2020 Elections

[mamselle]

Unrelated (directly) to above:

How it starts:

"GOSH, sir, us? Y'mean WE could do something for you? Sure, just name it, sir, anything...

You say you want us to break into the DNC offices and do...what??? break into those closed hearings, scare the witness, and stop the deposition?

SURE, sir. Wouldn't want anything to get in the way of your being re'-elected, sir.

Oh, lunch afterwards? What, that's sure be nice, sir.

Thanks, sir...."

[spork]

I'll predict that Biden's campaign implodes as a result of the Iowa caucus results.

[Parasaurolophus]

I'll predict that Biden's campaign implodes as a result of the Iowa caucus results.

I suspect that's right, unless he wins despite having next to no ground operation in Iowa. If he wins, I kind of suspect (/fear) that everyone's going to decide to line up behind him, due to worries about a long primary.

But I don't think he'll carry it.

[clean]

It is too early to tell, but for me, I dont know that I can vote FOR anyone this year!  Not one candidate of either party has me sold on their positions.  though I still have time as my state votes on Super Tuesday. 

At this point, while I would not vote FOR Trump, Im not sure that i could bring myself to vote AGAINST Trump if it meant voting for some of the current democratic candidates.

Maybe Blumburg will catch some steam enough to make me look into his campaign promises and the baggage he brings with his campaign. 

Otherwise Every Candidate, as far as I can see just now, has significant weaknesses in one or more areas of importance.  Maybe Im just a little late in joining the ranks of apathetic (or damned if you do, damned if you dont)  voters. 

[mamselle]

Well, if you don't want Trump back, you need to hold your nose and vote for whatever Dem. is nominated who isn't Trump.

That is all.

Really.

M.

[Parasaurolophus]

Otherwise Every Candidate, as far as I can see just now, has significant weaknesses in one or more areas of importance.

Wait, there were candidates in the past for whom this wasn't true, as far as you're concerned?

[clean]

Wait, there were candidates in the past for whom this wasn't true, as far as you're concerned?

Yes.
I know that I will be asked for examples. However, I refuse to provide any as I dont want to divert this into a 'get clean' thread, and dont want to dredge up the past elections for the 35+ years I could vote in the various local, state, & national elections across the four states I have lived in!   

But yes, there have been elections were both candidates were strong and good picks, and elections were there was but one clear choice (IMHO anyway), and like now it seems anyway, where there are no good choices at all. 

[nebo113]

Wait, there were candidates in the past for whom this wasn't true, as far as you're concerned?

Yes.
I know that I will be asked for examples. However, I refuse to provide any as I dont want to divert this into a 'get clean' thread, and dont want to dredge up the past elections for the 35+ years I could vote in the various local, state, & national elections across the four states I have lived in!   

But yes, there have been elections were both candidates were strong and good picks, and elections were there was but one clear choice (IMHO anyway), and like now it seems anyway, where there are no good choices at all.

Thank god for your purity.

[mamselle]

Wait, there were candidates in the past for whom this wasn't true, as far as you're concerned?

Yes.
I know that I will be asked for examples. However, I refuse to provide any as I dont want to divert this into a 'get clean' thread, and dont want to dredge up the past elections for the 35+ years I could vote in the various local, state, & national elections across the four states I have lived in!   

But yes, there have been elections were both candidates were strong and good picks, and elections were there was but one clear choice (IMHO anyway), and like now it seems anyway, where there are no good choices at all.

This is not a "get 'Clean'" effort: I respect your discretion and good citizenship here.

But you do see how this leads to someone like Trump being elected, right?

Those who do not vote for his strongest, most-likely-to-win opponent, enable his election.

It's not always possible to stay untouched by distressing complications in human situations...life gets messier than that, sometimes.

_=_=_=_

In other news....so, what (or who) was the impetus behind surveillance of a duly-posted U.S. ambassador by compadres of the POTUS' "man-on-the-ground-behind-the-scenes (i.e., Mr. Guiliani's friends)?????

Was that their own little rogue plot or was someone more highly placed behind it?

And as Maddow suggested, was the "sudden pullout" of said ambassador to protect her?

But if so, then why end it by saying, essentially, in gov-speak, "You're fired..."?

More rotten Danish apples to be excavated? And by the impeachment team, or....??

M.

[ciao_yall]

My surprisingly low standard this election is "not a crook."

Which is turning into ABT (Anyone But Trump).

[marshwiggle]

My surprisingly low standard this election is "not a crook."

Which is turning into ABT (Anyone But Trump).

A fascinating twist from the leadup to the 2016 election, when it was laughable to even imagine that Trump could win. Now he's impossible to beat.

(I'm definitely not a Trump fan, and since I'm a Canadian it's not my battle, but it's amazing and sad to see the Democrats so obsessed with progressivism that they can't connect with mainstream voters. Being "anti-trump" has replaced simply good governance as the goal.)

[mahagonny]

Wait, there were candidates in the past for whom this wasn't true, as far as you're concerned?

Yes.
I know that I will be asked for examples. However, I refuse to provide any as I dont want to divert this into a 'get clean' thread, and dont want to dredge up the past elections for the 35+ years I could vote in the various local, state, & national elections across the four states I have lived in!   

But yes, there have been elections were both candidates were strong and good picks, and elections were there was but one clear choice (IMHO anyway), and like now it seems anyway, where there are no good choices at all.

This is not a "get 'Clean'" effort: I respect your discretion and good citizenship here.

But you do see how this leads to someone like Trump being elected, right?

Those who do not vote for his strongest, most-likely-to-win opponent, enable his election.

It's not always possible to stay untouched by distressing complications in human situations...life gets messier than that, sometimes.

There's no one very much like Trump. But it may be that clean likes some of what Trump has been doing. If that's the case I would be interested in hearing specifics for this reason: not all of the voters who would prefer Trump to the alternative or accept his reelection without  a great deal of anguish are uneducated. But I also understand if Clean opts not to take the discussion further at this time. It can be stressful or just tiring to swim against an online tide.

[Parasaurolophus]

but it's amazing and sad to see the Democrats so obsessed with progressivism that they can't connect with mainstream voters. Being "anti-trump" has replaced simply good governance as the goal.)

I'd diagnose the problem in the opposite direction, but concur with the final assessment.

FWIW, as far as I'm concerned, it's totally legitimate for people, when faced with what they take to be "lesser of two evils" situations, to refuse to participate. If we didn't have as many political options as we do here in Canada, I might not always vote, because I refuse to be complicit in enabling policies which I take to be morally wrong, or which I think do nothing substantive to address the issues we face. Certainly, if I was voting in the US and my choice was Trump or Biden, or Trump or Buttigieg, I'd opt to stay away from the polls.

To my mind, the goal can't just be to replace Trump. That's setting the bar far too low. I (for my part!) demand substantive changes in government policy. Or, I would, if I could. My partner does, anyway.

[ciao_yall]

Wait, there were candidates in the past for whom this wasn't true, as far as you're concerned?

Yes.
I know that I will be asked for examples. However, I refuse to provide any as I dont want to divert this into a 'get clean' thread, and dont want to dredge up the past elections for the 35+ years I could vote in the various local, state, & national elections across the four states I have lived in!   

But yes, there have been elections were both candidates were strong and good picks, and elections were there was but one clear choice (IMHO anyway), and like now it seems anyway, where there are no good choices at all.

This is not a "get 'Clean'" effort: I respect your discretion and good citizenship here.

But you do see how this leads to someone like Trump being elected, right?

Those who do not vote for his strongest, most-likely-to-win opponent, enable his election.

It's not always possible to stay untouched by distressing complications in human situations...life gets messier than that, sometimes.

There's no one very much like Trump. But it may be that clean likes some of what Trump has been doing. If that's the case I would be interested in hearing specifics for this reason: not all of the voters who would prefer Trump to the alternative or accept his reelection without  a great deal of anguish are uneducated. But I also understand if Clean opts not to take the discussion further at this time. It can be stressful or just tiring to swim against an online tide.

There are two extremes in which one would choose not to vote for either candidate.

1) The voter is going to do very well under either candidate, and they have no single issue that tips them one way or another.

In 2016 this was suburban white women, who were Republicans in general for other issues (taxes, etc), had health insurance through their own or husband's employers, and either personally against abortion or not convinced that the Supreme Court would ever overturn Roe, or that it wouldn't be their problem. Because they all know a podiatrist who does extra services when one wishes to be discreet and not pass by their church friends when slipping in and out of Planned Parenthood.

2) The voter is going to do very poorly under either candidate, and they have no single issue that tips them one way or the other.

In 2016 this was voters of color. African-Americans hadn't forgotten Bill's "tough on crime" policies which ran up the incarceration rates. Latinos were not convinced that deportations were going to stop under either party. And a little voter suppression didn't hurt, either.

[Parasaurolophus]

WTF was on the back of Steyer's left hand in last night's debate? It was a grid with just four quadrants, and a large cross in each one.

Nobody seems to be asking this crucial question.