The Many Faces of US Politics...

[J70]

J70-Warren and Bernie were doing great in the polls until they decided abolishing private healthcare was a winning issue. Joe won because even Democratic Primary voters knew that the policies of the likes of Warren, Bernie, Castro and Mayor Pete were so outside the mainstream that Trump would demolish them in a General Election

Yes, that more or less is in line with what I said. Democratic voters are not hostage to the most progressive wing of their party. They don't want to lose the option of private healthcare, even if many believe that public healthcare is part of the solution to the problem.

[whitey]

But do you not think it's scary that 2 such prominent and supposedly main stream candidates would have such a crazy idea


Also keep  in mind, if they had joined forces (like the "moderates" did) Biden would be toast

[J70]

But do you not think it's scary that 2 such prominent and supposedly main stream candidates would have such a crazy idea

Scary?

Not really. Especially as it has zero chance of ever being put into practice.

I find the actual phenomenon of private equity corporations buying up hospitals and nursing homes a lot scarier.

[whitey]

But do you not think it's scary that 2 such prominent and supposedly main stream candidates would have such a crazy idea

Scary?

Not really. Especially as it has zero chance of ever being put into practice.

I find the actual phenomenon of private equity corporations buying up hospitals and nursing homes a lot scarier.

Wow-it doesn't concern you that such a major policy position held by 2 of the leading Democratic candidates is supported by only 13% of registered voters

[J70]

But do you not think it's scary that 2 such prominent and supposedly main stream candidates would have such a crazy idea

Scary?

Not really. Especially as it has zero chance of ever being put into practice.

I find the actual phenomenon of private equity corporations buying up hospitals and nursing homes a lot scarier.

Wow-it doesn't concern you that such a major policy position held by 2 of the leading Democratic candidates is supported by only 13% of registered voters

Why would it bother me?

The party voters rejected those candidates, not least because of those policy positions.

Do you want me to run through some of the stuff that Republican and conservative candidates, including major contenders, have supported in the past, including recently?

[mrdeeds]

But do you not think it's scary that 2 such prominent and supposedly main stream candidates would have such a crazy idea


Also keep  in mind, if they had joined forces (like the "moderates" did) Biden would be toast

The main Republican man believes noise causes cancer.

[whitey]

But do you not think it's scary that 2 such prominent and supposedly main stream candidates would have such a crazy idea

Scary?

Not really. Especially as it has zero chance of ever being put into practice.

I find the actual phenomenon of private equity corporations buying up hospitals and nursing homes a lot scarier.

Wow-it doesn't concern you that such a major policy position held by 2 of the leading Democratic candidates is supported by only 13% of registered voters

Why would it bother me?

The party voters rejected those candidates, not least because of those policy positions.

Do you want me to run through some of the stuff that Republican and conservative candidates, including major contenders, have supported in the past, including recently?

I guess we'll agree to disagree, but from my vantage point it's bizarre that 2 of the leading candidates in the Dem Primary hold a position on private health insurance that is almost universally rejected among by base of the party?

And while Joe ultimately prevailed (due to some back room deals) Bernie won the first 3 states and combined He and Elizabeth Warren got almost as many popular votes as Joe.

[RadioGAAGAA]

saying its "unmistakably anti-Trump" agenda risks damaging its credibility.

When does an:

anti-lies
anti-nepotism
anti-corruption
anti-treason

agenda

become an anti-Trump agenda?


How would you spot the difference Whitey?

[whitey]

saying its "unmistakably anti-Trump" agenda risks damaging its credibility.

When does an:

anti-lies
anti-nepotism
anti-corruption
anti-treason

agenda

become an anti-Trump agenda?


How would you spot the difference Whitey?

They're not my words you're quoting

That's a quote from the former editor of The NY Times

[Jell 0 Biafra]

What would balanced coverage of Trump's presidency look like?

[J70]

What would balanced coverage of Trump's presidency look like?

Never mind that a lot of the damaging stuff that Trump is doing gets more or less zero coverage. It's going to take a long time and a lot of effort to undo their assault on environmental protections, if it can even be done, especially as Mitch McConnell is methodically stacking the federal court system with all kinds of dodgy right wing characters. And where is public education going to be when Betsy DeVos gets through with it, especially if they get another term?

[J70]

But do you not think it's scary that 2 such prominent and supposedly main stream candidates would have such a crazy idea

Scary?

Not really. Especially as it has zero chance of ever being put into practice.

I find the actual phenomenon of private equity corporations buying up hospitals and nursing homes a lot scarier.

Wow-it doesn't concern you that such a major policy position held by 2 of the leading Democratic candidates is supported by only 13% of registered voters

Why would it bother me?

The party voters rejected those candidates, not least because of those policy positions.

Do you want me to run through some of the stuff that Republican and conservative candidates, including major contenders, have supported in the past, including recently?

I guess we'll agree to disagree, but from my vantage point it's bizarre that 2 of the leading candidates in the Dem Primary hold a position on private health insurance that is almost universally rejected among by base of the party?

And while Joe ultimately prevailed (due to some back room deals) Bernie won the first 3 states and combined He and Elizabeth Warren got almost as many popular votes as Joe.

Luckily or unluckily, depending on your  perspective, you have to win a majority of delegates from the whole country, not just the initial primaries. Loads of candidates have flamed out after doing well early, which allowed people to take a proper look at them and weigh their options.

Ironically, and backing up the bland, centrist approach to Biden, he's actually doing all right at the moment now that he's locked in his basement, more or less out of sight, and Trump is having daily hissy fits and trying to change the subject from the outbreak and its health and economic fallout by spewing about the "worst political crime in American history!!"

This election is going to be a referendum on Trump (as all end of first term elections, of course, are). Whether a re-emerging Biden can present himself as a coherent, non-threatening, viable, moderate Democrat alternative remains to be seen.

On Biden, BTW, Politico had a piece up yesterday on Tara Reade, supported by lots of named people from her past. Doesn't paint a nice picture. Of course, even scumbags can be victims, so it doesn't mean she is lying about what she claims Biden did, but it obviously doesn't help her case. https://www.politico.com/news/2020/05/15/tara-reade-left-trail-of-aggrieved-acquaintances-260771

[RadioGAAGAA]

saying its "unmistakably anti-Trump" agenda risks damaging its credibility.

When does an:

anti-lies
anti-nepotism
anti-corruption
anti-treason

agenda

become an anti-Trump agenda?


How would you spot the difference Whitey?

They're not my words you're quoting

That's a quote from the former editor of The NY Times

The question remains.

How would you spot the difference Whitey?

[whitey]

saying its "unmistakably anti-Trump" agenda risks damaging its credibility.

When does an:

anti-lies
anti-nepotism
anti-corruption
anti-treason

agenda

become an anti-Trump agenda?


How would you spot the difference Whitey?

They're not my words you're quoting

That's a quote from the former editor of The NY Times

The question remains.

How would you spot the difference Whitey?

Nothing to spot

Trump won fair and square and from day one they did everything in their power to undermine his legitimacy. The problem is they undermined their own credibility in the process.

[RadioGAAGAA]

saying its "unmistakably anti-Trump" agenda risks damaging its credibility.

When does an:

anti-lies
anti-nepotism
anti-corruption
anti-treason

agenda

become an anti-Trump agenda?


How would you spot the difference Whitey?

They're not my words you're quoting

That's a quote from the former editor of The NY Times

The question remains.

How would you spot the difference Whitey?

Nothing to spot

Trump won fair and square and from day one they did everything in their power to undermine his legitimacy. The problem is they undermined their own credibility in the process.

That is not an answer.

If a journo is writing an article that talks about lies, nepotism, corruption and Donald Trump - does that automatically make it a part of an anti-Trump agenda? Or do you judge the article on its own merits?