance if she stayed in it.

Beto is a bit too close to the Obama years. We had our fresh start guy, and Beto doesn't really promise anything, and couldn't even win in his home state (but had a good showing). Still, Texas is a somewhat red state, so it doesn't really indicate much that Beto lost it. So I won't count Beto out just yet. I don't see any of the females making any real noise. Many have been around too long and are already about as high up as they'll ever get by being in congress.

It will be hard to beat Trump if the economy is good, if we aren't going into another war, if he's bringing home troops. Voters won't give a shit about Russiagate, at least the swing voters. Party liners will still vote their team colors.

[DMC]

So you would vote for Biden and not Trump?

Yes. I voted for him twice already. I've never voted for Trump.

[FrostKing]

I will take any sane individual with the best odds of winning from either party over what we have now. Integrity should matter to us again.
Again? Jimmy Carter was ages ago.

[Millennial_Messiah]

It's a mistake to run someone who looks like they might die at any moment. Disabled people deserve some honor and dignity but generally the American people want someone who looks like they can make it through a term. This is why Bernie isn't a good choice. It's why McCain wasn't a good choice, never mind that he picked the worst running mate anyone could have possibly picked. I think Colin Powell could have become the 1st black POTUS had he run, but he's too smart to run. Condoleeza Rice would stand a chance if she stayed in it.

Beto is a bit too close to the Obama years. We had our fresh start guy, and Beto doesn't really promise anything, and couldn't even win in his home state (but had a good showing). Still, Texas is a somewhat red state, so it doesn't really indicate much that Beto lost it. So I won't count Beto out just yet. I don't see any of the females making any real noise. Many have been around too long and are already about as high up as they'll ever get by being in congress.

It will be hard to beat Trump if the economy is good, if we aren't going into another war, if he's bringing home troops. Voters won't give a shit about Russiagate, at least the swing voters. Party liners will still vote their team colors.

The next economic downturn is almost guaranteed to happen between the final quarter of 2019 and the third quarter of 2020. House prices have stagnated since mid-2017 and real estate investors are holding off buying because it's going to be a buyer's market sooner than later. This should help Democrats a bit.

Bernie is super popular. I think he could get through 2 terms without dying. But if Beto echoes the same policies, things could swing his way.

Condi Rice... it's too bad she never ran. I would have voted for her.

[DMC]

The next economic downturn is almost guaranteed to happen between the final quarter of 2019 and the third quarter of 2020. House prices have stagnated since mid-2017 and real estate investors are holding off buying because it's going to be a buyer's market sooner than later. This should help Democrats a bit.

Bernie is super popular. I think he could get through 2 terms without dying. But if Beto echoes the same policies, things could swing his way.

Condi Rice... it's too bad she never ran. I would have voted for her.

Stagnated?

https://i1.wp.com/realestatedecoded.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/08/case-shiller-chart.jpg

I'm not seeing it. I know people who are selling because they can no longer afford the property tax since their home has been valued well over 100% of their original price from just a dozen or so years ago. Home prices, especially around this area in Texas, have not stagnated and certainly not since 2017. Not sure what you're referring to.

Bernie allowed his supporters to be fucked over by Hillary and the DNC. I think he poisoned himself by doing so.

[Millennial_Messiah]

Stagnated?

https://i1.wp.com/realestatedecoded.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/08/case-shiller-chart.jpg

I'm not seeing it. I know people who are selling because they can no longer afford the property tax since their home has been valued well over 100% of their original price from just a dozen or so years ago. Home prices, especially around this area in Texas, have not stagnated and certainly not since 2017. Not sure what you're referring to.

I know first hand that Dallas has stagnated from July 2017-present. That map only goes up to Jan 2018, fwiw.

[UnWantedTheory]

Didn't figure you for a socialist, but that's your prerogative.So you didn't comprehend what was said. Got it.

[UnWantedTheory]

In this case integrity means "shrouded in secrecy" since most of these people are revealed to be pieces of shit at some point after their terms.
I will take the old pieces of shit over the current one. They all lie, and all have secrets, but this is a new level of which we should not be comfortable with in my opinion.

[AaronY]

#anyonebutbernie2020

[Pavlov]

#anyonebutbernie2020Right? I'd be OK with him if he and his minions didn't always seem to be working to destroy the party.

[UnWantedTheory]

He's the only one who can beat Trump.

I'd prefer someone to quell the nastiness and begin to reach across the isle again to get something done. Scoreboard politics doesn't help the people. We don't need an exciting person as POTUS. We just need someone who isn't about to cash in.
So when I asked for integrity, what was the problem? Was that too strict a term for you? Again, I wan't someone sane in office. A sane person could speak like an adult, and act like one too. A sane person could hopefully work with the other side when necessary as well. Based on the comment you just made, I feel like you are far too literal, or you are too much of a contrarian to have not understood what I meant.

[UnWantedTheory]

Stagnated?

https://i1.wp.com/realestatedecoded.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/08/case-shiller-chart.jpg

I'm not seeing it. I know people who are selling because they can no longer afford the property tax since their home has been valued well over 100% of their original price from just a dozen or so years ago. Home prices, especially around this area in Texas, have not stagnated and certainly not since 2017. Not sure what you're referring to.

Bernie allowed his supporters to be fucked over by Hillary and the DNC. I think he poisoned himself by doing so.
True, my property is now about 60% higher in the last 5 years alone. The housing market has been doing fine for several years now.

[UnWantedTheory]

I know first hand that Dallas has stagnated from July 2017-present. That map only goes up to Jan 2018, fwiw.
In fairness, one city isn't an indicator of the entire market.

[Millennial_Messiah]

True, my property is now about 60% higher in the last 5 years alone. The housing market has been doing fine for several years now.

but most of that growth was 2013-2016, it really shot up from 2011-2016. But Summer 2017-present there has been a plateauing. Not a downturn yet but a plateauing. The downturn will come sooner than later and almost certainly in 2020.

[DMC]

So when I asked for integrity, what was the problem? Was that too strict a term for you? Again, I wan't someone sane in office. A sane person could speak like an adult, and act like one too. A sane person could hopefully work with the other side when necessary as well. Based on the comment you just made, I feel like you are far too literal, or you are too much of a contrarian to have not understood what I meant.

I don't believe there are more than a couple of people in the entire running who fit that bill. Implying Integrity for someone because they appear nice on TV isn't the same as someone having accountability and being honest about what they know and don't know. I don't know if Joe Biden has Integrity, I have no idea. I believe he's more of a moderate than some of the others and that's more my style.

As far as being a contrarian I'm probably guilty. I just believe that words are important in conversations especially written ones so that the people having a discussion are on the same page and not arguing about a misunderstanding.

[SpursforSix]

In fairness, one city isn't an indicator of the entire market.

You obviously haven't seen enough of Millennial Messiah's takes.

[DMC]

I know first hand that Dallas has stagnated from July 2017-present. That map only goes up to Jan 2018, fwiw.

The chart I posted doesn't reflect that. Can you find a chart that does?

[Millennial_Messiah]

The chart I posted doesn't reflect that. Can you find a chart that does?

It's not just price... days on market have skyrocketed in the past couple years. Up to and including 2016, if you put a house up for sale it'd be under contract w/earnest deposit within a week every time (as long as you're not asking for WAY over market value) but now you have to wait at least a month which is plain awful as a seller. For me it took 4 months, plus an additional to close. That is hell as a seller trying to sell the house they live in and not able to plan when they're going to need to move.

[BD24]

Your so full of shit Andy. I had three of my neighbors sell in the last 6-12 months. They all sold within 2-4 weeks at or above asking price. Why do you insist on lieing and then doubling down on your lies constantly tbh?

[DMC]

It's not just price... days on market have skyrocketed in the past couple years. Up to and including 2016, if you put a house up for sale it'd be under contract w/earnest deposit within a week every time (as long as you're not asking for WAY over market value) but now you have to wait at least a month which is plain awful as a seller. For me it took 4 months, plus an additional to close. That is hell as a seller trying to sell the house they live in and not able to plan when they're going to need to move.
Chart. Show some data.

[Millennial_Messiah]

Your so full of shit Andy. I had three of my neighbors sell in the last 6-12 months. They all sold within 2-4 weeks at or above asking price. Why do you insist on lieing and then doubling down on your lies constantly tbh?

2-4 weeks even is a long time compared to 2013-2016. Everything usually went under contract (and didn't renege) on days 1-7.

[DMC]

2-4 weeks even is a long time compared to 2013-2016. Everything usually went under contract (and didn't renege) on days 1-7.

Still no data. Are you going by what you recall people talking about or are you trying to get a real estate license?

[Millennial_Messiah]

Still no data. Are you going by what you recall people talking about or are you trying to get a real estate license?
Personal experience, but I invite you to call any realtor number on Zillow in the north DFW area

[CosmicCowboy]

In SA the over 500,000 is pretty slow because of too much builder supply but houses under 300k are selling pretty fast. I sold a rent house last year within 24 hours for 65K more than I paid for it 5 years ago.

[DMC]

Personal experience, but I invite you to call any realtor number on Zillow in the north DFW area

The median home value in Dallas is $214,900. Dallas home values have gone up 16.9% over the past year and Zillow predicts they will rise 11.6% within the next year. The median list price per square foot in Dallas is $205, which is higher than the Dallas-Fort Worth-Arlington Metro average of $137. The median price of homes currently listed in Dallas is $379,900. The median rent price in Dallas is $1,618, which is lower than the Dallas-Fort Worth-Arlington Metro median of $1,695. -Zillow

https://i.imgur.com/r1nSWaF.jpg

Again, not seeing it.

[Chris]

So you didn't comprehend what was said. Got it.

He said he was voting for Bernie so yeah - Socialism. What's your discrepancy here?

[Chris]

https://twitter.com/thehill/status/1113783288479592448

Here you go guys :lol

[UnWantedTheory]

but most of that growth was 2013-2016, it really shot up from 2011-2016.But Summer 2017-present there has been a plateauing. Not a downturn yet but a plateauing. The downturn will come sooner than later and almost certainly in 2020.
A majority of the growth was from 2014 - 2016 in my case, but I don't see the drastic fall off you are trying to describe.

[UnWantedTheory]

I don't believe there are more than a couple of people in the entire running who fit that bill. Implying Integrity for someone because they appear nice on TV isn't the same as someone having accountability and being honest about what they know and don't know. I don't know if Joe Biden has Integrity, I have no idea. I believe he's more of a moderate than some of the others and that's more my style.

As far as being a contrarian I'm probably guilty. I just believe that words are important in conversations especially written ones so that the people having a discussion are on the same page and not arguing about a misunderstanding.
Ok, fuck it. Someone that speaks coherent and complete sentences that doesn't throw temper tantrums like a child. Is that doable this time around?

[UnWantedTheory]

He said he was voting for Bernie so yeah - Socialism. What's your discrepancy here?
I don't know what he has said previously, or who he plans to vote for, but the following quote you were responding to doesn't seem to say what you said it did. But hey, I could be wrong.


i think he's got a good chance at displacing trump

like i said back in 2016, bernie is over the top with many of his policies, but realistically, even a democrat controlled congress wouldn't go so far to serve him his full agenda on a silver platter.

[Spurtacular]

warren provided she can get past the native american shindig

dont care for harris/booker/castro or the old guard like biden

sanders as a follow up because i think he'd be able to energize young voters the way beto did in texas

:lmao No, she didn't.
:lmao Nobody on ST was saying that, including you when she proved she was 1/10000th Indian maybe
:lmao Gonna have me a beer now with that laugh.

[Spurtacular]

https://twitter.com/thehill/status/1113783288479592448

Here you go guys :lol

Dumb schmuck looking white guy; good luck :lol

[Spurtacular]

Right? I'd be OK with him if he and his minions didn't always seem to be working to destroy the party.

How'd he try to destroy the party, Chump?

Also :lmao at okay with him if he wasn't a cancer.

:lmao Psychopav Chump

[ElNono]

:lmao No, she didn't.
:lmao Nobody on ST was saying that, including you when she proved she was 1/10000th Indian maybe
:lmao Gonna have me a beer now with that laugh.

He said ‘provided’, meaning, ‘if she can get past’ that.

You probably misread that for ‘proved’.

[Spurtacular]

92 Clinton won because b) people tired of 12 years of GOP policy


Oversimplification at best. People enjoyed prosperity for a decade. They were plenty happy, then. They still had a lot of faith in the policies frankly; but recession put a damper on things. And GB being a two-faced asshole on no new taxes was his undoing.

[CosmicCowboy]

Oversimplification at best. People enjoyed prosperity for a decade. They were plenty happy, then. They still had a lot of faith in the policies frankly; but recession put a damper on things. And GB being a two-faced asshole on no new taxes was his undoing.

Perot taking 20% of the vote certainly didn't help.

[ElNono]

People generally underrate incumbency. Being on the spotlight amplifies mistakes, and gives material to the opposition. Biggest factor for the pendulum swings we see.

[pgardn]

People generally underrate incumbency. Being on the spotlight amplifies mistakes, and gives material to the opposition. Biggest factor for the pendulum swings we see.

So you meant overate ?

[ElNono]

So you meant overate ?

Underrate. They think it’s not a factor or generally unimportant, but it’s one of the things that gives the biggest and better ammo to the opposition. Even more so these days where ideas are lacking and candidates run solely on negative campaigns.

[ElNono]

That’s also why a candidate like Biden is a bad idea. Too easy to tie to Obama, and all the criticism levied to that administration.

[Millennial_Messiah]

Oversimplification at best. People enjoyed prosperity for a decade. They were plenty happy, then. They still had a lot of faith in the policies frankly; but recession put a damper on things. And GB being a two-faced asshole on no new taxes was his undoing.

that, and Ross Perot eating up like 12% of the vote which deep sixed GB41 in all the swing states plus a few normally red states

[Millennial_Messiah]

That’s also why a candidate like Biden is a bad idea. Too easy to tie to Obama, and all the criticism levied to that administration.
People liked Obama generally a lot more than Shillary or the New Left.

[DMC]

Ok, fuck it. Someone that speaks coherent and complete sentences that doesn't throw temper tantrums like a child. Is that doable this time around?

We'll see.

[DMC]

That’s also why a candidate like Biden is a bad idea. Too easy to tie to Obama, and all the criticism levied to that administration.

But Obama would have won again if he could run again. Being tied to his administration isn't all that bad, considering the alternatives.

[CosmicCowboy]

I'm still laughing about this one.

kQDQ-Q4kW5Y

[koriwhat]

Sanders
Gabbard
Warren
Gilibrand
O’Rourke

Any of em. Not crazy about Harris. Biden is meh. Booker is a clown

lmao trump is still head and shoulders above all you mentioned tbh. they're all weak and we need real leadership unlike past admins and those your listed.

yall weirdo lefty's are losing the race and fast too. good luck. :tu

[Chris]

No one here on the Yang train?

[Will Hunting]

It’s too bad Sherrod Brown felt discouraged from running just because he’s a white male.

Just shows how out of touch the Democratic Party is. Too many eggs in the Russian collusion basket and candidates who do nothing to win the Midwest back.

I don’t see how Trump loses in 2020 unless he really fucks up in the next 18 months.

[Spurtacular]

Perot taking 20% of the vote certainly didn't help.

But my point is GB wins easy w/o that recession / lies on no new taxes. Given that, Perot frankly could've won if he hadn't dropped out the first time. It's funny how little America wanted Clinton the first time around, but it all worked out for him.

[AaronY]

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/D3bkYbwW0AA8YRN?format=jpg&name=medium

[Spurtacular]

He said ‘provided’, meaning, ‘if she can get past’ that.

You probably misread that for ‘proved’.

Provided is used as a verb and not as a modifier.

You did misread that.

[ElNono]

But Obama would have won again if he could run again. Being tied to his administration isn't all that bad, considering the alternatives.

He would have, IMO, but that doesn’t mean his administration didn’t have dings everywhere. Some talking points, some legit, but the material was already there.

[Spurtacular]

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/D3bkYbwW0AA8YRN?format=jpg&name=medium


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wi-H6ohY37k

[ElNono]

Provided is used as a verb and not as a modifier.

You did misread that.


pro·vid·ed
/prəˈvīdəd/

conjunction
on the condition or understanding that.
"cutting corners was acceptable, provided that you could get away with it"

Straight from the dictionary...

[Spurtacular]

pro·vid·ed
/prəˈvīdəd/

conjunction
on the condition or understanding that.
"cutting corners was acceptable, provided that you could get away with it"

Straight from the dictionary...

And that conjunction needed the comma to be grammatically correct. In your sentence it would not have worked as a verb without the comma; in his sentence it did. I know you know this stuff. You're just stubborn.

[Millennial_Messiah]

It’s too bad Sherrod Brown felt discouraged from running just because he’s a white male.

Just shows how out of touch the Democratic Party is. Too many eggs in the Russian collusion basket and candidates who do nothing to win the Midwest back.

I don’t see how Trump loses in 2020 unless he really fucks up in the next 18 months.
agreed, the Midwest is like 90% white and fairly socially conservative but they are big on worker's rights, not communism but unions and fair treatment of workers.

Biden has a legit chance. He's leading currently in polls vs. Trump in all of the swingy Midwest states except Ohio (which I'd argue has turned more red anyway). But if the Dems nominate a New Left candidate (Bernie, Beto, Harris, Warren, etc) they'll get schallacked and possibly lose even more states that Hillary won in 2016 like MN, CO, VA, maybe NV or NM

[Chris]

Wait till casual voter finds out what Biden and his son did in Ukraine.

[ElNono]

And that conjunction needed the comma to be grammatically correct. In your sentence it would not have worked as a verb without the comma; in his sentence it did. I know you know this stuff. You're just stubborn.

I’m not going to talk for SR, just pointing out that ‘provided’ it’s not a verb, it’s a conjunction, and yes I would agree he missed the commas. That’s at least what I understand he tried to convey, IMO.

[ElNono]

*I should probably clarify before the nit picking that ‘provided’ as a verb would come from provide, or make available, which makes zero sense in the context of that sentence.

[Chris]

Thank God the grammar Nazis are here to enlighten the board.

[ElNono]

Proud ignorant appealing to Godwin per par.

[UnWantedTheory]

Wait till casual voter finds out what Biden and his son did in Ukraine.Also I heard dem fuckers were puhlootin ours minds wit the Devils message thru dem radio freekweensies and turnin frogs gay to boot. Got damn soshalist commie fasschist fag devil worshippin Demoncrats.

[spurraider21]

Nono is right. Derp is wrong.

Par

i missed a comma

[SouthTexasRancher]

Before the COMPLETE EXONERATION, I was thinking it was going to be about 55-45 the Dems would win, but now I think he's going to win again more because the Dems will trip over their own dick.

Do you have proof that the democrats in the Washington DC sewer even have a dick? The women act more like they have balls to go with their dick. Nobody in Congress on any side is worth a shit. If anyone is going to beat Trump they better have a level headed plan and not all this mumble jumble socialist shit from people like AOC and Beto Bozo. JMHO

[pgardn]

Underrate. They think it’s not a factor or generally unimportant, but it’s one of the things that gives the biggest and better ammo to the opposition. Even more so these days where ideas are lacking and candidates run solely on negative campaigns.

The biggest spotlight is on the incumbent.

The Republicans tried to eat each other alive while Hillary sat waiting after her coronation.
It worked. The Republicans made each other look awful.

I think presidential elections are very unique events.
Difficult to make generalizations that hold.

[pgardn]

I would add that the Final decision on the Democratic candidate could get very ugly because the president is so incredibly vulnerable.

[Winehole23]

Biden is coasting on name-recognition and the bad memory of Democratic voters. He is awful and it's only a matter of time before he makes it clear to everyone. Again.

Sanders is taking on Trump head on and could be a frontrunner. Seems to draw crowds, has a knack for relating social spending to conservative voters.

Harris, O'Roarke and Warren are all bunched together at 8-10% each. Harris and O'Roarke are fairly obvious establiashmentarians. For better and for worse, Warren is the candidate with most policy ideas -- Bernie's a distant second. Kamala Harris and O'Rourke are made out of tin; they can be molded to suit the priorities of the DNC and the donor class. Their proposals will be kept suitably vague toward this end -- Harris and O'Roarke both seem to be allergic to specificity so far.

If the top 5 Democratic candidates are all able to maintain funding leading up to the convention next year, it'll be interesting to see which name emerges from the smoke-filled room

[BD24]

I'm still laughing about this one.

kQDQ-Q4kW5Y
This one made me chuckle tbh.

[Chucho]

And that conjunction needed the comma to be grammatically correct. In your sentence it would not have worked as a verb without the comma; in his sentence it did. I know you know this stuff. You're just stubborn.

You're the last fucking person to try and give grammar lessons, you fucking moron.

[Winehole23]

No no, it's hilarious

[Spurtacular]

I’m not going to talk for SR, just pointing out that ‘provided’ it’s not a verb, it’s a conjunction, and yes I would agree he missed the commas. That’s at least what I understand he tried to convey, IMO.

Kudos to you for seeing his more likely intent better than I did. But he still actually used provided as a verb.

[Spurtacular]

You're the last fucking person to try and give grammar lessons, you fucking moron.

:lmao Crusty

[Chucho]

derp the sociopath telling himself he's intelligent and a winner while reality tells him he's a dipshit and a loser. LOL, derp.

[Spurtacular]

derp the sociopath telling himself he's intelligent and a winner while reality tells him he's a dipshit and a loser. LOL, derp.

Pull yourself together, Crusty.

[florige]

That’s also why a candidate like Biden is a bad idea. Too easy to tie to Obama, and all the criticism levied to that administration.


I agree totally. While Obama himself would probably destroy Trump, there is really no guarantee that Biden just because he was Obama's VP he would win against Trump at all. The reason I say Sanders is his voters seem to be really stubborn. To them I have noticed that its either Sanders or no one, or Trump. I personally know about 20 or so Sanders voters who plain didn't vote or voted for Trump out of spite against Hillary. The only hope there is that it was more of a despise against Hillary verses it not being Sanders as the nominee.

[Will Hunting]

I agree totally. While Obama himself would probably destroy Trump, there is really no guarantee that Biden just because he was Obama's VP he would win against Trump at all. The reason I say Sanders is his voters seem to be really stubborn. To them I have noticed that its either Sanders or no one, or Trump. I personally know about 20 or so Sanders voters who plain didn't vote or voted for Trump out of spite against Hillary. The only hope there is that it was more of a despise against Hillary verses it not being Sanders as the nominee.
It was out of spite towards the DNCs primary process that was rigged for Hillary. Sanders voters would have played ball if Sanders was given a fair shake.

[benefactor]

derp the sociopath telling himself he's intelligent and a winner while reality tells him he's a dipshit and a loser. LOL, derp.
Dunning-Kruger, just like the president tbh

[Spurtacular]

I agree totally. While Obama himself would probably destroy Trump, there is really no guarantee that Biden just because he was Obama's VP he would win against Trump at all. The reason I say Sanders is his voters seem to be really stubborn. To them I have noticed that its either Sanders or no one, or Trump. I personally know about 20 or so Sanders voters who plain didn't vote or voted for Trump out of spite against Hillary. The only hope there is that it was more of a despise against Hillary verses it not being Sanders as the nominee.

I guess you weren't paying attention to all those rust belt voters who gave up on the Obama mirage.

[Spurtacular]

It was out of spite towards the DNCs primary process that was rigged for Hillary. Sanders voters would have played ball if Sanders was given a fair shake.

Maybe that's true for a percentage of them. But a large percent of them recognized Hillary as an establishment hoax irregardless. Plenty of that sentiment strongly expressed in interviews long before the cheating came out.

[Will Hunting]

Maybe that's true for a percentage of them. But a large percent of them recognized Hillary as an establishment hoax irregardless. Plenty of that sentiment strongly expressed in interviews long before the cheating came out.
You’re right tbh, my post was incomplete. I definitely agree Hillary’s past (and generally cunty demeanor) was a turn off for a lot of the Sanders supporters regardless of how the primary process was handled.

[rmt]

It’s too bad Sherrod Brown felt discouraged from running just because he’s a white male.

Just shows how out of touch the Democratic Party is. Too many eggs in the Russian collusion basket and candidates who do nothing to win the Midwest back.

I don’t see how Trump loses in 2020 unless he really fucks up in the next 18 months.

Each side tends to be pessimistic about its side. Don't worry the Trump hate is STRONG, and I think Florida will flip - over a million former felons now eligible to vote and this Gillum's drive to register another one million voters. These people know no bounds - do you know that someone went into prison and signed up that (accused) Parkland shooter - I wouldn't want his vote.

[Will Hunting]

Each side tends to be pessimistic about its side. Don't worry the Trump hate is STRONG, and I think Florida will flip - over a million former felons now eligible to vote and this Gillum's drive to register another one million voters. These people know no bounds - do you know that someone went into prison and signed up that (accused) Parkland shooter - I wouldn't want his vote.
I think DeSantis is going to be successful in blocking that vote at least in 2020, by 2022 the courts probably strike down whatever law was made in effort to delay them being able to vote.

Regarding “these people know no bounds” - if felons/prisoners shouldn’t be allowed to vote then they shouldn’t count towards a state’s population for purposes of electoral colleges and congress. The current system where some states have millions of registered felons/prisoners who can’t vote but still get the state extra congressman/electoral colleges is 3/5ths compromise level bullshit.

[Millennial_Messiah]

I think DeSantis is going to be successful in blocking that vote at least in 2020, by 2022 the courts probably strike down whatever law was made in effort to delay them being able to vote.

Regarding “these people know no bounds” - if felons/prisoners shouldn’t be allowed to vote then they shouldn’t count towards a state’s population for purposes of electoral colleges and congress. The current system where some states have millions of registered felons/prisoners who can’t vote but still get the state extra congressman/electoral colleges is 3/5ths compromise level bullshit.

I read somewhere though that there were actually slightly more of the ex-felons in Florida actually going out and registering as Republicans than Democrats. Not too unbelievable actually.

[florige]

I guess you weren't paying attention to all those rust belt voters who gave up on the Obama mirage.


I personally don’t think Obama loses states like PA and MI. Hillary was just totally hated and ran a terrible campaign and
She still came close in the rust belt states. I think Trump would had still taken OH and maybe FL. But the hate towards Hillary, the fact that she ran a awful campaign
and all those disenchanted Bernie voters are what cost her. Plus Hillary had so much baggage that even Trump with all his stuff was able to exploit.

[florige]

92 Clinton won because of a) Ross Perot, and b) people tired of 12 years of GOP policy

08 Obama won because any Democrat would have won because Bush was public enemy #1 at the time + the recession had just started. Even Hillary would have crushed twerpy McCain that year.

I really was referring to 08 Obama more so against Hillary than McCain. 08 was supposedly Hillary’s time. She was primed
And unscathed from scandal at that point. Obama sorta came out of nowhere and snatched that away from her. Everyone even knew that whoever came out from that would be the next President.

[Spurtacular]

I personally don’t think Obama loses states like PA and MI. Hillary was just totally hated and ran a terrible campaign and
She still came close in the rust belt states. I think Trump would had still taken OH and maybe FL. But the hate towards Hillary, the fact that she ran a awful campaign
and all those disenchanted Bernie voters are what cost her. Plus Hillary had so much baggage that even Trump with all his stuff was able to exploit.

Mitt didn't offer the stark contrast that the rust belt states voters wanted. Voting for Obama Lite wasn't a big draw for them. Maybe Obama would win Pennsylvania by bringing out more of the urban vote there.

[florige]

Mitt didn't offer the stark contrast that the rust belt states voters wanted. Voting for Obama Lite wasn't a big draw for them. Maybe Obama would win Pennsylvania by bringing out more of the urban vote there.


That’s what I’m thinking. Urban voters tend to stay at home when its not someone they fully endorse. But I’m sure Trump would had pounded Obama on the healthcare thing In the rural PA counties so who knows.

[Millennial_Messiah]

I personally don’t think Obama loses states like PA and MI. Hillary was just totally hated and ran a terrible campaign and
She still came close in the rust belt states. I think Trump would had still taken OH and maybe FL. But the hate towards Hillary, the fact that she ran a awful campaign
and all those disenchanted Bernie voters are what cost her. Plus Hillary had so much baggage that even Trump with all his stuff was able to exploit.

I think Florida is permanently a swing state, Ohio is now a red state and Nevada is permanently a blue state.

[ElNono]

I personally don’t think Obama loses states like PA and MI. Hillary was just totally hated and ran a terrible campaign and
She still came close in the rust belt states. I think Trump would had still taken OH and maybe FL. But the hate towards Hillary, the fact that she ran a awful campaign
and all those disenchanted Bernie voters are what cost her. Plus Hillary had so much baggage that even Trump with all his stuff was able to exploit.

I think Barry takes FL... IIRC, he won them pretty convincingly both times.

[ElNono]

It’s too bad Sherrod Brown felt discouraged from running just because he’s a white male.

Just shows how out of touch the Democratic Party is. Too many eggs in the Russian collusion basket and candidates who do nothing to win the Midwest back.

I don’t see how Trump loses in 2020 unless he really fucks up in the next 18 months.

It honestly think Trump is still a fairly weak candidate, IMO. The issue here is that Democrats don't seem to have a unifier figure out there, and if that person turns out to be Bernie, he would be too polarizing for a good chunk of independents.

[Millennial_Messiah]

It honestly think Trump is still a fairly weak candidate, IMO. The issue here is that Democrats don't seem to have a unifier figure out there, and if that person turns out to be Bernie, he would be too polarizing for a good chunk of independents.

Biden is the only one who consistently leads the polls in enough states to reach 270 ECV.

[Spurtacular]

Biden is the only one who consistently leads the polls in enough states to reach 270 ECV.

If true, Dems are cooked. Creepy Joe has no real chance against Alpha Trump.

[Spurtacular]

It honestly think Trump is still a fairly weak candidate, IMO. The issue here is that Democrats don't seem to have a unifier figure out there, and if that person turns out to be Bernie, he would be too polarizing for a good chunk of independents.

Any incumbent overseeing good economic times is not "fairly weak." That's just not how it works.

[rmt]

I think DeSantis is going to be successful in blocking that vote at least in 2020, by 2022 the courts probably strike down whatever law was made in effort to delay them being able to vote.

Regarding “these people know no bounds” - if felons/prisoners shouldn’t be allowed to vote then they shouldn’t count towards a state’s population for purposes of electoral colleges and congress. The current system where some states have millions of registered felons/prisoners who can’t vote but still get the state extra congressman/electoral colleges is 3/5ths compromise level bullshit.

De Santis sent out robocalls (I got one myself) before the vote ENCOURAGING people to vote for it - he definitely will not be seeking to block it (I don't even think one can block it after the voters have had their say) - maybe that's why his approval ratings are so high. Florida voters overwhelming voted FOR it so it will be in effect for the next election. The "know no bounds" specifically refers to the Parkland shooter himself (not FORMER felons of which he is not one) - how desperate for votes do you have to be to want his vote.

How would your method work? Isn't the determination for electoral college/reps determined once every 10 years - meaning a static time when people are either in or out of prison (and that prison population is ever changing after). I don't see how you don't count the prison population. Then if someone couldn't vote in prison and then comes out and votes, his representation would be diminished under your suggestion. Maybe you want the prison population to count and vote. I'm for them not voting in prison - just another right/freedom you lose in prison. Besides, it probably wouldn't matter as ALL the states would PROPORTIONALLY lose/gain representation. Or maybe the thought is that the more populated (and liberal states) have more prison population and would result in more swing.

[Will Hunting]

De Santis sent out robocalls (I got one myself) before the vote ENCOURAGING people to vote for it - he definitely will not be seeking to block it (I don't even think one can block it after the voters have had their say) - maybe that's why his approval ratings are so high. Florida voters overwhelming voted FOR it so it will be in effect for the next election. The "know no bounds" specifically refers to the Parkland shooter himself (not FORMER felons of which he is not one) - how desperate for votes do you have to be to want his vote.

How would your method work? Isn't the determination for electoral college/reps determined once every 10 years - meaning a static time when people are either in or out of prison (and that prison population is ever changing after). I don't see how you don't count the prison population. Then if someone couldn't vote in prison and then comes out and votes, his representation would be diminished under your suggestion. Maybe you want the prison population to count and vote. I'm for them not voting in prison - just another right/freedom you lose in prison. Besides, it probably wouldn't matter as ALL the states would PROPORTIONALLY lose/gain representation. Or maybe the thought is that the more populated (and liberal states) have more prison population and would result in more swing.
The states with the highest incarceration rate per 100,000 adults (as of 2016) were Oklahoma, Louisiana, Missippi, Georgia, Alabama, Texas, Arizona Kentucky and Missouri, in that order. You got me, I CLEARLY want all those liberal states with a disproportionately high prison population getting more of a vote

[Millennial_Messiah]

If true, Dems are cooked. Creepy Joe has no real chance against Alpha Trump.

How come? Please provide logic.

[Reck]

How come? Please provide logic.

Derp is devoid of logic.

Biden strikes the balance of being a moderate and also being progressive enough on the issues that matter. Biden would win comfortably against Trump.

Moderates have proven they can win in deep red states (Arizona,Alabama) while ultra progressive candidates have mostly failed. (Beto-texas)

This new line of attack on Biden is just...odd.

They're calling Biden a creep while worshipping another. Such is the life of a Trumpster.

Oh and did I forget people actually like Biden? :lol

[Pavlov]

Unless Biden actually grabbed someone by the pussy, he should be fine.

Sanders just runs a cult of personality like Trump. No thanks.

[Millennial_Messiah]

Derp is devoid of logic.

Biden strikes the balance of being a moderate and also being progressive enough on the issues that matter. Biden would win comfortably against Trump.

Moderates have proven they can win in deep red states (Arizona,Alabama) while ultra progressive candidates have mostly failed. (Beto-texas)

This new line of attack on Biden is just...odd.

They're calling Biden a creep while worshipping another. Such is the life of a Trumpster.

Oh and did I forget people actually like Biden? :lol
One thing I liked about Biden is that, in 2014 he had the balls to make comments about Turkey and Saudi being primarily to blame for harboring of ISIS, before the Obama admin + Congress shut him up. Even though he was right.

I'm honestly in favor of any candidate that will stop being friends with our worst ideological enemies. Especially those who suppress women, enforce religious conservative, one-way polygamy, and kill gays. Those are all anti-American and anti-Western values and giving them U.S. taxpayer money and breaks in trade deals.

[Millennial_Messiah]

The states with the highest incarceration rate per 100,000 adults (as of 2016) were Oklahoma, Louisiana, Missippi, Georgia, Alabama, Texas, Arizona Kentucky and Missouri, in that order. You got me, I CLEARLY want all those liberal states with a disproportionately high prison population getting more of a vote

The vast, vast majority of incarcerated whites are right wing. It's not surprising.

[Spurtacular]

How come? Please provide logic.

What contrast does he offer? None. Not gonna kick out an incumbent.

[Pavlov]

What contrast does he offer? None.:lmao

[Spurtacular]

Tell us about the contrast, psychopav.

[Will Hunting]

The vast, vast majority of incarcerated whites are right wing. It's not surprising.
You’re saying the incarcerated population in states like Georgia is predominantly white? :lmao

[pgardn]

The states with the highest incarceration rate per 100,000 adults (as of 2016) were Oklahoma, Louisiana, Missippi, Georgia, Alabama, Texas, Arizona Kentucky and Missouri, in that order. You got me, I CLEARLY want all those liberal states with a disproportionately high prison population getting more of a vote

rmt takes a debilitating blow to the midsection

[ElNono]

Any incumbent overseeing good economic times is not "fairly weak." That's just not how it works.

It wouldn't be unprecedented, tbh, happened to Bush Sr, after a relatively short downturn in the economy. We'll see what the economy looks like when the elections come around. People have relatively short memory, IMO.
Doesn't help either that the economy was already in the upswing when he took over (and by that I don't mean he shouldn't take credit for the economy doing well, I mean that's much easier to campaign on an economic turnaround).

War time presidents also normally have better support for re-election, but, well, we're not officially at war (at least not on a new war campaign).

Lastly, this is something I mentioned in the past and not specific to Trump, the GOP generally has an election numbers problem. Even though we use an electoral votes system, consistently losing the popular vote is a trend they'll have to turnaround sooner rather than later, or their avenues to victory will continue to diminish. Plus, I think it'll be interesting to see how the rust belt reacts to the current economic realities, a path that was key for the original upset.

All that said, I still think he's largely the favorite right now, mostly because the Dem field looks fragmented and uninteresting so far.

[Spurtacular]

It wouldn't be unprecedented, tbh, happened to Bush Sr, after a relatively short downturn in the economy.

The recession and its effects hit all during campaign time. That could still happen to Trump, but I'm not expecting it.

[Millennial_Messiah]

You’re saying the incarcerated population in states like Georgia is predominantly white? :lmao

Nope, because they're majority black (Shitlanta). Then again, blacks vote in lower turnouts than whites, historically.

[Millennial_Messiah]

It wouldn't be unprecedented, tbh, happened to Bush Sr, after a relatively short downturn in the economy. We'll see what the economy looks like when the elections come around. People have relatively short memory, IMO.

It happened to Bush Sr because

a) people were tired of 12 years of the GOP... they wanted something fresh
b) Bush Sr lied about raising taxes and instead raised them in order to police the world... dumb dumb dumb
c) Ross Perot

12 years of the same party/policy is too much. 4 years is completely different.

[Spurtacular]

Doesn't help either that the economy was already in the upswing when he took over

Trump has been the steward of the economy, not Obama. Only the partisans will be arguing in those margins.

[Millennial_Messiah]

the GOP generally has an election numbers problem. Even though we use an electoral votes system, consistently losing the popular vote is a trend they'll have to turnaround sooner rather than later, or their avenues to victory will continue to diminish.

I agree, and it's going to have to mean at some point appealing to Hispanics.

Latinos have socially conservative values and are usually more capitalistic than socialistic, but the immigration thing has burned the GOP badly, because it's painted them as racist and anti-Latino. However we can't just let everyone from Latin America in. Cesar Chavez advocated that the Hispanics already in the USA should be protected from competition by closing off most immigration. The theory that if there are 5 job seekers to a job it would be worse for Hispanics than if there were 2 job seekers to a job. It makes perfect sense and the GOP must stress examples like this, plus cater to the social conservatism.

[Reck]

It wouldn't be unprecedented, tbh, happened to Bush Sr, after a relatively short downturn in the economy. We'll see what the economy looks like when the elections come around. People have relatively short memory, IMO.
Doesn't help either that the economy was already in the upswing when he took over (and by that I don't mean he shouldn't take credit for the economy doing well, I mean that's much easier to campaign on an economic turnaround).

War time presidents also normally have better support for re-election, but, well, we're not officially at war (at least not on a new war campaign).

Lastly, this is something I mentioned in the past and not specific to Trump, the GOP generally has an election numbers problem. Even though we use an electoral votes system, consistently losing the popular vote is a trend they'll have to turnaround sooner rather than later, or their avenues to victory will continue to diminish. Plus, I think it'll be interesting to see how the rust belt reacts to the current economic realities, a path that was key for the original upset.

All that said, I still think he's largely the favorite right now, mostly because the Dem field looks fragmented and uninteresting so far.

I was just gonna say...Obama? What Obama?

The economy is doing well because of mah Trump. Then derp proves me right. :lol

[Pavlov]

It will be interesting to see how Dennison handles an economic downturn. He seems primed to blame the fed for everything which I guess is why he wants to pack it with TV loudmouths and @pizza makers. But then what? Moar QE?

[Spurtacular]

I was just gonna say...Obama? What Obama?

The economy is doing well because of mah Trump. Then derp proves me right. :lol

Yea, Obama's trillions for non-existent shovel ready jobs saved the day.

[Spurtacular]

It will be interesting to see how Dennison handles an economic downturn. He seems primed to blame the fed for everything which I guess is why he wants to pack it with TV loudmouths and @pizza makers. But then what? Moar QE?

I'm still waiting for the Biden/Trump contrast. Go ahead and tell us.

[Reck]

:lmao

[Pavlov]

I'm still waiting for the Biden/Trump contrast. Go ahead and tell us.You like Biden as much as you like Trump and think he will do just as good a job as president.

[Spurtacular]

You like Biden as much as you like Trump.

Tell us about the contrast. What is going to win the voters over.

[Pavlov]

Tell us about the contrast. What is going to win the voters over.You like Biden as much as you like Trump and think he will do just as good a job as president.

You see no difference whatsoever.:tu

[Spurtacular]

You like Biden as much as you like Trump and think he will do just as good a job as president.

You see no difference whatsoever.:tu

The voters aren't gonna care about replacing Trump with Creepy Joe. You simply can't give any good reasons, so you're trying to do a semantic play. Par.

[Pavlov]

The voters aren't gonna care about replacing Trump with Creepy Joe. You simply can't give any good reasons, so you're trying to do a semantic play. Par.It's not semantics. You like Biden as much as you like Trump and think he will do just as good a job as president.

You see no contrast whatsoever.:tu

[Spurtacular]

It's not semantics. You like Biden as much as you like Trump and think he will do just as good a job as president.

You see no contrast whatsoever.:tu

So, your position is there is no contrast whatsoever.:tu

[Pavlov]

So, your position is there is no contrast whatsoever.:tuIt's your position.

I never said it was my position.

Quit lying.

Why do you always lie?

[ducks]

Robert Charles: Obama is right -- Dems' circular firing squad is set to give Trump a 2020 Former President Obama declared concern Saturday that Democrats are creating ”a circular firing squad” by embracing progressive socialists. He is right. Democrats are setting up a 2020 landslide -- for President Trump.https://www.foxnews.com/opinion/robert-charles-obama-is-right-dems-are-set-to-give-trump-a-2020-landslide

[Pavlov]

Robert Charles: Obama is right -- Dems' circular firing squad is set to give Trump a 2020 Former President Obama declared concern Saturday that Democrats are creating ”a circular firing squad” by embracing progressive socialists. He is right. Democrats are setting up a 2020 landslide -- for President Trump.https://www.foxnews.com/opinion/robert-charles-obama-is-right-dems-are-set-to-give-trump-a-2020-landslide:lol that's not what he said.

[Spurtacular]

It's your position.

I never said it was my position.

Quit lying.

Why do you always lie?

Okay, then finally tell us what you think the contrast is.

[Pavlov]

Okay, then finally tell us what you think the contrast is.How do you think each generally feels about the ACA, derp?

Fill in the blanks with "for" or "against."

Trump is ____ the ACA.

Biden is ____ the ACA.

[Spurtacular]

How do you think each generally feels about the ACA, derp?

Fill in the blanks with "for" or "against."

Trump is ____ the ACA.

Biden is ____ the ACA.

So, you think Biden's gonna win on trying to revive the Obamacare scam?

:lmao

[Pavlov]

So, you think Biden's gonna win on trying to revive the Obamacare scam?

:lmaoDerp votes present.

lol derp

[Spurtacular]

Derp votes present.

lol derp

Nope. I'm going back to the crux of the matter from the start. Biden can't beat Trump. He doesn't offer a more desirable alternative.

[ducks]

He would kiss all republicans elected officials to try to get them to do what he wants

[ducks]

Speaking of town halls, Fox News stirred a bit of controversy this week, announcing that it will host a presidential town hall with democratic socialist Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., on April 15. Fox News’ Bret Baier and Martha MacCallum will moderate the one-hour event live from Bethlehem, Pa., beginning at 6:30 p.m. ET.

[Pavlov]

Nope. I'm going back to the crux of the matter from the start. Biden can't beat Trump. He doesn't offer a more desirable alternative.
https://media1.tenor.com/images/83116dac5575fef19f9a39e17984e7bd/tenor.gif
:lmao derp

[koriwhat]

Speaking of town halls, Fox News stirred a bit of controversy this week, announcing that it will host a presidential town hall with democratic socialist Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., on April 15. Fox News’ Bret Baier and Martha MacCallum will moderate the one-hour event live from Bethlehem, Pa., beginning at 6:30 p.m. ET.

"democratic socialist" :lmao

i can't believe people are backing an old, rich, white, cis male(lol) who turned his back on his whole base of fucking retards to prop up satan herself. fucking losers the whole lot of you bernout idiots.

[ElNono]

Trump has been the steward of the economy, not Obama. Only the partisans will be arguing in those margins.


I was just gonna say...Obama? What Obama?

The economy is doing well because of mah Trump. Then derp proves me right. :lol

He should and will claim credit for it, IMO, and that's proper. What I said stands though: from a political standpoint, it's much more salient to contrast the economic progress when you inherited a mess (an actual turnaround) than steady progress (basically, didn't fuck it up).

From a non-partisan standpoint, both have merit. From a political standpoint, a turnaround is a much easier sell.

[rmt]

The states with the highest incarceration rate per 100,000 adults (as of 2016) were Oklahoma, Louisiana, Missippi, Georgia, Alabama, Texas, Arizona Kentucky and Missouri, in that order. You got me, I CLEARLY want all those liberal states with a disproportionately high prison population getting more of a vote

What do you want? Do you want prisoners to vote? Or only former felons?

I am assuming that currently all states count prison population for representation - so if former felons in these conservative states vote, it will hardly matter as these states (except maybe GA) will go GOP anyways. It won't matter in either liberal or conservative states - just the swing states as always. Incarceration rates in FL (Number of people incarcerated per 100,000 people in that race/ethnic group):

White - 626
Hispanic - 536
Black - 2555

So if former felons vote (historically the way their race votes), then FL will swing DEM next election and it's unlikely Trump can win without FL (although he did last time).

[Spurtacular]

:lmao derp

That was always the crux of the matter that Joe can't offer an alternative (contrast) that voters desire. You think I'm just making random shit ass points otherwise?

:lmao Psychopav Chump

[Spurtacular]

He should and will claim credit for it, IMO, and that's proper. What I said stands though: from a political standpoint, it's much more salient to contrast the economic progress when you inherited a mess (an actual turnaround) than steady progress (basically, didn't fuck it up).

From a non-partisan standpoint, both have merit. From a political standpoint, a turnaround is a much easier sell.

Obama had eight years in which the median income fell. That's why America rejected the next incarnation of him. People were not exceedingly happy with the economy when he was in. They're certainly not gonna care four years on about seeing him as the conductor. Rather, they see him as the jack ass talking about wands and trying to cuck America to the rest the world. MAGA train full speed ahead.

[Pavlov]

That was always the crux of the matter that Joe can't offer an alternative (contrast) that voters desire.
https://media1.tenor.com/images/83116dac5575fef19f9a39e17984e7bd/tenor.gif:lol derp

[ElNono]

It happened to Bush Sr because

a) people were tired of 12 years of the GOP... they wanted something fresh
b) Bush Sr lied about raising taxes and instead raised them in order to police the world... dumb dumb dumb
c) Ross Perot

12 years of the same party/policy is too much. 4 years is completely different.

Yes, agree that incumbency has a high price (although I would put an asterisk in that particular case since Reagan was extremely popular, but also ties to what I mentioned about being a war president).
He was actually pretty mild when it came to wars, it was mostly cut and run on Iraq/Kuwait (which IMO was perfectly reasonable).

Economically, he missed the dotcom boom by just a few years. Clinton ended up getting credit for that, but could've happened to anybody. That's why the whole economics swings thing is not something you can count on this early in the cycle, IMO.


I agree, and it's going to have to mean at some point appealing to Hispanics.

Latinos have socially conservative values and are usually more capitalistic than socialistic, but the immigration thing has burned the GOP badly, because it's painted them as racist and anti-Latino. However we can't just let everyone from Latin America in. Cesar Chavez advocated that the Hispanics already in the USA should be protected from competition by closing off most immigration. The theory that if there are 5 job seekers to a job it would be worse for Hispanics than if there were 2 job seekers to a job. It makes perfect sense and the GOP must stress examples like this, plus cater to the social conservatism.

Completely agree that latinos are there for the taking for the GOP, the issue is that they keep shooting themselves in the foot mostly to appease the same aging, largely white, rural population that's giving them diminishing returns.

Another sector that they could probably easily grab is Asian and Asian-Americans, a fast growing population segment generally more conservative also.

[ElNono]

Obama had eight years in which the median income fell. That's why America rejected the next incarnation of him. People were not exceedingly happy with the economy when he was in. They're certainly not gonna care four years on about seeing him as the conductor. Rather, they see him as the jack ass talking about wands and trying to cuck America to the rest the world. MAGA train full speed ahead.

I don't need to defend Barry's economics, tbh, he inherited a depression not seen in 80 years and turned it around. He won reelection over that and Obamacare fairly easily. The economic indicators when he walked in and walked out are night and day (despite any pointed criticism in specific areas).

I also do agree that incumbency has a high price (although I don't think that's entirely why Shillary lost, she was just a very unlikeable candidate).

The point I'm making is that it's much easier to sell your economic prowess when you took over a country in the middle of a giant recession and leave office with decent to good economic indicators, etc, than getting a mildly vibrant economy and making it shine.

That's not Trump's fault either, he didn't get to choose how he started.

[Spurtacular]

:lol derp

:lmao Coping mechanism

[Spurtacular]

I don't need to defend Barry's economics, tbh, he inherited a depression not seen in 80 years and turned it around. He won reelection over that and Obamacare fairly easily. The economic indicators when he walked in and walked out are night and day (despite any pointed criticism in specific areas).

I also do agree that incumbency has a high price (although I don't think that's entirely why Shillary lost, she was just a very unlikeable candidate).

The point I'm making is that it's much easier to sell your economic prowess when you took over a country in the middle of a giant recession and leave office with decent to good economic indicators, etc, than getting a mildly vibrant economy and making it shine.

That's not Trump's fault either, he didn't get to choose how he started.

People give Obama some credit for steadying the economy whether he deserves it or not; but by that same token, they don't see him as the guy who took the economy next level. They see him as the guy who was weak on the border and who presided over a decreasing standard of living. It's just not gonna happen, Obama getting credit for Trump presiding over a good economy.

[Millennial_Messiah]

Completely agree that latinos are there for the taking for the GOP, the issue is that they keep shooting themselves in the foot mostly to appease the same aging, largely white, rural population that's giving them diminishing returns.

Another sector that they could probably easily grab is Asian and Asian-Americans, a fast growing population segment generally more conservative also.

The thing is the religious rural white conservatives would still vote for the GOP over the Dems 100%. They like their land and don't care about urbanite stuff like climate change and welfare programs.

I'm not so sure I agree about the Asians, though. The majority are located on the West Coast and Massachusetts and vote liberal because they are socially liberal. They value population control (2-3 kids tops per U.S. Asian couple) and generally other more liberal causes, in addition to being primarily non-religious.

[Pavlov]

:lmao Coping mechanism:lol crying derp

[ElNono]

People give Obama some credit for steadying the economy whether he deserves it or not; but by that same token, they don't see him as the guy who took the economy next level. They see him as the guy who was weak on the border and who presided over a decreasing standard of living. It's just not gonna happen, Obama getting credit for Trump presiding over a good economy.

Well, of course he'll get the credit, it was his administration, just like Trump will take credit now. That's perfectly understandable, even if entities like the Fed have a much bigger role in those matters. Just like dubya took the bulk of the blame when shit went south, even if we can debate if it was entirely his fault or not. That's normally how these things work.

Not sure who 'they' are up there, but Barry left government with around 50% of job approval rate (only Reagan and Clinton are recently on the same level), had a record number (at the time) of deportations, etc. If anything, I think conservatives in general were fairly upset how popular he was, IMO. (On a personal level I think he was pretty much a Wall Street sellout, but hey, everybody has their opinion).

I keep circling back to popular vote, likeability, etc, because while it's not the decider of an election, it's much more complicated to win when you're consistently unpopular. Trump is a polarizing figure and his job approval in the first term so far ranks with the likes of Gerald Ford (a one termer), and while Democrats don't have much to show for anything right now, tbh, it's stuff that can't be waived off.

[Spurtacular]

Well, of course he'll get the credit, it was his administration, just like Trump will take credit now. That's perfectly understandable, even if entities like the Fed have a much bigger role in those matters. Just like dubya took the bulk of the blame when shit went south, even if we can debate if it was entirely his fault or not. That's normally how these things work.

Not sure who 'they' are up there, but Barry left government with around 50% of job approval rate (only Reagan and Clinton are recently on the same level), had a record number (at the time) of deportations, etc. If anything, I think conservatives in general were fairly upset how popular he was, IMO. (On a personal level I think he was pretty much a Wall Street sellout, but hey, everybody has their opinion).

I keep circling back to popular vote, likeability, etc, because while it's not the decider of an election, it's much more complicated to win when you're consistently unpopular. Trump is a polarizing figure and his job approval in the first term so far ranks with the likes of Gerald Ford (a one termer), and while Democrats don't have much to show for anything right now, tbh, it's stuff that can't be waived off.

:lol Giving credit to the fed.
:lol Academia BS point.

[Pavlov]

:lol Giving credit to the fed.Do you know what the fed does?

[Spurtacular]

Do you know what the fed does?

:cry Check for understanding :cry

[Pavlov]

:cry Check for understanding :cryJust say you don't know what you're talking about, derp.

[Spurtacular]

Just say you don't know what you're talking about, derp.

I know exactly what the fed does, ass hat.

:lmao Fishing Pscyhopav Chump

[Pavlov]

I know exactly what the fed does, ass hat. OK, what is it?

[ElNono]

:lol Giving credit to the fed.
:lol Academia BS point.

Trump bitching about the Fed interest rates only enhances the point, tbh. Keeping tabs on inflation, things like QE, etc, they're all driven by the Fed. Sure, nobody has to like them, but their influence on the money supply and the economy is undeniable.

[Spurtacular]

Trump bitching about the Fed interest rates only enhances the point, tbh. Keeping tabs on inflation, things like QE, etc, they're all driven by the Fed. Sure, nobody has to like them, but their influence on the money supply and the economy is undeniable.

Fed causes the problems. :lol at giving them credit for tempering their fucking stuff up.

[Pavlov]

Fed causes the problems.How?

[Spurtacular]

How?

Are you unaware of their fundamentally flawed setup and the problems that it causes, or is this simply you being a blue-pilled bitch like usual?

[Pavlov]

Are you unaware of their fundamentally flawed setup and the problems that it causes, or is this simply you being a blue-pilled bitch like usual?I want to see your explanation.

In your own words.

Without whining or trying to change the subject.

[Spurtacular]

I want to see your explanation.

In your own words.

Without whining or trying to change the subject.

I didn't ask what you want. I typically could care less about what you want.

Are you unaware of their fundamentally flawed setup and the problems that it causes, or is this simply you being a blue-pilled bitch like usual?

[ducks]

MA POLL: bernieSanders
leads Democratic #Primary followed by
@JoeBiden

@ewarrenhttps://mobile.twitter.com/EmersonPolling/status/1114997620848590853
and
@PeteButtigieg

[ducks]

Lol Biden beating waren in her home state and not even running official

[Pavlov]

I didn't ask what you want. I typically could care less about what you want.

Are you unaware of their fundamentally flawed setup and the problems that it causes, or is this simply you being a blue-pilled bitch like usual?You're whining.

Are you going to explain it in your own words or just whine and try to change the subject?

Let me know so we can move on.

[Spurtacular]

You're whining.

Are you going to explain it in your own words or just whine and try to change the subject?

Let me know so we can move on.

I'm going to see if you can identify any problems or if you're just sperm shielding like usual.

[Pavlov]

I'm going to see if you can identify any problems or if you're just sperm shielding like usual.That's precisely what I asked you to do.

So you're just going to whine and try to change the subject.

You're an idiot.

Stop acting like you know anything.

[Spurtacular]

That's precisely what I asked you to do.

So you're just going to whine and try to change the subject.

You're an idiot.

Stop acting like you know anything.

You have to ante up if you want me to show my hand.

[Pavlov]

You have to ante up if you want me to show my hand.Nope.

You don't know shit.

I called you out and you shit yourself.

Just shut up.

[Spurtacular]

Nope.

You don't know shit.

I called you out and you shit yourself.

Just shut up.

:lmao Total tantrum

[Pavlov]

:lmao Total tantrum:lmao totally whining trying to change the subject.

You know nothing about the fed.

Period.

[Spurtacular]

:lmao totally whining trying to change the subject.

You know nothing about the fed.

Period.

No shame in you folding, bruh. Just try to avoid the tantrum is all.

[Pavlov]

No shame in you folding, bruh. Just try to avoid the tantrum is all.You folded as soon as I asked you to explain yourself and you're ashamed.

Now you're desperately trying to change the subject to me.

lol derp

How does the Fed cause problems as you claim?

[Spurtacular]

You folded as soon as I asked you to explain yourself and you're ashamed.

Now you're desperately trying to change the subject to me.

I called. You folded.

[Pavlov]

I called. You folded.Sorry.

I asked you this simple question:

How does the Fed cause problems as you claim?


I asked you to explain in your own words without whining or changing the subject.

All you have done is whine and try to change the subject.

You know nothing.

[Spurtacular]

Sorry.

I asked you this simple question:

How does the Fed cause problems as you claim?


I asked you to explain in your own words without whining or changing the subject.

All you have done is whine and try to change the subject.

You know nothing.

:cry I don't have to ante up :cry

:cry Tantrum :cry

[Pavlov]

:cry I don't have to ante up :cryNo one does. It's not poker.

How does the Fed cause problems as you claim?


Please explain in your own words without whining or trying to change the subject or making up poker rules for a simple discussion.

[Spurtacular]

No one does. It's not poker.

How does the Fed cause problems as you claim?


Please explain in your own words without whining or trying to change the subject or making up poker rules for a simple discussion.

:cry But muh demands :cry

[Pavlov]

:cry But muh demands :cryYou're whining.

If you can't answer, just say so.

How does the Fed cause problems as you claim?


Please explain in your own words without whining or trying to change the subject or making up poker rules for a simple discussion.

[Spurtacular]

You're whining.

If you can't answer, just say so.

How does the Fed cause problems as you claim?


Please explain in your own words without whining or trying to change the subject or making up poker rules for a simple discussion.

I can answer. I told you to ante up and you went into tizzy mode.

[Pavlov]

I can answer.Then quit stalling and answer.


I told you to ante up and you went into tizzy mode.You're making up poker rules for a simple discussion.

It's not poker.

How does the Fed cause problems as you claim?


Please explain in your own words without whining or trying to change the subject or making up poker rules for a simple discussion.

[Pavlov]

I mean you could have Googled "federal reserve problems" and faked some shit by now.

But muh conditions.

lol derp

[Spurtacular]

I mean you could have Googled "federal reserve problems" and faked some shit by now.

But muh conditions.

lol derp

I didn't need to fake anything. You should stop being an asshole and presuming people don't know stuff just because it suits your psychopav narrative.

[Pavlov]

I didn't need to fake anything.Great, then just answer.

How does the Fed cause problems as you claim?


Please explain in your own words without whining or trying to change the subject or making up poker rules for a simple discussion.

[Spurtacular]

Great, then just answer.

How does the Fed cause problems as you claim?


Please explain in your own words without whining or trying to change the subject or making up poker rules for a simple discussion.

Ante up, bitch.

[ElNono]

Fed causes the problems. :lol at giving them credit for tempering their fucking stuff up.

Whether they fuck up or not is immaterial to the fact that they're largely in control of monetary policy in the US. They're much quicker than Congress (who has the power of the purse), to react to inflation and deflation problems, and largely dictate where the money flows.

Again, arguing whether they're good, bad, right or wrong is a very different topic. What can't be denied is the power they exert over the economy.

[Pavlov]

Ante up, bitch.You're making up poker rules for a simple discussion.

It's not poker.

How does the Fed cause problems as you claim?


Please explain in your own words without whining or trying to change the subject or making up poker rules for a simple discussion.

Either answer or say you can't answer.

[Spurtacular]

Whether they fuck up or not is immaterial to the fact that they're largely in control of monetary policy in the US. They're much quicker than Congress (who has the power of the purse), to react to inflation and deflation problems, and largely dictate where the money flows.

Again, arguing whether they're good, bad, right or wrong is a very different topic. What can't be denied is the power they exert over the economy.

If they didn't manage it, what good would that be to them and their benefactors?

[Spurtacular]

You're making up poker rules for a simple discussion.

It's not poker.

How does the Fed cause problems as you claim?


Please explain in your own words without whining or trying to change the subject or making up poker rules for a simple discussion.

Either answer or say you can't answer.

You had your chance. Throw your chip in next time, pussy.

[Pavlov]

You had your chance. Throw your chip in next time, pussy.You're making up poker rules for a simple discussion.

It's not poker.

How does the Fed cause problems as you claim?


Please explain in your own words without whining or trying to change the subject or making up poker rules for a simple discussion.

It's clear you know absolutely nothing about the Fed and are balled up in a fetal position.

Keep whining.

lol derp

[Spurtacular]

You're making up poker rules for a simple discussion.

It's not poker.

How does the Fed cause problems as you claim?


Please explain in your own words without whining or trying to change the subject or making up poker rules for a simple discussion.

It's clear you know absolutely nothing about the Fed and are balled up in a fetal position.

Keep whining.

lol derp

That's a lot of crying for a guy who feigns to have a keen interest in the matter at hand. Par.

[ElNono]

If they didn't manage it, what good would that be to them and their benefactors?

You're addressing the Fed, I'm addressing the economy at large. We're talking about two different topics. Can we at least agree that the Fed's decisions have a large impact on money flow, cost of debt and thus, the economy?

Past that, and addressing your point, I don't dwell on the Fed because I can't do anything about the Fed. It's there, they make decisions that impact millions of Americans, including me, but we don't vote for them, or pick them. I don't even know what's the barometer to measure their work? Monetary policy over the past 50 years? 100 years? 10 years?

[Pavlov]

That's a lot of crying for a guy who feigns to have a keen interest in the matter at hand. Par.I do have an interest in your claim the fed causes problems.

That's why I asked you a simple question.

How does the Fed cause problems as you claim?


Please explain in your own words without whining or trying to change the subject or making up poker rules for a simple discussion.

[Spurtacular]

I do have an interest in your claim the fed causes problems.

That's why I asked you a simple question.

How does the Fed cause problems as you claim?


Please explain in your own words without whining or trying to change the subject or making up poker rules for a simple discussion.

Your level of "interest" doesn't rise to anteing up. Throw your chip next time, pussy.

[Spurtacular]

You're addressing the Fed, I'm addressing the economy at large. We're talking about two different topics. Can we at least agree that the Fed's decisions have a large impact on money flow, cost of debt and thus, the economy?

Past that, and addressing your point, I don't dwell on the Fed because I can't do anything about the Fed. It's there, they make decisions that impact millions of Americans, including me, but we don't vote for them, or pick them. I don't even know what's the barometer to measure their work? Monetary policy over the past 50 years? 100 years? 10 years?

Nor do I dwell on the fed. That's sort of my point. They're an x-factor that any president has to deal with. They have the power to excite the economy or dampen it at any time. That's why I was saying it's silly to be throwing them credit.

[Spurtacular]

Pavlov
(https://www.spurstalk.com/forums/member.php?u=7343)
Gonna throw you a bone, bitch.

The Fed's an un-elected private entity that is designed to enrich itself and its benefactors to the detriment of American citizenry.

1. Stop presuming people don't know and crying about it.
2. Throw your chip in next time.

[Pavlov]

Your level of "interest" doesn't rise to anteing up. Throw your chip next time, pussy.:lol prove your claim for once in your life, pussy.

:rollin "ante up"

[Pavlov]

Pavlov
(https://www.spurstalk.com/forums/member.php?u=7343)
Gonna throw you a bone, bitch.

The Fed's an un-elected private entity that is designed to enrich itself and its benefactors to the detriment of American citizenry.

1. Stop presuming people don't know and crying about it.
2. Throw your chip in next time.You haven't even said what problems the fed causes.

That's what I asked.

Answer the simple question next time, pussy.

:rollin "throw your chip in"

I can only assume you lost money gambling recently.

[ElNono]

Nor do I dwell on the fed. That's sort of my point. They're an x-factor that any president has to deal with. They have the power to excite the economy or dampen it at any time. That's why I was saying it's silly to be throwing them credit.

I gave them credit for exactly what you're crediting them with: they largely have much more to do with the economy overall than either Congress or the Executive (save very specific instances, like the bailout). We basically agree on that.

[CosmicCowboy]

It's pretty sad to see people in here hoping for a recession just to further their political views. Recessions hurt everyone.

[boutons_deux]

It's pretty sad to see people in here hoping for a recession just to further their political views. Recessions hurt everyone.

bullshit, as usual

Banksters Great Depression proved that BigFinance is almost totally immune to being "hurt", will be bailed out yet again, come out stronger, more (politically) dominant, more controlling, while "everyone" ELSE gets screwed for years, or life.

Capitalism is unstable, aka "business cycle", and lots of indicators say a recession is coming. eg, watch the imminent IMF and World bank meetings

and like in 2007, Capitalists will have made the next recession much worse having corroded banking regulations created after the Banksters Great Depression,

esp by selling, yet again, being allowed to see many $100Bs of "subprime" loans (closing fees, plus high interest income for Capitalists) to shaky, dicey orgs that will fold and default when the next recession hits.

Then the vulture/hyena/predatory Capitalists will sweep to "asset strip" the company carasses.

And this will happen without any "everyone" wishing one way or the other.

As always, rightwingnutjobs have been suckered into duped, conned into NOT knowing the actual perps.

[CosmicCowboy]

So Boo hoping for a recession.

Sick motherfucker.

[Pavlov]

lol "hoping"

Economic cycles are a thing.

[CosmicCowboy]

lol "hoping"

Economic cycles are a thing.

No shit. And you are hoping it cycles sooner than later.

[ChumpDumper]

No shit. And you are hoping it cycles sooner than later.lol "hoping"

I don't know why you lie so much when it comes to Trump, but you do.

[CosmicCowboy]

lol "hoping"

I don't know why you lie so much when it comes to Trump, but you do.

Nothing to do with Trump, bitch. Just faggots like you hoping for a recession this year and next.

[ChumpDumper]

Nothing to do with Trump, bitch. Just faggots like you hoping for a recession this year and next.lol "hoping"

Why do you lie, CC? Does supporting Trump make you lie?

[CosmicCowboy]

lol "hoping"

Why do you lie, CC? Does supporting Trump make you lie?

I know you just pull that Trump schtick to piss me off, but it's not working.

You still suck for hoping for a recession this year.

[ChumpDumper]

I know you just pull that Trump schtick to piss me off, but it's not working.

You still suck for hoping for a recession this year.lol "hoping"

Why do you keep lying, CC? Do you have windmill noise cancer?

[SpursforSix]

Nothing to do with Trump, bitch. Just faggots like you hoping for a recession this year and next.

Recessions suck but they're a normal part of the economic cycle. I'd rather have a recession clear the slate than going into a full depression.

And it's a major issue with politicians imo. No one wants to take the pain and lessen their chances for reelection. Just push it on down the line.

[spurraider21]

Robert Charles: Obama is right -- Dems' circular firing squad is set to give Trump a 2020 Former President Obama declared concern Saturday that Democrats are creating ”a circular firing squad” by embracing progressive socialists. He is right. Democrats are setting up a 2020 landslide -- for President Trump.https://www.foxnews.com/opinion/robert-charles-obama-is-right-dems-are-set-to-give-trump-a-2020-landslide
i thought obama was a radical left wing socialist extremist?

[CosmicCowboy]

Recessions suck but they're a normal part of the economic cycle. I'd rather have a recession clear the slate than going into a full depression.

And it's a major issue with politicians imo. No one wants to take the pain and lessen their chances for reelection. Just push it on down the line.

recessions don't avoid depressions.

[SpursforSix]

recessions don't avoid depressions.

That doesn't even makes sense.

[SpursforSix]

That doesn't even makes sense.

But I knew what you were trying to say. A recession can lower the risk of a depression.
That being said, I'm not going to argue that with someone who continually shows they don't know what they're talking about.

[CosmicCowboy]

But I knew what you were trying to say. A recession can lower the risk of a depression.
That being said, I'm not going to argue that with someone who continually shows they don't know what they're talking about.

Talk about not making sense. A depression by definition is a deep and long recession.

[SpursforSix]

Talk about not making sense. A depression by definition is a deep and long recession.

And yet...depression has it's own separate name.

[Millennial_Messiah]

My OP was made out to ST Democrats. Since Spurtacular is the highest-volume poster in this thread, I'm assuming he's a stalwart Democrat.

[spurraider21]

My OP was made out to ST Democrats. Since Spurtacular is the highest-volume poster in this thread, I'm assuming he's a stalwart Democrat.
of course he is. he's one of hillary's fiercest defenders on this site. he's never even named a single crime she's committed, he's still with her

[Millennial_Messiah]

of course he is. he's one of hillary's fiercest defenders on this site. he's never even named a single crime she's committed, he's still with her

:lmao

[CosmicCowboy]

And yet...depression has it's own separate name.

Just admit you didn't know what the fuck you were talking about.

[spurraider21]

Just admit you didn't know what the fuck you were talking about.
do cows technically fart?

[spurraider21]

btw a recession is when the GDP sees negative growth for two consecutive quarters.

a depression is just a longer recession... though i'm unaware of any specific standard to how long a recession must be until it is considered a depression. two years? three years?

the "great recession" we had was for a period of about 2 years iirc

[Chris]

Thanks Google boy.

[spurraider21]

coming from duckduckgo boy

[SpursforSix]

Just admit you didn't know what the fuck you were talking about.

Actually I do. But I don’t have any desire to having a pissing contest with you about my education and your lack thereof. You’ve already proven that you’re unable to admit when you’re wrong so I can’t really see any benefit of trying to help you learn anything. It took days to convince you that cows fart. I can’t imagine how long it would take to help you understand economics. I’d have to start with analogies about Luann Platters.

[Spurtacular]

You haven't even said what problems the fed causes.

That's what I asked.

Answer the simple question next time, pussy.

:rollin "throw your chip in"

I can only assume you lost money gambling recently.

You were given the problem. Or do you somehow think it's good to have a great conflict of interest among the people controlling the money supply?

:lmao Blake Zero

[ChumpDumper]

You were given the problem.No.

You were asked a simple question after you made a claim.

How does the Fed cause problems as you claim?


Please explain in your own words without whining or trying to change the subject or making up poker rules for a simple discussion.

Either answer or say you can't answer.

[Spurtacular]

No.

You were asked a simple question after you made a claim.

How does the Fed cause problems as you claim?


Please explain in your own words without whining or trying to change the subject or making up poker rules for a simple discussion.

Either answer or say you can't answer.

:cry But write me an essay :cry