A STUDY IN CONTRASTS
President T.T. Trump (Twitter Teleprompter Trump) visited El Paso and Dayton, Ohio, today but apparently could not make a big speech in an open venue for fear of being booed.
In Dayton, his staff made him invisible with his cooperation meeting in private with family, medical staff and political figures. He made NO public appearance and issued no comment. As usual, he and his people avoided any protests or protesters with his caravan taking routes both circuitous, long and secret. It appears that he will do the same in El Paso. As always, he is a coward.
He creates division and anger at a time when the country would normally look to the president for comfort, for unity, for the best in American values.
The contrast between that bitter, little man who occupies the White House, launching twitter attacks against Beto O’Rourke through the night while insisting that his words and actions brings us together, and former vice president Joe Biden, who chose to deliver a big, important speech today in Iowa could not have been more stark.
Biden began by stating what too many Republicans, embarrassed by this president but shamefully still backing him, refuse to admit:
“The words of a president matter. They can move markets. They can send our brave men and women to war. They can bring peace. They can calm a nation in turmoil. They can console and confront and comfort in times of tragedy … They can appeal to the better angels of our nature. But they can also unleash the deepest, darkest forces in this nation.”
Biden’s tone was both defiant and sad at the same time blasting out each poignant phrase. It was a simple speech. Its message sharp. It called for a courageous response in tones profound and stirring.
Biden recounted the parade of Trump of horrors — from Charlottesville (where Trump claimed there were “very fine people on both sides”) to raising fear of a refugee “invasion” to calling Baltimore a “disgusting rat-infected, and rodent mess (that) no human being” would choose to call home.
Biden reminded us that when he asked a rally crowd in Florida how immigrants should be stopped he got back the answer to “shoot them. Trump grinned pretending it was a jest saying that the comment would only be acceptable in Florida Panhandle.
Biden argued that it “is not far at all” from Trumpian comments to the alleged El Paso murderer’s so called manifesto where he claimed that his attack was “in response to the Hispanic invasion of Texas,” just as his praise to “very fine” neo-Nazis chanting “you will not replace us” shouted at Charlottesville et.al. is not far at all from the words of the mass murderer at the Tree of Life synagogue in Pittsburgh, who said Jews “were committing genocide to his people.”
Biden paused at one point and stared stonily into the crowd and then at the cameras and flat out accused Trump of fanning white nationalism mocking his “low-energy, vacant-eyed mouthing of the words written for him condemning white supremacists this week” that he parrots before crowds when prompted to do so. He faulted Trump for pouring fuel on a fire that white supremacists dance around by using their language, retweeting their messages, and cutting funding to fight domestic, white nationalist terrism.
He called Trump’s looking to steps to address a mental health crisis or too much violence in video games as a phony “dodge.” Biden reminded the audience that he was a co-sponsor and principal author of the assault weapons and that he was ready to do the same again in this arena while committing to root out domestic terrorism with as much vigor as has been devoted to fighting international terrorism.
Biden also contrasted Trump to presidents who stood up at key moments in history (e.g., George H.W. Bush turning in his NRA membership, Bill Clinton’s speech after the Oklahoma City bombing in the rubble of a flattened public building, George W. Bush’s mosque visit after 9/11, Barack Obama’s sermon after the Charleston, S.C., massacre).
But today, Biden said,
“Our president has aligned himself with the darkest forces in this nation. And it makes winning the battle for the soul of this nation that much tougher, harder.”
At the root of his poor performance as President, Biden made the case that Trump fundamentally doesn’t understand the job.
“Trump offers no moral leadership; seems to have no interest in unifying this nation, no evidence the presidency has awakened his conscience in the least…Indeed we have a president with a toxic tongue who has publicly and unapologetically embraced a political strategy of hate, racism and division.”
Biden then called on the country to take up the challenge and do what Trump can’t.
“Stand together. Stand against hate. … Treating everyone with respect. Giving everyone a fair shot. Leaving nobody behind. Giving hate no safe harbor.”
Biden closed by reminding his listeners that America is, at its heart, a great idea…not because of its economy, its military or because we “win.”
“America is an idea” — not great because we have the biggest economy or military or because we “win.” but because of its creed.
Biden reminded the audience that this is how Republicans used talk but cannot do so now because they have knelt to Trump to get tax cuts, or the judges they want.
Ironically (or tragically), this is how conservatives like Ben Sasse of Nebraska used to talk, before they became yes-men for Trump or argued that his defacing democracy was tolerable because of judges or tax cuts.
Biden told voters:
“Everyone knows who Donald Trump is. We need to show them who we are. We choose hope over fear. Science over fiction. Unity over division. And, yes — truth over lies.”
Biden explained that the real choice is between Trump and American democracy, between Trump and objective truth and between Trump and someone with a basic understanding of what makes America “great.”
In this speech Biden demonstrates that he has the voice to take Trump on (as to others as well) and that he is a much better alternative. But then again, so is virtually every other Democratic Candidate.
Since you like trends so much, I took a closer look at the RCP averages over the past month. Biden was about 28 and Warren about 15. Today it’s Biden at 30.5 and Warren at 17.3. The differential favoring Biden has gone from about 13 a month ago to about 13 today. Damn, you’re correct, there really is quite the earth shattering trend for Warren…oh, never mind…
I’ve heard Biden referred to as the Democratic Party’s Romney. And I have to say that resonated. Nice guy. Trump fodder.
Yes, I know. The polls.
The polls showed a substantial lead for Hillary too in 2016. Until I came home from having worked the (other) polls that November evening to find the NYT’s Hillary Meter “Probability for Victory” dial plunging rapidly toward the zero mark.
“If we keep on doing what we’ve always done, we’ll keep on getting what we’ve always had.”
It isn’t even so much the age thing. Elderly Dr. Spock was a major (and beloved) figure in the 1960s anti-war movement. Bernie spoke to arenas full of 20,000-25,000 screaming young voters throughout the 2016 primary season. Howard Zinn still commands respect among younger political thinkers.
The problem is running Hillary 2.0. Biden was fine with letting banks off the hook after the 2008 Crash. Biden was okay with Dubya’s Iraq war. Biden — for better or worse — has been a go-along-and-get-along politician even when it meant shaking hands with the devil on occasion.
But I’m wondering whether there aren’t an awful lot of voters (including old school Republicans and Independents) who have reached a point of no return. A point at which half measures are no long good enough. A point at which they want to wash the stench of devil sweat off the palms of their hands once and for all.
My fear is that Americans will continue to get what they deserve as long as they continue to do the same things, one of which is to continue to lie about Hillary Clinton. Hillary Clinton was actually named by Americans as the most admired woman in the world for 17 consecutive years. Yet, she supposedly lost the presidency by 70,000 votes that determined the electoral vote, after receiving 3,000,000 more votes than her opponent.
What was the latest reason people supposedly disliked Clinton? She used a personal server to conduct official State Department business? REALLY??? She supposedly voted to invade Iraq? REALLY??? American voters are STUPID and they deserve Trump. Not only for one term, but as long as they choose to remain STUPID.
Rather that investigating if Trump actually won the 70,000 votes that supposedly gave him the presidency. STUPID Americans continue to blame their STUPIDITY on Hillary Clinton.
How is that working out for ya, America? To get out of the rut of STUPIDITY America has another chance to elect a highly qualified female for president. Will they do that? Chances are that they won’t. WHY??? Because Americans are STUPID. Not only are many of them DEPLORALBE, MOST of them are STUPID!
But that is just my opinion.
https://news.gallup.com/poll/245669/michelle-obama-ends-hillary-clinton-run-admired.aspx
Well, maybe. But mostly those old school Republicans and Independents along with the rest of the great middle who determine most elections here, just want some peace and quite for a while. They sure aren’t pining to go from the Drama Queen, Infant Terrible we have now to a really exciting Progressive Revolution. They tend not to be the RIGHT ON!!! kind.
That is generally how I see it. I am not convinced that Biden is the only one who can pull this off.
Nor am I. I’m depressed today and worrying that none of ours can pull it off since the numbers as of today indicate Biden is the only one who would pull it off today but that age factor could negate that…
It might be an issue of the field narrowing to where there is an acceptable 2nd who could endorse Biden (or vice versa) and then assist in the selection of a strong balancing VP.
Too early for me to have a sense of this kind of detailed approach.
I tend to think in strategic steps….what are the gaming options.
Don’t know yet. Just like having the most decisive front runner to beat Trump.
I don’t think anybody is the “RIGHT ON” kind in 2019. That mentality went out with bell bottoms and good riddance. But people are fed up with milquetoast responses to serious levels of racism, cruelty, wealth inequality and injustice. I normally haven’t bought into the “nice guys finish last” mentality, but I think that just may be the fate that awaits Biden. And no big bad Russian asset on facebook brainwashed my poor widdle college-educated mind into being concerned about that possibility. It’s simply obvious enough that this evening even the highly unrevolutionary BBC World News announced that Biden had pretty much managed to blow up his entire weekend in Iowa by way of a number of unforced errors… with no help whatsoever from the Kremlin.
A rose by any other name…the Young Turks and Bernie friends are as much into the RIGHT ON!!! thingy as any Lefty back in my salad days. And the BBC has as much a take on the Unky Biden thingy as the Kremlin. Next it will be the unrevolutionary Guardian with its erudite take on Unky Biden. But as of now, our core base of voters seem to like the old comfy cuddly unky just fine. And the voters who most know Warren don’t like her much. Biden has almost twice the support in Massachusetts as she does and even Bernie is well ahead of her there. And by the numbers, our non-White core base don’t like either Bernie or Warren much. And Bernie’s fellow Jews who are an important base in the Dem Party like Bernie least of the main candidates. Maybe they know their own? And like non-Whites, Jews especially like Biden. Go figure…
You share my interest in numbers so there’s this:
https://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/ny-iowa-corn-poll-joe-biden-20190812-vunsn5oxonhxjjjjfvg5u2aswm-story.html
For your proposition to be validated, Biden should be rising in the polls or at the very least, Warren shouldn’t be gaining on him. But the reverse is true.
The trend is that Biden is declining in popularity and Warren is rising. It is logical to extrapolate that trend and if it continues, Biden will swap the lead with Warren.
It’s the trend that tells the story, we can offer a variety of propositions that support our chosen candidate winning but the most accurate indicator is the trend over time. And over the past 4 months, Biden has been stagnant at best and Warren has been steadily rising.
And as with the average of all the other polls, either national or state, Biden is ahead of all the rest…even in the home states of other candidates like Massachusetts, Texas, Indiana and California. He is well ahead of Bernie in his neighboring NH, NY and Mass. According to RCP, over the past month or so, until the last few days, Biden was on the increase while Warren was level. These things do wax and wane. Oh, do note that while Iowa has great fairs and corn, their near Lily White caucuses are anything but representative of Dem VOTERS in general. And Iowa has all of about 1% of the vote at the Dem Convention. We won’t get a better sense of where our voters are at until actual elections in more diverse S.C. and California, etc.
But note, soon after Iowa where Biden still has a strong lead, come NH, Nevada and S.C. where Biden also has strong leads. Then comes Super Tuesday where Biden leads in virtually ever one of them, including the home states of other leading candidates like Warren and Beto.
That is the core manifesto that all dems need to stand by.
Yep…but they won’t and the Russians are good at helping them not be that way.
I don’t disagree with much of this…..my post was about someone very clearly naming the reality in clear and cogent terms. Yes, he was reading a speech…..and every candidate has their well written speeches….initially read from teleprompters and then recited from memory. Obama in 2008 had four packaged speeches…I heard them over and over again….Obama was also good on his feet and ever so careful in how he answered something that Biden is not, and something that Trump has never even got close to being (but it does not seem to matter for him).
I think Biden is too old. I think his ideas are not as current as they need to be. I think he has a lot of appeal to a lot of groups as his polling demonstrates. My attention right now is focused on Warren and Booker…..but….that is who I am supporting directly.
All I have to say is that those who want someone else, and those someone else’s are going to have to make their case to the American voter in the key primary and caucus states. Nothing else matters.
Some people never learn from their mistakes, they just keep trying to hammer that square peg into the round hole because they like square pegs the best.
No election punched me in the gut more than 2016, I was never so shaken or angry. I voted for Hillary but I was resentful all during the primary because it was clear that the Establishment Dems had already anointed her and did all they could to force their pick on Dems and the country.
Of course, Hillary would have been incredibly better than Trump, that should go without saying.
But it was the hubris and elitist superiority mentality that Establishment Dems used to justify their choosing the Dem nominee for us (don’t forget, they had already lined up a huge number of Superdelegates committed to her before the race even began, any challenger would have faced a huge deficit in delegates and be a likely loser to her because of that alone so why challenge her?).
It is the same definition of insanity this time around. Despite knowing the fact that moderate, establishment Dems have lost EVERY presidential election for the past 35 years including Hillary vs. Trump, too many people are still insistent that they know best that a Hillary/Biden political type is surely the best candidate to win for Dems.
They say that only Biden can win white men in red and purple states and that’s how Dems will need to win.
Nope. Chasing after the demographic that votes for Trump is not what won The House and a record election win for Dems in 2018 nor why Hillary lost in 2016. But why look at the most recent election and the way Dems won then when we can wish instead?
There is absolutely no evidence, aside from these very early polls, that supports running Biden instead of a sharper, more enthusiastic candidate.
And the factor not reflected in today’s polls is how quickly and easily Biden can shoot himself in the foot and lose support. Some may point to his numbers rebounding from his poor performance in the first debate but the fact that one debate performance can tank him so badly is a warning about how weak his support truly is and how he can damage himself badly overnight.
Biden has more baggage than Hillary did and as opposed to Hillary, Biden has lost his sharpness. He slurs his words sometimes, as I demonstrated, he makes major mistakes when he speaks, having him as the nom would be like carrying an unexploded mine in your car, if you hit a bump, it could all blow up.
But I understand, some people are scared and want what they think is the “safe” candidate. Others are so locked into their mindsets, they just won’t accept that the establishment moderate that they want to be the nom, is the riskier pick in an election we can’t afford to risk.
I am looking forward to the primary narrowing down to just a few candidates so there can be a real head to head comparison that I think will show Biden as the weaker candidate. Also, by then, I will have had to post “The Day in Biden’s Gaffes” timeline that will be many pages long and have Dems rolling their eyes on a regular basis.
If my portrayal of Biden is correct, he won’t win the primary (unless the Dem Establishment steps in) because he will founder on his own. Confusion, gaffes, refusing to apologize for bad decisions in the past and a long track record as you describe of being on the wrong side of Dem issues.
As I mentioned today in another comment, Biden has 28% in IA (Warren is only 9% behind him with big momentum) which means 72% of Dems who have to know him well by now, are voting against him. As the field narrows, where will those votes go? Most are likely to go to a challenger to Biden and that’s a lot of votes for challengers like Warren to rack up.
So, as in 2008, nothing you can do about those who insist Biden will win because he has a lead now, just like they did when Hillary had a 20% lead over Obama. He may squeak it out in the end but I don’t think he will.
2020 is similar to 2008. The longtime establishment moderate starts as the favorite against the upstart challenger who is more Progressive, charismatic and exciting to the base and would be the first of their kind to become President.
I remember how 2008 turned out, I wouldn’t be surprised for 2020 to turn out to have a similar result.
In terms of the Dem Party, the South Carolina primary is more important than the Iowa caucus. It is also way more important in terms of representing where our core non-White voters are. If you missed it, Iowa is one of the most White states. A bit of a contradiction to tout near Lily White Iowa as the bell weather from someone who has dumped on others for maybe being racist for looking to try to get some White Working Class Obama voters back into the fold. Like Sanders last time, Warren has minimal non-White support. Anyway, what happens in South Carolina will likely indicate what will happen in the all important California primary way better than the Iowa caucus.
The support Biden has now is from OUR voters, especially our major core voters. And this is nothing like the supposed Establishment carination of 2016. What I hope will also not be like 2016 is how the Bernie supporters became the best echo chamber for the Trumpites and their Russian friends to dump on Hillary and help make Trump Prez. Let’s see, following your lead, Warren is opposed by 81% of Iowa Dems. And I might be missing something but I saw Obama and I see Warren and Warren sure is no
Obama. It would also be nice if Warren could get support in her own home Liberal State. Can’t claim the Dem voters don’t yet know her well enough there. This little factoid is about as damning of her and her chances against Trump as most anything you said about Biden who leads her by almost two to one in the RCP Massachusetts polls. Also, while Warren and Biden both beat Trump in Warren’s home state, Biden beats him by way more than Warren. The same holds for the three swing Rust Belt States. And maybe more important, Biden beats Trump in such potential swing states as Ohio and Florida. Warren does not. And we must beat Trump decisively or he may just not leave office and it
might take a two-thirds vote in
the Senate to remove him. Now that is one scary thought! But it is still early.
My ouches were meant to be zings, or pffffftttt of an arrow hitting the mark…….
Thank you
ouch, ouch, ouch, ouch, ouch……
how about reposting this as an article for the front page….as a feature……..AND, if you are at NewYabz do the same there….it is easy to do that.
Posting a feature here has some contortions you have to manage. If you want help I can provide the formatting but someone as sharp as you are really has a place on the front page.
Ok….a comment on your comment……Yes, SC is very important insofar as it has a place as a laboratory for how a candidate will do with particular populations….but does that tell us how the candidate will do with that population in another state. Having lived in the South and in SC in particular and having lived in the North and Midwest I believe that the profile of black activism is very different from region to region. Thus high turnout in SC does not necessarily portend high turnout in Michigan for ex.
Now let me add that SC will have zero value in the general election except where the ticket helps to boost state and local elections which means lessons learned there have limited application for the national race.
Whatcha think?
I’d have to check in detail but from my first review the pattern of Biden in general getting significantly more support from non-Whites and Jews holds throughout the country. (Bernie gets the least support from Jews, Biden gets the most, to give you another fun tidbit.) I wasn’t making a comment about turnout. I doubt if Biden will get back the Obama Black increased turnout. None of our candidates would this time. But matters not since Trump is doing such a good job of that for us. But as happened in California last time, non-whites will tend to the moderate/establishment candidate like Hillary against a firebrand Lefty like Bernie. Bernie lost to Hillary right here in the heart of the heart of Lefty Land, Alameda County, home of UC Berkeley!!! (Alameda is less than a third non-Hispanic White.)
Anyway, SC will indicate where the non-White vote is going and whoever wins that decisively in SC will likely go on to win California in the Dem Primary soon after and then likely take the nomination. But whether that candidate will win against Trump is not looking too good to me at this time. The numbers indicate only Biden can at present have a good chance of beating Trump by enough not to put the election into a Trump it’s rigged crisis. And because Biden does seem a bit old, unless I’m correct and all folk want this time is a rest, he will not do as well against Trump as the polls indicate and thus not have a decisive win. And if the Progressive Dems do the Trumpites’ and Russian’s bidding as lots of Bernie Babies did last time against Clinton, they will again help Trump win.
Sorry, I send way too much time on the Internet as it is and am also too lazy to do what you suggest. Besides, the kind of powers that be here hate me already. If I started to post featured articles they would likely flip out. Damn, they have implicitly threaten to ban me as it is. Oh, well…time to go Troll the [email protected]…
I did think the speech Biden gave was timely and on the money.
At the same time, it was written for him by his speechwriters and he was reading off of teleprompters. When I first saw it, I was thinking this was a very strong approach and a well structured speech…but then I saw him faltering here and there and saying the wrong words repeatedly. For instance:
This section is at the 1:05 mark in the following video:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DTKhR2ofOTY
The last sentence in this segment is disjointed and of course, Trump said and the outrage has been over Trump’s use of “infested” not “infected”. Biden’s repeated stumbles while reading this speech disappointed me while driving home his vulnerabilities as a candidate, especially his age.
Am I glad he made this speech? Yes. However, while the sentiment and substance of the speech is truly appreciated, it is important to Dem primary voters to consider that this was a performance. This was not Beto O’Rourke expressing his genuine anger and sadness in an impromptu tv interview or any of the El Paso and Dayton politicians who have been so eloquent, genuine and powerful in their statements.
This was a candidate for the Democratic nomination performing a speech written by others off of teleprompters (saying that Trump was more George Wallace than George Washington was such a contrived, dated and overwritten jab) that was of course positioned to raise his standing in the primary and your very post evidences that to one degree or another, it has worked as planned.
That is part of the problem I have with Biden and this speech, it was political opportunism even if it was also a very appropriate push back against Trump and the white hatred he has whipped up.
In addition to Biden’s faltering during his speech, this demonstrated his reliance on old school political characteristics that voters have become less enthusiastic about. Instead of speaking his own words from his heart, he spoke someone else’s. Instead of expressing his personal outrage, he dramatically performed outrage in a speech written for him (it was very well written though).
I don’t disagree that it worked. As in your post, I saw news coverage lauding his speech (but not one mentioned his repeated tripping over words and phrases). On one hand, it could be just because the substance of the speech was rightfully so supported. On the other hand, it could be voluntary blindness, as unfortunately occurred with Hillary’s candidacy, that people who don’t want to see and accept that age has affected Biden’s acuity.
With Hillary, there was an issue with some voters feeling she wasn’t authentic. She said the right things, she supported the positions most Americans support but the way she communicated that with the public left some feeling that it may have been more performance than genuine.
This is the same problem I think Biden is facing now and will continue to face through the primary and if he becomes the nominee. He has a very well-rehearsed and effective style of presenting a speech with a tone of outrage and defiance. That can be a plus especially with Dem voters furious towards Trump. But for some Dem voters, there is something about it that comes off as less “from the heart” and more performance skills.
Eventually, this type of presentation can wear thin and seeing the latest polls in Iowa, I think there are a number of Dem voters who may agree with this. In a new Monmouth Poll in Iowa, released today, Biden has basically stayed unchanged over the past four months while Warren is up 12%
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/poll-warren-gains-on-biden-in-iowa/ar-AAFwO9s
And while Biden does lead with 28%, that also means that 72% of Dems in Iowa are not supporting him. There will be Dems that leave the race along the way and with their voters, Warren is more popular as a 2nd choice than Biden so she has even more room to rise than he does.
Biden’s numbers being static and Warren now being only 9% behind him in Iowa and clearly having momentum with over 5 months to go before the Iowa Caucus certainly puts Warren in a viable position.
As you say, Biden is hands down a better alternative to be president than Trump, no question. And as you say, any of the Dem candidates would be.
I just think that when it comes to which candidate would win the nom, be strongest against Trump (and not stumble), best represents the diversity and vibrancy of the Democratic Party and can generate the most enthusiasm, it may prove out not to be the 76 year old white male establishment moderate who has a propensity for stumbling when delivering a speech.
I don’t disagree with much of this…..my post was about someone very clearly naming the reality in clear and cogent terms. Yes, he was reading a speech…..and every candidate has their well written speeches….initially read from teleprompters and then recited from memory. Obama in 2008 had four packaged speeches…I heard them over and over again….Obama was also good on his feet and ever so careful in how he answered something that Biden is not, and something that Trump has never even got close to being (but it does not seem to matter for him).
I think Biden is too old. I think his ideas are not as current as they need to be. I think he has a lot of appeal to a lot of groups as his polling demonstrats.
All I have to say is that those who want someone else, and those someone else’s are going to have to make their case to the American voter in the key primary and caucus states. Nothing else matters.
I understand, I just was making the point because I’ve been seeing an ongoing push for Biden in the MSM and what I saw as an overreaction to his speech which many pundits used to claim other candidates should stop criticizing him and that he is the Dems’ best hope. I think this is the same kind of push the moderate/establishment media types have pushed only on Dems (remember how they swooned over Trump?) to go with the moderate/establishment candidate who is “entitled” to the nom.
As you say, I too think Biden’s age is a deficit that will grow to be a bigger and bigger issue as the campaign goes on. I can only imagine the dirty tricks Trump and the Russians will pull on Biden to use his senior moment gaffes as proof that he has Alzheimer’s, is senile, is going to have a stroke or heart attack, etc.
Remember how they tried to portray Hillary is sickly, weak and hiding serious physical ailments? No way they don’t do that times ten to Biden.
If Warren wins, they’ll do it to her too but Biden is far more vulnerable as each new gaffe will be pounced on by Russian bots on Twitter as proof that Biden has lost it and is a dottering old man. Trump is already attacking Biden this way now, no question that will be the main game plan against him if he won the nom.
Warren though has the tenacity, mental acuity and energy to easily dispute that portrayal, as would any of the other candidates (Bernie would be vulnerable too, though I don’t think he’ll win, but his tenacity would help as a defense too).
I do think other candidates could be effective too, being more exciting to bring out voters and offer a real and fresh vision of where they want to take the country. Of the top candidates though, I think Biden is the least inspirational and the GOTV could rival Hillary’s in the end which could be very worrisome.
Whoever it is though, I’m voting for and supporting the Dem nom 110%!
I believe that this post strikes the most balanced tone I have read in a while. Keep our eyes on the Prize, THE PRIZE, a Trump-Free WH. Now, how we get there….well there are likely a few paths….I am inclined to support Warren but she has hurdles, reflected in her own weakness in home state support, that she has to overcome BUT in nearly all of my other categories she fits my bill. What must be avoided is the kind of underground resistance to our own party’s candidate that marked the 2016 race.
Here is something that gives me pause from https://www.vox.com/2019/7/30/20691246/elizabeth-warren-massachusetts-unpopular
I don’t see a cause for concern here. The article explains that Warren underperforms against Biden with white working class men.
No surprise, these are moderate white men and they will not be the demographic that goes strong for Dems or will make the difference in their winning in 2020.
Trump will at worst split this demo but more likely will win it as he did in 2016. But Hillary didn’t lose in 2016 because she’s didn’t win the white male working class vote that Dems don’t win, it was because not enough non-white voters came out in three swing states (MA wasn’t a factor).
Would Warren lose MA with a 60% total? Of course not so I think reading too much into it would be a mistake. Dems need to drive greater turnout with women and non-white voters in Swing states. That should cause worry about Biden, not Warren.
Good comeback……
Throw this in the hopper. Mass is different than the Rust Belt Swing States in that they on average are Whiter and way less educated in terms of percent college. In these terms Mass is the most educated state. So the Swing States have relatively more of just those voters who don’t particularly like Warren. But wait. She also doesn’t have Black support compared to Biden. As that survey cited by AdLib showed, Biden got 38% of Blacks and Warren got all of 7%. Looks like a combination which will make it way way more difficult for Warren to take the Swing States than Biden. Given that we need to get Trump out by taking just those states, as of now in comparison to Biden she is NOT
the one.
Again, the numbers and trends don’t support your hope that Warren won’t beat Biden or Trump.
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-08-17/warren-chips-away-at-biden-s-strength-as-the-one-who-beats-trump
Like the others, these are national polls that include polling of voters in the Rust Belt.
Warren beats Trump in the latest poll in MI, 44% – 38%
https://climatenexus.org/wp-content/uploads/Michigan-Poll-Toplines-PR1916.pdf
Warren is tied with Trump in WI at 41% – 41% which leaves 18% of the vote to be decided and history proves that the majority of undecided goes to the challenger instead of the incumbent (the majority of voters who end up voting for the incumbent, who they know best, do so from the start).
http://firehousestrategies.com/june-2020-survey/
Please do not misstate my position. I have said many times that I want to beat Trump, hopefully with someone who can do it decisively. As of now, the numbers indicate that would more likely be Biden than Warren. And trends are fleeting. Ask Harris about that. Anyway, your picking from individual polls and surveys you like is near meaningless statistically. That is usually called cherry picking, a big no-no in statistics. Now what do the more meaningful averages of the most recent major polls show as presented today by RCP. Biden beats Warren by a wide margin, 30.5 to 17.3. If you note the tends over the past month or so both Warren and Biden have increased but in the past couple of days Warren is falling while Biden is increasing. But these trends don’t have much statistical meaning anymore than cherry picked polls. As I mentioned, ask Harris about that. Recall the big story not long ago was that she was closing the gap with Biden after the first debate and if the trend continued she would be ahead of him soon. Well, in the real world her RCP average is now a whooping 8.0 compared to Biden’s 30.5.
Also, as your own cherry picked polls themselves indicate, Biden is doing better than Warren. In fact, if you check the RCP averages and about any national and state polls or surveys you can find, Biden is ahead of Warren in the Primaries and does better than her against Trump. You tout one to boost Warren but fail to note what that Firehouse Strategies survey itself concludes:
“For the Democrats, Joe Biden remains Trump’s toughest competition. In head-to-head contests, the former Vice President currently leads Trump in all three states, while Senator Elizabeth Warren and Mayor Pete Buttigieg don’t lead Trump in any.”
Do note, if Trump takes just one of those Rust Belt States he very likely wins the Electoral College Vote And gets a second term.
And in that Michigan Cherry you picked to tout Warren, she does beat him by 6 points but Unky Joe beats him by 13. At least in this case, 13 sounds like a much luckier number than 6.
And the Bloomberg article you cite refers to the survey we talked about before. It is clearly an outlier in how close it has Warren to Biden. But it did indicate a real problem for Warren. She only gets 7% of Black support compared to Biden’s 38%. Oh, and it notes a FOX poll that found:
“…Democrats said by a 24-point margin that it’s more important to have a candidate ‘who will restore the country and get American politics back to normalcy’ — the core of Biden’s pitch — over ‘a candidate who will fundamentally change the way things work in Washington,’ which is Warren’s message.”
And then there is the fact that Dems most in the know about Warren in her home state of Massachusetts support Biden by almost two to one over her (RCP)…that’s among Dems in her Liberal, educated home state for God’s sake!
But if Warren gets the nomination, I will absolutely support her over Trump. But will also check into the immigration requirements for New Zealand.
Saying “trends are fleeting” is demonstrating a misunderstanding of what a trend is. Trends are by definition, not fleeting. They are a summary of performance over a meaningful period of time. You tried to refer to Harris’ brief bump after the first debate as a trend, that is not what a trend is.
I posted a documented trend over the past 4 months of Warren’s steady gain and Biden’s flat numbers. If you don’t like that trend, that’s perfectly fine. If it was the other way around and the trend favored Biden, I might not like it as much.
However, it doesn’t show a respect for numbers though to try to dismiss the concept of trends simply because they don’t favor your preferred candidate.
So far, 2020 is following the same pattern as 2008. The well known, long time establishment Dem starts out in the beginning of the primary with a big lead that flattens and recedes as a more unconventional candidate gains momentum and eventually overtakes them and wins the nomination and the General Election.
Understanding trends helps one extrapolate what is more or less likely in the future. Disputing that trends have any meaning is choosing to put on blinders to avoid seeing what one may not wish to see.
I posted the following to Murph. It was meant for you:
Since you like trends so much, I took a closer look at the RCP averages over the past month. Biden was about 28 and Warren about 15. Today it’s Biden at 30.5 and Warren at 17.3. The differential favoring Biden has gone from about 13 a month ago to about 13 today. Damn, you’re correct, there really is quite the earth shattering trend for Warren…oh, never mind…
It’s so easy to refute your “arguments”. All one has to do is look at the numbers you claim support you and they inevitably prove you’re incorrect.
Here are the RCP numbers you incorrectly claim show Biden gaining over the past month (click it to enlarge):
Using the last month’s polls, from 7/14 to 8/15, as appear above:
a. Biden’s lead over Warren shrunk from 18% to 11%.
b. Biden’s 32% support decreased to 31% support.
c. Warren’s 14% support increased to 20% support.
Click the dates above to see these true poll numbers at the polling company sites.
Maybe in the future, the momentum will change to favor Biden and if it does, I’d have no trouble being honest and admitting that even if it’s not what I’d prefer. But that’s me…
Oh, since you like to cherry pick so much, here’s your cherry of the day:
https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.cnn.com/cnn/2019/08/20/politics/cnn-poll-democrats-2020-biden-rebound/index.html
Biden’s “…up 7 points compared with a late June CNN survey. No other candidate has made meaningful gains over that time.” Warren DROPPED one point. Where oh where has your little Warren trend gone? Some might even say it was fleeting. Anyway, this shows why you should stop with your grand pronouncements based on cherry picking. Better, only watch the poll averages and please hold down on your insults.
So? 2007 was a thousand years ago in terms of our politics today. And I believe you said the same about Bernie in the 2015 Primary polls in a recent post. And who did you say got the nomination in 2016? It is all very early and Warren’s old trends might reignite after she has gone nowhere in terms of narrowing Biden’s lead over her for the past month. Her trend has stalled for now if it wasn’t just fleeting. But, again, lots of time still to go.
If and when she gets back on track consistently narrowing her gap with Biden, come back and crow. When she gets any significant support from our key non-White voters, come back and crow. When she beats Biden in the Rust Belt Swing States, come back and crow. When she does even as well against Trump as Biden does in the key Swing States, come back and crow. Damn, when she beats Biden in her own home State, you might have a reason to crow.
Sad. You claim RCP proves you right and instead it proves your wrong.
When you claim you used RCP numbers as a “study” you made, I assume you expected to be taken seriously but when those same numbers actually prove that your “study” is false, you suddenly disparage the numbers “cherry picking”. Got it.
It’s also called “desperate”.
As for the CNN poll, you again fail to link to it or list its actual numbers because they prove you wrong again (you don’t seem to comprehend what “compared to” means).
The numbers from CNN’s poll:
Biden: 29%
Warren: 14%
https://www.cnn.com/2019/08/20/politics/cnn-poll-democrats-2020-biden-rebound/index.html
See how an honest person presents facts even when they aren’t what they’d prefer?
Since math seems to be a bit of a challenge for you, let me simplify more so maybe even you can grasp this:
Biden at 29% now < Biden at 31% before So the poll you cling to, to support your misguided proposition shows Biden down 2% since the last week's poll. Biden has no momentum and even in this poll that you represent as favorable to him, he has dropped. Yes, it also shows Warren at 14%. That could be accurate but it is an outlier with her support in nearly all of the recent polls so I will look to see if subsequent polls support it or undercut that number as an outlier. Warren had over 12,000 people attend her rally yesterday in MN. Have we seen Biden have anywhere near that turnout at any of his rallies? Who really has momentum and inspires voters? That person will win the primary and it seems clear at this point that's not Biden...and no amount of misrepresentations and contorting numbers and poll results will change that.
I’m so glad you mentioned rally turnout as a factor for prediction, AdLib. My son — who has an advanced degree in math (including statistics) — was one of the few people who predicted a Trump victory in 2016. Nate Silver — the “Numbers Guy” — of course, totally blew it.
One of the main criteria my son used in his analysis was rally turnout. (Which would have indicated that Sanders should have been the candidate in 2016, if it hadn’t been for the odious super-delegate situation.)
To quote him: “I knew something was up when I saw those consistently enormous rallies in state after state. There was something much more grassroots going on there than the highly flawed polling systems were indicating.” His sense was that declining usage of landlines and flawed polling techniques (including subjects deliberately lying to pollsters) made virtually all the polls at that point irrelevant and inaccurate. So it was time to look at other indicators.
I’m very impressed with your son, Kes! He’s right that polling can’t capture that one element that can override everything else, enthusiasm.
By nature, pollsters want to include specific cross-sections of voters that they feel will give them an accurate balance of the population. But if one set of voters are far more enthusiastic, even if that is asked, the polling results arrived at will still be reflective of that predetermined cross-section.
At the same time, the polls weren’t far off. Hillary did win by 2%, polls generally predicted her to win by around 3% (and there is of course a margin of error that fit these results).
Trump’s win in FL now is in question, knowing that the Feds have confirmed Russia broke into their election system and they are hiding what happened from the public.
Voter suppression also played a role as did the Russian interference and of course Comey and the FBI.
But in those three swing states Trump barely won in, there was monkey business too.
So while the Electoral College was given to Trump, it is in question as to whether he actually won it.
That said, the election was much closer than it should have been, Hillary running against a racist sexual molester.
All she needed was to have the voter enthusiasm that a non-establishment, non-moderate would have had and Trump would have lost. An inescapable fact is that Hillary had far lower turnout by the Dem base and she failed to even visit the swing states despite desperate calls from campaign staff in those states that Trump was gaining strength.
Hillary was not a great campaigner and she was not inspirational which contributed to her loss in the end.
Meanwhile, Warren is an exciting candidate that is rallying big crowds and growing support. People don’t even seem to be thinking about her being the first woman president, many seem just to be thinking about having a smart, conscientious, Progressive leader taking over the WH.
I think the nom is Warren’s to chase and Biden’s to fumble away.
Yes, some of politics is intuitive (as much as numbers people hate to hear that… and the same goes for economics) and what they used to call “The Big Mo” (momentum) seems to be shifting now.
Again, poll averages are way more indicative than any one poll. Sorry you never took stats or don’t understand them. Now you go argue with Real Clear Politics whose poll averages for Biden with the new CNN poll included today are 29.0 with Warren at 15.8, for a Biden lead of 13.2, the same as yesterday. And a month ago it was Biden about 28 and Warren about 15, which is ALSO about 13 points. So neither shows any particular trend up or down for the past month and the differential is essentially level. Now you can jump up and down and stamp your little feet and claim otherwise but you are wrong again.
And if you missed it, which you obviously did, I used the CNN poll to show you why you should NOT use just one poll. That is cherry picking, a big no-no. And the 14 that Warren got in the CNN poll is not an outlier since it is in the midrange of the polls RCP used to get it’s average. The outlier might be the Hill poll with her at 10.
You really are a bad student. But I won’t give up on you yet. Your heart is in the right place even if you arrogantly insist you are correct when you are not.
Do you have a trampoline in your backyard? Where do you practice your backflips?
I provide a trend of 4 months of polls that favors Warren, you say trends are meaningless.
I post individual polls bracketing a month that favor Warren, you say individual polls are meaningless.
Meanwhile…
You offer a questionable average for one month of polls that you claim favors Biden and say it’s meaningful.
You offer one CNN poll that favors Biden and present it as meaningful.
Have to wear my sunglasses reading your posts, the hypocrisy and denial is glaring.
Believe whatever makes you happy, we’re all entitled to be happy. Ignore the trends and polls that make you unhappy, make up whatever numbers put you at ease, it’s a free country.
But reality is still happening all around you even if you refuse to look at it.
The cat that puts its head under the bed may think that the world just disappeared but people should know better.
And now the NYT is indicating that Obama himself has never encouraged Biden (quite the opposite) to run — neither in 2016 nor now — for president. “You don’t have to do this, Joe” were his words.
https://www.businessinsider.com/obama-told-biden-advisers-not-let-him-damage-legacy-2020-2019-8
Who knows Biden as a politician better than Obama? And he doesn’t have confidence in Biden?
I just posted above that in this very month, before the 2008 election, Hillary was leading Obama by 44% – 24%, a lead of 20%.
Biden’s lead over Warren is somewhere between 11% – 15% and his support is stuck at around 29%.
Hillary had a lot more going for her in 2008 than Biden does now. And his campaign, like Trump’s though not using immigration, is based on fear. And that’s awful.
Biden’s only platform is, “If you don’t vote for me, Trump will win and destroy what’s left of America! You better vote for me even if you don’t like me! Or Trump will get you!!!”
Just a matter of time until Jill Biden warns of caravans of Trumps coming to invade us and only Joe can stop them!
If you don’t think Trump is fearful, that’s awfully.
Well said! Do we want a candidate who echoes Trump: “You may love me or hate me, but you have to vote for me! You have no choice!” Wow…that’s inspiring!
Regardless of what anyone might think of all of Obama’s policies, I think it’s commonly agreed that he was/is a brilliant politician. He knows a problem-in-the-making when he sees one. To cling stubbornly to Biden regardless can put a fanboy (or girl) into the dreaded “Bro” club. So many of Biden’s backers despised “Bernie Bros.” But fail to see that it’s totally possible to be a Biden Bro without noticing that slippery slope they’ve just rolled down.
How desperate is it that Biden is already having to use his last resort of, “Okay, I may not be a great choice for president but you gotta pick me cause I’m the only one who can save you from Trump!”
I’ve seen the demos for many polls, Biden’s voters aren’t the bros as much, it’s the older folks. Older Dems who just want to play it safe and know Joe from all the decades he’s been around.
The folks who want to be conservative. Who don’t want change. Who never decide the GE.
They are a minority in the Dem Party though. If Biden is at 29% that means that there’s 81% who don’t want to go with the “safe” but unsatisfying choice. As the field shrinks, Warren and others will grow in their support but Biden’s pretty maxed out on the moderate/conservative/establishment vote.
Looking forward to the next debate. The more chances Biden has to stumble, he will. The more chances Warren has to inspire, she will.
I’ve come to this thread late, but
I hope not too late to stick my oar in.
Every day across the country the
enthusiasm for Warren is rising, and more people are beginning to realize how mediocre and morally weak Biden is as a politician — not to mention as a very disappointing human being.
Some of us see this as clear as day, but others do not and will tout Biden’s candidacy until he performs so poorly he finally becomes a lost cause and has no chance to become the nominee.
Maybe. But it not showing up in the average of either the national polls or most all the key states. If Warren actually renews her momentum and ever shows she can do better than Biden in most of the key Primaries and the most important swing states, that would be something to write home about. Hey, it would even be kind of telling if she can beat Biden in her home state of Massachusetts and do better than Biden against Trump there. Wouldn’t hurt if she could get more than nominal support from our key non-White Dem voters.
It’s never too late, NoMan.
I agree, I think it’s just a matter of time and a few more debates until Biden’s deficits as a candidate become more apparent to more voters and Warren’s assets become more visible.
There are many Dem voters who won’t really engage or watch debates until we get closer to the actual elections and caucuses. We forget, because we’re engaged citizens, that many Dem voters aren’t as much.
That’s why I think Biden’s lead is very soft, many supporting him just know him so they support him and haven’t been following the primary campaign and debates.
And as I mentioned, Biden’s fear campaign feels desperate. If all he’s got is trying to convince Dems to vote for him despite his being a mediocre choice, out of fear of a second term for Trump, he’s in a very shaky position.
This whole phony meme about electability was disproven when Hillary ran against Trump. She was the most qualified, experienced and moderate in the race but since she didn’t inspire Obama voters, she couldn’t win in the Electoral College.
Same goes for Biden. He energizes nobody. Yes, many voters will be energized to vote against Trump…but Warren or any other candidate would benefit the same from that though their energizing of the base would give them a bigger advantage.
I’m just looking forward to the debates, it’s annoying a bit that we’ve had a 2 month break between them. I think that accounts for Biden still having a lead.
Biden isn’t a bad guy but he’s not a great candidate. He’s lost two primaries already, I’d rather go with a winner.
And a woman.
I’d agree that Biden’s not a ”bad” guy
and would certainly be preferable to
Trump. But so would your average
malaria-carrying mosquito make a better president than Trump.
That said, these are desperate times in America – and it would be tragic
if Elizabeth Warren — who, having risen high from very hardscrabble beginnings — understands the plight of the common woman and man as deeply as any other candidate in our history and has the mark of greatness upon her – is denied
the Democratic presidential nomination by establishment Democrats who want to reenact Hilary Clinton’s almost willful political suicide of 2016 by nominating bumbling Joe Biden — the uninspiring, repeat plagiarist who has never had an original political idea in his life!
And yes, every word Kesmarn and you have written about the disastrous choice of Hilary Clinton and its consequences is true and verifiable. The great Spanish-American philosopher and moral giant George Santayana, who said
“Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it,” would be spinning in his grave if he could know how many Democrats
have evidently forgotten Hillary’s
debacle and want Biden to repeat
it!
NoManIsAnIsland, you may have put your oar in a little late, but your boat’s course is steady and true. I appreciated every word of this comment! I believe there’s a reason Trump keeps saying that the person he really wants to run against is “Sleepy Joe.” Trump may be a mad man, but he knows who is and who isn’t going to be “easy pickin’s” in 2020.
I read this only now and
couldn’t be more delighted
and flattered by your very
high praise!
I just read the first sentence
to my wife: “NoManIsAnIsland,
you may have put your oar in a
little late, but your boat’s course
is steady and true.” She was
struck by its poetry, and its
scansion is indeed poetic.
I’m not ready for one yet, but I
can’t think of a more beautiful or appropriate epitaph for me.
Of course Trump is a mad man
— he’s a malignant narcissist
and sociopath, whose emotional
and mental development came
to a screeching halt when he
was only five years old.
But all that notwithstanding,
it’s no surprise that even a
psychotic and severely
intellectually challenged five
year old could sense what
“easy pickin’s” Joe Biden
would be.
NoMan, please give your dear wife a hug for me! And — yes — that emotional five year old in the White House has an uncanny sense for sizing up his perceived foes! This is one time we should pay attention to him.
I just gave my dear wife your hug. She
thanks you and sends one back to you!
And this is a very rare time we should
pay attention to Trump.
LOL! I needed that hug. Yes, Trump is plainly telling us what he wants. We should be careful not to give it to him!
We were glad to send it to you.
I laughed out loud at that!
Your other comments reminded me of what Warrren said to Elmer Fudd…er…John Delaney when he attacked her for having vision:
I think that can be applied to all the Establishment Dems and MSM pundits trying to argue Biden into the nomination. Why do Dems always have to settle for less than what they really want? Repubs never have to.
The message this “ekectability” meme really pushes is, Dems shouldn’t try to really change anything, the status quo before Trump is good enough.
No it’s not, the status quo is dooming the world and the generations that are coming up. The economic injustice, health care problems, immigration, student debt, climate change, we need big changes and a status quo candidate like Biden would be almost an automatic one-termer if he won, handing the WH right back to the Repubs (and Ivanka?) just four years later.
I don’t see how Biden, at 81, would be able in any way to win re-election in 2024.
So these “electability” shills are trying to promote a four year break from Repubs followed by at least another four years of them re-instituting all the Trump policies Biden would have reversed.
It’s crazy, such short term thinking has been the self-sabotage that the U.S. and the Dems and Repubs have brought about.
We need 8 years of a Dem president to fix what Trump has destroyed and make big, positive changes in our democracy, economy and society.
IMO, a vote for Biden is a vote for a Repub president in 2024.
I’m glad you enjoyed it – it’s a bit milder
and much less involved than similar
figures of speech I’ve used on the
internet!
Although I didn’t hear Warren giving
John Delaney the hell he deserved, I’m
pleased my other comments reminded
you of that exchange she had with the
often idiotically grinning Delaney, a
close-to-Republican in Democrat’s
clothing. And while political vision and
courage have never been needed more
in our history than now, one would
think Elizabeth Warren would already
have been recognized as the
transcendent and transformational
figure I hope she will get the chance to
prove she can be.
I’ve never understood why so many Democratic voters have been so eager
to accept a status quo that benefits
only the pluto – and now kleptocrats –
who run this country. If it weren’t for
them and their willingness to vote for
even Democratic politicians who deny
them economic justice, I think there
would be fewer establishment
Democrats in political office.
An informed electorate would vote
them out in favor of liberals and
progressives beholden to no one but
their constituents, instead of their
political masters.
But election after election, poorly
informed citizens persist in voting for
those who want to keep them servile
and poor. It’s as if they’re voting to deliberately cut off their economic
noses to spite their faces!
And like you, I agree that if Biden
were elected, it would only postpone
–- and not prevent –- a very likely
fascist takeover of the U.S. in 2024
and the final blow to democratic
governance in this country.
John Delaney after Warren clapped back at him:
I’m patient and confident, I think it will take time for the public and most Dem voters to become really familiar with Warren and recognize the vision and change she represents.
The Dem Party has suffered from having this kind of ruling elite that has the hubris to think they are superior to the Dem voters and are better equipped to decide what’s best for them. And as we’ve seen, it’s always what’s best for them.
They want one of their own, a Dem Establishment type, to win the WH so they personally can benefit from it in the form of cabinet positions or other types of power or money. They are not altruistic, as most people with power aren’t. Obama beat their candidate and was an exception to the rule. If Warren wins the nom, they won’t be very happy either.
I’m sure they’ll fully support Warren if she’s the nom, to beat Trump, just saying that the status quo means they have power so they want to keep the status quo.
And Dem voters watching the media have been seeing wall-to-wall PR from them insisting that electability is the most important factor and Biden is the most electable. So of course, voters are initially shepherded to their candidate but I think once Warren and Biden have had enough exposure to Dem voters, Warren will pass him by.
That is a better way of putting it, voting for Biden only postpones a Repub presidency until 2024 and a possibly completed destruction of our democracy since that’s the only way they can hold onto power.
Biden is a long term problem, that’s a powerful point that will need to be put out to Dem voters.
Ha –That’s perfect, only John Delaney doesn’t look half as genuine as Elmer Fudd!
It’s time for me to hit the hay now where I am, so I’ll say “Good night!”
You’ve made many good points, as always, and it’s been very rewarding conversing with you tonight. It reminds me of former better times several years ago…!
This sounds a lot like trump telling his supporters that whether they like him or not, they have to vote for him because of their 401(k)s. I suspect fewer than 10% of them actually have 401(k)s.
Bingo! And what I haven’t seen discussed yet is that Biden is running on fear. I thought us Dems despised that Trump ran and is running on fear?
Biden is taking a very manipulative and cynical path now, he is earning my stronger opposition each day.
Well, she better start doing that soon since she hasn’t been inspiring much of anyone new for at least a month according to the average of the major polls at RCP and 538. And to help you out with the numbers as I need to do most all the time, 29% from 100% is 71%, not 81%.
self-de·lu·sion
/ˈˌself dəˈlo͞oZHən/
noun
noun: self-delusion; plural noun: self-delusions
the action of deluding oneself; failure to recognize reality.
Now isn’t that a personal attack in violation of your Terms if Service?
You know better than the average of the top major polls as published at RCP and 538. Before you make that claim, maybe you need to first improve your arithmetic skills.
To be frank, it’s clear for all to see that you make up and slant much of what you present as “facts”. That is your MO.
You complain that all the polls and trends that don’t support what you want to believe are no good and should be ignored and instead offer tortured conclusions, cherry picked numbers and misrepresentations to “prove” you’re right.
The irony is that they don’t, they prove that you don’t present your opinion in good faith and see truth as an adversary.
That’s not a horrible or unusual thing. It does make it somewhat moot though to try and discuss facts and numbers with someone who claims to respect them but in practice, goes into denial every time they conflict with his views.
And a small thing, repeating back at me, my grounded and supported observations of how you present your opinions is like children chanting, “I know you are but what am I?”. It comes off more playground than serious.
I realize this response may seem harsh but my intention is just to express my analysis, as I do on any issue, on the manner in which you try to debate using disingenuous and hypocritical approaches.
Trying to be “right” through a kneejerk response to disqualify all factual data that disputes your beliefs or hopes disqualifies your own opinions as prejudiced. When you can’t admit facts simply because you wish they weren’t true, that is called being in denial. It is not reflective of someone who respects numbers or seeks the truth.
It’s the Completion Backwards Principle that many Republicans use. Arrive at a conclusion one wants to believe first then accept only the facts that support it and deny all the facts that undermine it.
Your approach actually affirms that you have an opinion that is unsupportable by the whole truth so you have to scramble to swat away all the facts and truths that disprove it.
“That poll doesn’t count! That trend doesn’t matter! Only the ones that I think prove me right are legit!”
Really? How mature and enlightened is that mindset? People who are genuinely seeking the truth not only accept all truths but seek them out.
The way it works in a genuine debate is that both parties stipulate that facts are facts, polls are just as legit when they don’t support your position as when they do. Trends are by definition, not fleeting, they are strong indicators of the direction something is going in over a meaningful period of time. And the longer a trend goes, the stronger and more meaningful it is (a 1 month trend is less informative than a 4 month trend…real numbers guys know that).
Have you ever considered that the reason you feel the need to do such backflips and contortions to support your perspective is that it may just be incorrect?
Why don’t I misrepresent numbers and polls? Why don’t I try to disqualify polls that don’t show what I’d like to see?
I’m not threatened by truths. I arrive at my conclusions over time, by reviewing and researching information and use corroborating information from multiple trusted sources to test and affirm my position.
I don’t have to do all that, I could just make it all up and deny truths I don’t like…you know what I mean.
I’m just a fellow citizen in this country but I see it as an important responsibility to be informed and share what I’ve discovered with others. And defend the principle of the truth however I can in my own small way.
If I discover that something I believed is inaccurate, I would rather know that and be on the track that’s true than be in denial and keep insisting that a disproven belief is correct out of insecurity and a fear of looking “wrong”.
Lastly, whether in politics or in conversations, I don’t look the other way when people are disingenuous, in denial, manipulative or lack a respect for truth.
I respect truth too much to just stand by while someone else tosses litter all over it.
So, while we honestly respect freedom of expression at The Planet and you are welcome to post your views however you wish (as long as they don’t violate our Terms of Use of course), if you continue this disingenuous approach of trying to disqualify facts that you don’t like and misrepresent numbers that you think support you, others will use their freedom of expression to continue to call it out for what it is.
It’s so much easier to be “right” by acknowledging and processing all truths then arriving at a conclusion.
But to each, his own.
Jake, you have violated our Terms of Use with personal insults. Either remove them by editing your comment or I will.
I support you in this.
Thanks. Two weeks of arguing, snide remarks and personal insults are more than enough and certainly not deserved knowing the people on the receiving end very well. We have been quite patient but someone has to be mature enough to stop this.
Very true, Kalima, you know me, I am an eternal optimist about turning around misguided people but that can be wasted sometimes.
Many won’t change, they are driven to behave poorly and they simply don’t know how to be any better.
We have bent the rules a bit to allow more disrespect in comments than our Terms of Use allow, considering we have new members from Yabberz and we wanted to give everyone time to acclimate to the neighborly conversation we have here at The Planet.
Almost all of our new members never needed that though, they’ve shown to be thoughtful, earnest and respectful of others from the start.
As you say, several weeks and many interactions in that time is more than enough for anyone to understand what is and isn’t acceptable behavior between people of good faith who want to honestly and constructively discuss issues.
Well we can’t enlighten everyone but this isn’t the only thread. TOCB’s post about identity politics and winning back white working class voters was hijacked and turned into a post about health insurance instead of answering the main subject of his post.
Anyway, I’m throwing in the towel on this as I’ve spent more than enough time asking for civility.
A discussion of opposing opinions is never won by the person who can’t explain their opinion without turning their replies into insults and trying to demean the person they are replying to. It makes their opinions moot. If you have a valid opinion you would want to explain it in detail and not throw rocks to avoid doing that.
There is enough chaos all around us and I certainly don’t enjoy being exposed to more of it here on The Planet.
Turning off my computer to enjoy that afternoon nap recommended by my doctor Horiouchi. He seems to know what is good for me better than I do myself.
Cheers!
I will spray the site for chaos, it will be clear by tomorrow! Have a nice nap!
I forgot about the chaos spray. Was it next to the “troll b’gone” spray?
Excuse the bluntly clinical language, but my friends in the education profession refer to your (Jake’s) style of argument as “weaponized autism.” Now before the fainting spells begin, I am not saying that you are autistic. But trolls, autists and rage addicts tend to use the tools of weaponized autism. Namely, extreme persistence (e.g., five years from now this debate would still be worth pursuing, in the interest of the “eventual win” even if Biden were dead), repetition (ya think?), and preoccupation with numerical patterns outside of meaningful context. While neurotypicals would eventually get bored, these folks don’t. As to why that is the case, I leave to the medical science of the future.
Now isn’t that a personal attack in violation of this site’s Holy Terms of Service?
I am critiquing a style of argument which most psychologists would consider counter-productive. And its possible neurological basis. Period. Nothing personal, just science.
Kes, I would think that someone who is of such a mindset would be unable to differentiate between a clinical description of such a mindset and a personal attack.
Just as some people who are racists are outraged at being called racists, they don’t recognize their own behavior as being racist so describing it accurately would be viewed by them as a personal attack.
As some have said towards Trump and his protests of being called a racist, “If you don’t want to be seen as a racist, stop saying racist things.”
AdLib, so true. Even if all anyone did was hold up a mirror to a person like this, it would be perceived as a personal attack. When you combine autism with narcissism, it creates an even more toxic brew.
To describe it in those much beloved numbers, with this mindset, most psychologists would chart that — on a scale of 1 to 100 — “the patient’s level of insight is: zero.”
My bet is you have as much in the way of credentials to make that argument as AdLib has to argue the fine points of numbers and stats.
Please feel free to bet. Betting is so comforting because it involves so many numbers, doesn’t it? Kind of like train schedules, sports statistics, and actuarial tables. Warm. Cuddly.
Nahhhhhhhh…but you answered the question. You are practicing without a license which is why you are mostly wrong, as it is with AdLib on this. I even offered to help educate him a bit but he seems to like self-homeschooling. Now pseudo-psychology is not my field so can’t help you there.
If you guys would like to continue this, I’m game while I still have the time relaxing from more important and challenging things.
Quod erat demonstrandum. Temple Grandin has had a great career and has buckets of credentials. (And, added bonus, can communicate with civility.) Oh, and I’m practicing with a license, dear.
If you seriously mean that then the only license you have is a driver’s license.
LOL! And the closest you’ve ever gotten to a Fulbright is when you had to google how to spell it. People who’ve actually gotten Fulbrights don’t write “quite” when they mean “quiet,” or “not so fact” when they mean “not so fast.” Just a few of your many errors on this thread alone.
Isn’t it about time for you to take your rage addiction to some place where it will be more appreciated? I hear they’re hiring at 8chan…?
Because, frankly, we’re all getting a wee bit bored with your lack of creativity here.
Insomnia??
Haha… not a situation that was important enough to lose sleep over, Kalima. Just a diversion on the way back to bed from the little room.
Relieved to hear that. A snack for the kitty or a stubbed toe?
Damn, you’re the first one in ages I’ve come across who’s a grammar and spelling [email protected] and not also a Putz Putin the Poisoner Troll. Congratulations. You try using an iPhone with AutoSpell for rapid posting without editing and see how you do. Anyway, Murph has one of my professional CV’s and as he knows after years on Yabberz and before, on things like that I don’t lie though I may hedge a bit to protect my identity. You can also ask him about me and 8Chan now that you mention it. Well, enough fun for now. Bye-bye…for now…
Yawwwwnnn…
Credentials don’t win arguments here. Experience in observing other people closely does. Most people here who certainly have and had, impressive credentials, would never use them as an excuse to try to score points or an argument. I know that for a fact.
LOL…that’s obvious…
You obviously missed my point. I said that people who are good at what they do, don’t have to boast about their credentials. They prove it by what they write.
LOL…that only works when those reading what is written don’t have an arrogantly closed mind thinking they know what they don’t know. Do note, in most all AdLib’s responses he challenged my statements that were based on my professional
credentials and experience with data and stats. More, he even accused me of lying and using false data. Kind of insulting especially coming from someone with no professional credentials and experience. Again, I agreed to tone it down if others did the same. I guess AdLib just feels the need to piss on posts around here. And he thinks numbers are his turf.
Who mentioned AdLib, only you. I was talking about all of the great members we have known in the 10 years since we launched the site.
Your obsession with AdLib seems as if he really hit a sore spot with you and you are out for revenge. Isn’t that what trump is doing against Obama. Either way, it’s petty, and if it takes closing down the comments, I will do it. You don’t Know when to stop.
While my friend Jake sometimes crosses the line – and I admonish him for it- he is a smart cookie who is widely read and puts together sound arguments. He has a very broad range of interests and has been a daunting crusader on a number critical issues.
We are a site that expects people to read and follow or ToU. Apparently that is proving to be very difficult for you. I think that it’s you who is looking for an echo chamber. Sorry we couldn’t oblige. It has nothing to do with opposing views, they have always been welcomed here, but the rude reactions to any criticism is not.
To gain respect you have to show respect.
We’ll have to agree to disagree on the “puts together smart arguments” thing, multiple members from Yabberz and The Planet have expressed their views on his credibility and honesty but as long as he refrains from personal insults, there won’t need to be further issues.
And who might those Yabberz folk be, I might ask?
Just look back on the other posts you spent a long time on. You will find your answer there.
We respect our members privacy and don’t give out names.
Yep, way back then and I did as requested until AdLib felt an irresistible compulsion to attack and insult yet again.
As an aside, I’ve only interacted with five people from Yabberz and I know for a fact that four would disagree with your claim. So that leaves one and we generally have agreed but have a friendly history of disagreeing, sometimes intensely.
That doesn’t excuse his behaviour here, Murph. Especially since he had more than enough warnings to tone it down. If his arguments are so sound, why become so rude and combative when others disagree with him as many have here?
This has been going on since you posted on the 7th of August. It is now the 21st and there are many other good posts to comment on.
I appreciate your efforts in all of this.
That’s part of my job as an Admin but I really don’t enjoy having to do it.
I generally do not get into these rumbles. Closing down the thread is certainly a reasonable one since it has gotten so unwieldy, there is little indication that the discussion is advancing, and it does not to stop. So, I have no objection to doing just that. If I knew how to, and was permitted to I would just that. As to the TOU and Jake….I have been sparring with him for years. I wish he would “let things go” but he does not. I value his perspective and he has provide some very keen insights and led me to info sources that I was unaware of. I have edited comments he has made to remove personalisms. Stopping a thread is another useful action I think.
Rest assured that I wouldn’t have gone ahead without checking with you first, and then only as a last resort. As you can see from recent comments, he couldn’t let it go even after AdLib had said that it was time to close the conversation. Sorry Murph but we just can’t have this 2 week long, all day and every day aggressive distraction. It’s not what The Planet is all about.
We will talk about it again if he continues. You don’t have to apologise for him, he’s an adult.
Guess you haven’t read the posts AdLib has made about me. As I said I would respond in kind and then some. Only fair.
In pursuit of getting conversations back on track, this is my last on all of this.
I described your comments and disrespectful behavior with common, descriptive adjectives.
However, I never used a pejorative towards you nor a disgusting phrase to describe you.
You have had conflicts and engaged in personal insults with multiple members here, not just me. We have been quite lenient about your breaking our Terms of Use in the hope that you would eventually dial it down.
But as the saying goes, no good deed goes unpunished. So, moving forward, it would be best for everyone to have conversations with each other like they were neighbors, people with good will and deserving of respect.
Being called a Republican is down right insulting! Being accused of lying is usually considered insulting when the accuser is wrong, as you were. Being accused of not knowing numbers by an amateur when I was at the top of my field making a very good living using numbers is beyond insulting. It is plain silly. And the list goes on and on. I said I would tone it down. And I did until you decided to be your old arrogant, insulting self again. So please learn to behave so I don’t go back at you.
Gokorosama, AdLib. You are a real Mensch.
Some non-New Yorkers have a weird view of what Mensch means.
It’s German for person, a human, and that is exactly what I meant. AdLib is a person of integrity and honour.
Goodnight, Jake. The stage is all your’s to destroy. The verbal sledgehammer is under the table.
LOL…did you just tell a New York Jew what Mensch means? Are you bonkers? Damn, you do need to sleep on that. However, in this context the Yiddish term that does pop to my New York mind is more Schmuck than Mensch.
I just told you what it means in German and your take on it has no bearing on my comment to AdLib. So you insert yourself just to insult?
I think it’s time to close the comments on this post.
What is the female version of Mensch in Japanese, cause back at ya!
Lol! There isn’t one as Mensch means human. In Japanese it would be, ii hito. A good person. I know for a fact that you are.
Thank you.
Arigatōgozaimashita, ii hito!
LOL! I just sprayed tea out of my nose.
Doitashimashite! (You’re welcome!)
Heh!
Those are the two other phrases I learned in Japanese were “moshi moshi” and “konnichiwa”.
Not what you’d describe as “fluent” but just enough to get tea sprayed out of noses.
Well if you throw in a “onegai shimasu” please, and a “Konbanwa” Good Evening, you could spend the evening in a Mom and Pop sake bar in Shinjuku and make many new friends.
Come on, Jake. You could stop this in a New York Minute by not responding. Two weeks of the same argument? Really? It is becoming very tiresome and time consuming. I have a life and a family that needs my attention. Let’s change the subject.
That’s a good idea. I’ll wait for AdLib or some other to bring up something else using polls and numbers and stats they clearly don’t understand to be my autistic self again. In the meantime, I’ll get back to preparing for my next teaching gig in a month or so instructing professionals in my field in Europe on how to use my techniques. Guess they want to learn to be autistic. Guess the Fulbright folk also like autistic people to teach in their name around the world since they did award me a five year international teaching fellowship. I’m sure AdLib has one in statistics and Kesmarn has one in Clinical Psychology.
Kesmarn didn’t say that you were autistic, she wrote about how people are deliberately weaponising autism on blogs. Look it up, it’s an actual thing.
I’m very pleased for you that so many people want to hire you but why should I be impressed?
My husband is world famous in his field, so what? Does that make my opinions more important than anyone else’s. Absolutely not.
If you can’t communicate in a civil way with others, what’s the use of flashing your credentials here as if that sets you apart. Social skills are more important than telling us how special you think you are.
Well, I might be impressed if you where world famous in a field you commented on here, not your husband. I don’t say my wife was world famous in these matters. However, she is quite an experienced attorney and I will ask her about legal and Constitutional issues that I see here and elsewhere. And I will take her opinion on these over mine and of the non-attorneys around here and elsewhere. But that’s just me. I’m old fashion. I actually believe some people are more knowledgeable because they have lots of experience and credentials. I value teaching and education. Done a great deal of it. I know, some folk don’t value that much.
Being as I was and am the person who built up a successful business around my talented husband, I share in his success so you really can’t just try to flip me off as “the wife”.
That’s all the info I’m going to offer about our private life but I wasn’t going to allow you to dismiss me as “the little woman”.
Well, then say what you mean. You sure as hell expressed it as somehow taking credit for your husband without making any connection to yourself other than being his wife. And obviously I don’t have a generic little woman attitude given what I offered about my wife. And if I stick around here you will also see me bringing in my in-house attorney’s opinion as someone credentialed in opposition to those here practicing law without a license. Actually, that one Yabberz old friend that I had a run-in with here a few times fell into just that situation making legal and Constitutional arguments back at Yabberz that I countered based on my in-house attorney’s opinion. He didn’t appreciated it much. But nevertheless we agree on most things.
Kes, this is so incisive and right on the money. People like you describe are impervious to truth and oblivious to how they’re perceived.
They have an emotional need that is in direct conflict with dealing with truths and reality. Thus they reside in an inconsistent bubble of delusion and denial.
As you describe, they can’t let go of their untruths and poor arguments because they see the conflict as the goal. To matter, in their minds, they must try to eternally “be right” while their deficits of being self-deluded and reliant on expressing made up “facts” and misrepresented numbers exposes them as dishonest.
I did not know about that preoccupation with numbers as part of the syndrome but it makes a lot of sense.
Thanks for your insights on this, it really puts things in perspective.
Well, that doesn’t change the fact that you don’t understand the difference between your cherry picking polls and an average of the major polls. Nor of what a trend is and is not.
Your words are much appreciated, AdLib. Unfortunately, the knowledge I have about this topic comes from both clinical experience and years of dealing with a family member with Asperger’s syndrome. In other words, awareness that came from learning the hard way what makes these people tick. They can be quite bright. And often are able to support themselves in careers that involve charts, graphs, grids, actuarial tables, etc.
Where they get into trouble is in their inability of recognize the cues of ordinary social interactions. Once they launch one of their “crusades,” they lock in with laser focus and simply cannot let go. Rather than seeing the other person as a human engaging in a give-and-take conversation, they see him as an “enemy” who must be “annihilated.” They’ll keep at it for years, given the opportunity. They tend to give people two options: either agree with everything they say or have no contact whatsoever with them. Agreeing to disagree is not in their tool kit. They tend to have few close friends, since their tendency to be deliberately provocative, their sarcasm and arrogance — which they inevitably will deny — eventually drive people away. But the internet is rife with them. Interestingly, some of the much maligned “Bernie Bros” would have fallen into this weaponized autism category. Maybe that’s why there’s so much projection of the “red faced Bernie supporter” image onto others. We sometimes tend to accuse others of what we fear in ourselves.
Very well said, Kesmarn. Your
last several posts on this thread
are proof positive of your deep knowledge of psychology and
a very keen understanding of
human nature.
One needn’t be a medical
professional to see this. And
in whatever way(s) you use
your clinical experience, I’m
sure you are a great credit to
your profession — as you are
a very welcome presence on
Planet POV.
i can’t tell you how touched I was to read this, NoManIsAnIsland. It means so much coming from a person who’s had experience in these areas as well. I’m very grateful.
I found out a very long time ago
that nothing I can ever do for myself
gives me as much pleasure as doing something for someone else.
It can be as effortless as recognizing excellence as I did yours, or it can
involve years of work. It doesn’t matter,
for the result is the same. You’ve just
made my day!
And by the way, early in my career I
spent a considerable time working with
autistic children, and I have a great
nephew who has Asperger’s Syndrome.
Talk about a positive presence in the world, NoMan. Your patients were fortunate indeed.
Asperger’s is a tough one. And it’s a balancing act to love them without being overly “soft” to the point of tolerating and excusing every meltdown. I think part of showing real respect for someone occasionally involves letting them know that they really are competent. Competent to play by the same rules that everyone else does. In the long run, that’s how self-esteem grows.
For brief periods, though — and I know you already know this — you’ll probably have to duck, because there will be blowback. To put it mildly.
Your young patients and your great nephew are very lucky people to have had you in their lives. Thank you again.
Your remarks on dealing with those
who have Asperger’s are dead on
the mark — every syllable of every single word.
I’ve been retired for some time, but if
my patients and great nephew have
been lucky to have me in their lives,
I feel just the same about them.
Thank you for your very kind words.
And you’re welcome again!
You’re so kind, NoMan. And yet, as I was driving to and from my elderly Dad’s home today to look after him, I was doing a bit of what old time Catholics used to call an “Examination of Conscience.” (Tough habit to shake.) And decided that if I were to be strictly honest with myself, I could be doing better. Especially in my interaction with our friend Jake here.
If he were a paraplegic, would I be asking him to stand up and walk? I don’t think so. If he were diabetic, would I urge him not to take insulin and just tough it out? Not likely. But I was — in some ways — urging him to act in a way that made sense to me (using tact, empathy, civility), but not to him. In a sense what I was doing was a bit unprofessional. Maybe even unkind.
Does he wake up in the morning asking himself whom he might verbally wound this day? Probably not. Did he choose his genetic makeup, his family of origin or what traumas he might have undergone as a child? Hardly. So even when he resorts to verbal cruelty, there’s perhaps a sort of “innocence” (for lack of a better word) in his hostility.
Regardless, one consequence of the words of people like you, who make a sincere effort to see the best in others, is that it produces the salutary effect of making those others want to live up to your high estimation of them.
So in that spirit, I have to offer an apology to Jake, not on behalf of the Planet (he really did violate the Terms of Use multiple times), but on behalf of myself. For becoming impatient with someone who — while he is legally an adult — for various reasons, may not be entirely responsible for the choices he has made here and elsewhere. For overlooking that possibility, I must say I am sorry.
To learn that my words have had such a profound influence on your thinking almost floors me! I understand how they affected you and am deeply moved and humbled to have unknowingly been the catalyst in the process.
I don’t know how to write this without sounding self-serving, but you have no way of knowing it if I don’t tell you: This isn’t the first time someone on the
internet has told me I’ve influenced their thinking — and even their life — for the better, and I’ll leave it at that for now.
You have reconsidered your recent contacts with Jake, regretted the way you responded to him, and made an apology. And no matter how Jake reacts, you’ve taken an honorable course and are to be commended for it.
Kes, I’m sorry you had to deal with having a family member with Asperger’s but you have become very wise about the way people behave (from your professional experience as well).
I like to think I understand human psychology well but there are such complexities in so many people, you can sometimes feel like you’ve barely scratched the surface.
What you say really makes sense to me, that sense of tunnelvision, locked in on “defeating” the other in any way possible including unethically because there is one singular, narrow focus, winning.
And with such a narrow focus, they can become oblivious as to how they are behaving and how they are perceived.
Which explains the projection you describe. I would think there may be a subconscious or suppressed awareness of their improper tactics that presses them to project it on the other party as a way of absolving themselves.
The Bernie Bros (and Sis’s) are still out there all around Twitter, I see them narrowly focused on purity and even with Trump in office, threatening not to vote Dem if Bernie isn’t the nom.
Those with the mentality you describe are stuck in a trap. I like to think there must be some way to get them out of it using reason but that’s the deceptive thing about mental issues, as you mention with Asperger’s, they can’t necessarily be reasoned out of an invisible but real condition.
The mind is often a fascinating but sometimes disappointing thing. Such potential that can be tapped and yet for physiological and psychological reasons, that potential is sometimes never fully realized.
Very well said, AdLib. I became
interested in the workings of the
mind — animal as well as human
— from a pretty young age — and
devoted much of my professional
career to research in experimental
psychology and psychiatry.
Yes, AdLib, My sense is that in their own minds they can rest in the comfort and the clarity of their entirely “quantified” world. A world where everything has a set of numbers attached to it. (Hence, frequent references to how much money they’ve made to demonstrate how successful they are as human beings, etc.)
In my better moments, I feel sad for the way in which the world of human interactions and relationships must seem to them like an impenetrable forest full of potholes and landmines, and which they can’t seem to learn to navigate. A world with rules and cues seemingly known to others but mystifying to them.
They inflict emotional damage, but can’t seem to be brought to a realization of that fact. One moment that poignantly (and humorously — although not at the time) demonstrated this was when our “Family Aspie” was getting louder and more shrill trying to make her point at a gathering. Finally someone told her to stop yelling at everyone. To which she responded at the top of her lungs: “I’M. NOT. YELLING!!!”
I think she actually believed that.
I’m sure she did.
You really describe what’s going on in the mind of people suffering from Asperger’s so well, from living with a relative with it, I know but still it’s very powerful.
We do take a lot for granted, how naturally we can interact with others, empathize and understand them and how we’re perceived and how foreign that can be for people with Asperger’s. I’ve only known one person with it years ago and while he wasn’t aggressive for the most part, it was difficult to connect with him or understand why he said some of the things he did.
That’s a funny story! I have some too from relatives with Alzheimer’s, it’s nice to get a little comic relief sometimes when you have a family member suffering from a mental illness.
Absolutely! As the common saying goes: “If we didn’t laugh, we’d cry.” Between Alzheimer’s and Asperger’s, there’s an endless challenge to our patience, no? But these days, I’m finding that the more I learn about both conditions, the easier it is to find some compassion for people with either one. I think if they could choose to act differently, they certainly would.
So true, they can’t choose to act differently but that’s unseen by us, we remember who they were and would hope to see them decide to change what they can’t change.
In many cases, they do seem to be happy much of the time, in the cases of dementia. And they have their moments of clarity which can be tough, when they tearfully confess they can’t remember anything or can’t figure things out. But it passes and because of their memory issues, they can quickly forget all that and be happy a moment later.
Interesting that you apply that only to those you disagree with. And actually add nothing to the really important issue of who might be best to beat Trump. And what the strengths and weaknesses of our candidates are as reflected in the real world of aggregate voter attitudes and intentions. You may not like my persistence in using real world numbers to make a point but I’ve done quite well professionally with that for many decades, thank you.
I rest my case.
“Let Biden be Biden…”
Well, that seems to be working just fine since he beats Trump by about 9 points in the RCP poll average as of today. He already has 50% voter support for the general election. And beats Trump in all the Swing States and a few other states like Ohio, Florida and Texas. But it is early. Warren also is ahead of Trump but by a not very significant about 3%. The same holds in the Swing States where Biden is ahead decisively and Warren is only marginally ahead.
Anyway, Biden being Biden gets way more votes than Warren being Warren. But it is early.
It is indeed early. Too early for Biden to be running against Trump and not against his primary opponents. Yes, Biden SHOULD be running against Trump, as all Democrats should be. But Biden is appealing to Trump voters in the Democratic primaries. I am not sure that is a wise move.
You may be correct about that. But what I’m watching is how that effects his support among Dem voters. Since the top issue for Dem voters is beating Trump, if Biden can point to how he beats Trump more decisively than any of the other Dem candidates, especially in the key Rust Belt Swing states, he expects to get greater support from the Dem voters in the Primaries. And of course by appealing more to the Trump voters who, say, voted for Obama twice, he will have way better poll ratings in just those states that made Trump Prez then the other Dem candidates. It’s a twofer for him. Who know’s whether it will work? We are far from a slam dunk with any of our candidates as of now. I just wish Biden was 20 years younger but he isn’t. Still, as of now he does way better against Trump in the average of the national polls as well as the state ones than any of the other Dems.
I have been making this case:
Here’s the thing….I begin with a very simple statement. Whoever it is has to be able to slice and dice Trump. Frankly, I don’t think Biden is all that adept at verbal sparring and I do not know of a time when he was able to land a killing verbal blow.
With a public that generally votes based on impressions….that look to one of the least reliable barometers of presidential timber, “debates” (which are in fact side by side Q and A’s with the occasional cross stage jab to drive enthusiasm…..I need someone who is going to engage him in such a way as to take control of the narrative and to put him into the hole from which he crawled.
With a public that has such a low knowledge base matched by the belief that the public is in fact wise (ignorance and arrogance paired), the voters are easily misled by propaganda. Labeling is a key tool and the Dems cannot be successfully presented to the average voter as the Socialist Party, as the Radical Party, as the UnAmerican Party. Sad to say, but there are more than a few Dems who have played into that (not to say that any study of what they are actually saying makes such labels nonsense and not to say that what they are proposing is not worth serious consideration)….and in doing so they have made themselves an easy target for Trump Bombing runs. Again, I am being very concrete in all of this.
Further….I think that the Democratic field understands this…..and those who are making the cut are wrestling with how they can frame themselves as The Trump Toppler…..
Well, not so fact. Go to the RCP site that gives the average of the polls:
https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2020/president/us/2020_democratic_presidential_nomination-6730.html
And what do you see? Today Biden is at 30.5 and Warren is at 17.3 which is about a 13 point lead for Biden. Now look down a bit and there is a graph of the trend lines for all the Dem candidates. Any ongoing trends should show up over the past month. So set the graph for the past month by clicking the 30 day button at the bottom of the graph. You will see that 30 days ago Warren and Bernie were tied at about 15 and Biden was ahead at about 28. Unless the rules of arithmetic have changed recently, 30 days ago Biden was ahead of Warren by about 13 points, about the same that he is ahead of her now. The only trend this indicates is that the differential between Biden and Warren has leveled off over the past month. Yep, Warren’s trend to close the gap with Biden has leveled off over the past month and some might thus even call her past trend fleeting. Thank you, I accept your apology.
Now what is the problem with your argument? Simply, you didn’t compare averages, you made that big statistical no-no by cherry picking individual polls. Worse, you cherry picked individual polls from different polling groups. That is effectively comparing apples and oranges in addition to cherry picking. I said I would be nicer and try to educate you on these things. But you are a difficult student. Anyway, as we all say, it’s early and anything can happen.
As an aside, there is a possible counter statistical argument to what I said. But I’m not overly worried about it since I’m not sure you or anyone else on this thread or this site would see it. Besides, since it would take some computer time to check out, which I have not done, I have no sense whether it would make my point stronger or weaker.
Well, at least you could find at least one thing you could make an argument about. In any case, until Warren can show she can consistently beat Biden in the average of the polls nationally and in the states whatever trend she has, if it is not fleeting, has little meaning. And until she can show in the average of the polls that she can beat Trump at least as decisively as Biden can she is a more risky candidate if our interest is in removing Trump.
So until she can show she can win against Biden in her home state, gain significant non-White support and at least do as well against Trump as Biden in the swing states, she has a lower likelihood of beating Trump than Biden. And that’s what this is all about if you missed it.
My fear is a lot of those who oppose Biden will fall for all the negative crap, in addition to their own, and out of spite become a megaphone for the Trumpites and their Russian buddies. Just like masses of Bernie supporters did in 2016 which really helped give us Trump as Prez.
Reply to Niemand that I thought you might value:
When someone writes something like this:
and when that person seems to be reasonable, well read and clear in their expression I have to wonder what is going on.
The Mueller report, which I have read, makes it very clear that the Trump administration (usually at the behest of the Chief Executive) engaged in at least 10 separate episodes of obstruction of justice. That same investigation led to a large number of judicial findings but spared the WH, by and large, because DOJ policy, based on a memorandum of understanding, is that sitting Executives cannot be indicted, nor can indictments be seal for later release, nor can they be listed as an unindicted conspirator…..but what he makes clear is that his report does not vindicate the man and that, if were able to make such a statement, he would have.
Your position on this invalidates the rest of your commentary from my POV.
He is William from Yabberz. A likely very good Putz Putin the Poisoner Troll. Or at least a gadfly Englishman trying to be a Putz’s Troll.
So many become so focused on THEIR CANDIDATE (and conversely so opposed to others) that they cannot get beyond the reality…..only one in the field can win the nomination and that nominee is NOW their only standard bearer…..I know SO MANY who resent the Hillary nomination and never got on board.
And to this day they refuse to take credit for their wonderful concerted efforts to make Trump Prez. And as I’ve said, I smell it happening again (even right here in River City) and the Russians haven’t even seriously begun their dirty deeds. Mostly because they haven’t yet figured the Unky Joe thing out. But they have a weird alternative which may have stared in the last debate. (You can take this with a grain of salt but watch it with a jaundice eye.) Gabby is running to be Biden’s VP. That was so obvious when she went after Harris it was funny. And Gabby is by far the most Putin Troll like of any Dem, not just candidate, I’ve seen. And I’ve been nailing Russian Trolls or their facsimiles for a few years now. Anyway, she may actually be a real Manchurian Candidate. And better than Trump, she’s young, stable, non-White (and thus beyond Dem criticism) and if Biden wins with her as VP she will very likely become Prez one way of another in several years. So expect that if she is Biden’s running mate, the Russians will back off supporting Trump and any attacks on Biden. They would likely help us this time win.
Not still on about those bad ole Russians Jake, old news, sans proof. As for Mueller, very sad, but the report was much ado about nothing, a damp squib as I intimated that it would be. Nevertheless, as I claimed it served as a vehicle with which to try and undermine Trump’s Presidency-witch hunt being an appropriate term. As for Biden, too affiliated with power and capital, never met a Republican that he didn’t like-have you checked his voting record? Ok, if all that you desire is Trump’s removal, and even there I’m not convinced, but then what, for as with Obama the circus would continue: the rich becoming richer, the poor poorer and the wars of terror continuing. As the late, great George Carlin said the system is rigged and choice is but an illusion, theatre for the masses. Roll up, roll up and see the show.
Going to Holland again next week, ferry from Hull-Zeebrugge, meeting my cousin Herr Tenk, cycling for a few days if the weather allows. Turning to yesterday, I tend to consider nostalgia an overrated emotion, but like you I miss Yabberz, particularly before a purge that transformed it into an echo chamber devoid of real discussion. Joined New Yabberz but I’m on my second muting, silenced until August 14th and threatened with expulsion, my views seemingly at odds with the nut jobs Zook and Opie who are site administrators. Was accepted as a member and then subject to censorship, so much for the first amendment. 01:14 here now and my eyes are heavy so I’m to my bed. Bye Jake, enjoyed talking to you again.
When someone writes something like this:
and when that person seems to be reasonable, well read and clear in their expression I have to wonder what is going on.
The Mueller report, which I have read, makes it very clear that the Trump administration (usually at the behest of the Chief Executive) engaged in at least 10 separate episodes of obstruction of justice. That same investigation led to a large number of judicial findings but spared the WH, by and large, because DOJ policy, based on a memorandum of understanding, is that sitting Executives cannot be indicted, nor can indictments be seal for later release, nor can they be listed as an unindicted conspirator…..but what he makes clear is that his report does not vindicate the man and that, if were able to make such a statement, he would have.
Your position on this invalidates the rest of your commentary from my POV.
Hi Murph,
My point being that the, supposed, main purpose of the enquiry, investigating the possibility of ‘Conspiracy between Trump and the Russian State-Putin’ was found to be unproven there being no direct evidence. NBC News, Ken Dilanian, 02/12/2019, reporting on conclusions reached by both Republican and Democrats on the Senate Intelligence Committee. As for Trump publicly asking for Russian help to find Hillary Clinton’s emails, even a simple Englishman is able to recognise sarcasm when it appears.
But it seems he was talking to drunk Russians who didn’t get the sarcasm and immediately went to work to illegally get the emails. Or so the Mueller and Intel reports show.
Hi Jake, You are a naughty boy. In front of a crowd of people, on tv Trump calls for the Russians to find Clinton’s missing emails. Consider the manner of his speech his expression, communication arises in many forms and sarcasm excoriates like no other. Only someone, shall I say partial, here a euphemism knowing your sensitivity, could judge this part of his speech such.
As for Mueller and your intelligence agency reports they, like Epstein’s purported suicide, shouldn’t be taken too seriously, especially after Iraq, for they are designed to undermine Trump’s Presidency, after all he was not the elites chosen one, Hillary was.
How’s the weather in Moscow?
When ones looks from a distance Jake, no not Moscow, it’s easier to discern the full picture, similarly, when one doesn’t have a dog in the race. Here in Groede, near Breskins-Holland, it’s overcast, threatening rain. Arrived Thursday and returning home on the morrow after an enjoyable few days with cousin Robert. Less than three weeks now before our visit, of eighteen days,to the US, should be fun.
This analysis seems insightful, both accepting your proposition that Trump was not found by Mueller to be guilty of conspiring with the Russians…but he wasn’t seen as innocent either:
Just because someone proves to be too incompetent to succeed in a crime, it doesn’t mean he didn’t have criminal intent.
As for your perspective that a man proven to have told over 12,000 lies since taking office, should be believed that he was only joking when he called for Russia to find Hillary’s emails:
https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2019/04/ben-wittes-five-conclusions-mueller-report/588259/
It’s not a joke when the Russians obey Trump’s request any more than it’s a joke when racist white gunmen go out to murder people of color who Trump declares to be their enemies.
Trump incited Russian attacks on our election with his “joke”. He also seriously pursued what you claim he was only joking about. The facts and timing are clear.
I meant to tell you that I have sent copies of your reply to three defenders of the “Mueller found nothing crowd” who I know…very well done.
Thanks. I don’t have to checkout RT or Sputnik Igor.
My fear is a lot of those who support Biden will fall for all the negative crap (about more progressive candidates), in addition to their own, and out of spite become a megaphone for the Endless War Machine and their Goldman Sachs buddies. Just like the DNC did in 2016 which really helped give us Trump as Prez.
I’m seeing that issue in every direction. A lot of Biden support on MSNBC for instance with pundits whining against any of the other candidates saying anything critical of Biden. They are saying, “”It’s destructive, a circular firing squad for Dems to criticize Biden. Can’t we just agree on not bringing up any of Biden’s faults and letting him win the nomination? I mean, Trump certainly won’t do that if Biden is the nominee so whats the benefit of diffusing any issues in the primary so they won’t be new ‘scandals in the General Election?”
They refer to Dem candidates who question anything about Biden as attacking Obama or damaging Dems’ chances in 2020. It’s a primary! That’s how it works! The front runner is the one in most of the crossfire because they’re the front runner. I guarantee, when Biden drops down and is no longer the front runner, the criticisms will wind down. I hope that makes the pro-Biden pundits happier.
As we’ve discussed, many of those blindly committed to Biden show no interest in considering how every establishment Dem moderate in the past 35 years has lost. Just like Biden, most led strongly in the early polls. But the lack of curiosity in how those early polls ended up being irrelevant and the candidate failed, allowing the Repub to win the next term in the WH, is disappointing.
I have seen many touting as if it was a badge of honor, that most Dems’ top issue is electing a candidate who can beat Trump. That is a self-deception as results have proven. Hillary was polling well ahead of Trump in many periods during the election and we all know who won.
If Biden was to win and only supported incremental change on healthcare, corporate power, economic inequality, etc., he will be a one-termer anyway and who knows, we might end up with President Ivanka next!
Biden would be 81 years old if he was running for re-election in 2024 and considering the many senior moments he’s having now, on top of being an uninspiring politician with little improvement to show on issues after 4 years, the Repubs would be favored to return to the WH and finish the job on destroying our democracy in 2024.
Not many Biden supporters talk about what would happen in 2024 if Biden won in 2020 but it is not a pretty picture.
And that’s the hole you dig for yourself when you vote based on who could win as opposed to who would be the best and most popular president.
“It’s a primary! That’s how it works!” Thank you, AdLib! And yes, what about 2024? And the blood-chilling possibility of a President Ivanka (with Jared joined at the hip)? Sometimes it’s possible for old school conventional Dems to “pragmatize” with such tunnel vision that genuinely workable options slip away right in front of their noses.
Guess you didn’t like Obama much. And maybe like Trump, don’t believe what our Intel community concluded about the Russian interference. But thanks for kind of proving my point.
I can’t figure out who you are replying to here….your reply does not seem to fit in with any of the comments above it.
Kesmarn who posted some snarky comment aimed at me in reply to the observation I made you about how we may have a rebirth of the Bernie Baby type attacks on Biden as they made with Russian help against Clinton last time.
Well, my post was by way of an experiment. (Besides being an accurate expression of my thoughts.) I was curious as to whether a comment posted in the exact same language as yours (using your post as a template) but expressing a differing point of view would be considered by you as an acceptable use of ordinary free speech rights. Or — would words that were presumably perfectly fine when used to express your opinion suddenly become “snarky” when they expressed someone else’s? I got my answer. Thanks.
My post was not aimed at you or anyone else specifically. It was also factual and not snarky. Yours was aimed at me and meant to be snarky with little consideration for its factual basis as you indicated. Big difference. But I have no problem with you being personally snarky. Just expect the same in return.
Hahaha!
“My post was not aimed at you…” you say.
Murph said: “I can’t figure out who you are replying to here…”
You replied:”Kesmarn who posted some snarky comment aimed at me…”
For future reference: Gaslighting doesn’t work when the words you typed are right there for all to read.
If you missed it, my comment referred to YOUR response to my initial post which was NOT aimed at you. But yours was aimed at me in a snarky way. Sorry you have felt obligated to make this personal. Maybe more of your venom towards Trump & Company and less towards me and Biden would be more productive. But that’s just my personal opinion.
Oh, the Russians really did interfere in our election and, yes, they did focus on the Bernie supporters and the Rust Belt States. And yes, they had enough success to help make Trump Prez. They likely will be doing the same again and unfortunately, a lot of gullible progressives will fall for it yet again.
Responses or comments are not limited to someone directly responding to your comment. Anyone can jump in anywhere if they choose to. And speaking of snark, that is misguided in Kesmarn’s case.
“Maybe more of your venom towards Trump & Company….”
There has never been venom used by Kesmarn in her comments during her 10 years on The Planet. Stop with the direct insults or no one will take you seriously here. Being combative will never win any argument, and just make people feel that they want to avoid having conversations with you. If that’s what you want, then continue.
Many thanks, Kalima. Especially for pointing out the very consistent double-standard evidenced in this exchange. As in implying: “When I use very direct language, I’m just ‘keeping it real.'” When you do it, it’s “making it personal” complete with promises of retaliation. When I word things strongly, it’s ‘just being honest.’ When you do it, it’s ‘being snarky.'” Etc., etc., etc. When the consistent message is: “I’m always the victim. The powers that be here hate me,” and so on, it gets quite tedious. Puh-leeze, who has time for ‘hate’ here? It’s boring for starters. And — even worse — it makes the purported object of the ‘hatred’ feel so very grandiose and important. Something we all can do without if we want genuine dialog.
No need to thank me, kes. I know you, Jake doesn’t.
Fine. Enough. See you all with comments on the issues and expressed as Bah Humbug Jake the numbers guy likes to do it. I’m not here to be liked as I tell the White Nationalists and Russians when posting at their sites.
We are not White Nationalists or Russians here. Do you think it’s enjoyable to keep asking you to be civil? In case it didn’t occur to you, both AdLib and I have work and a busy family life outside of running The Planet. If you are incapable of toning it down, just let us know.
Sure…if it is mutual. But if I am attacked or if incorrect and insulting assumptions are made about me, I will respond in kind.
Ok, we will see. It might help to remember that differing opinions and criticisms of one’s opinions, does not constitute an attack by any means.
Yep, and that is a two way street…
Bearing in mind that a criticism of one’s opinion is not a personal attack. That should do it.
I don’t understand why you still think it is a positive for you to invent false and insulting accusations against others whose opinions you disagree with. It only further reflects on your own credibility by repeatedly making false attributions against people who are merely trying to express their personal opinions as you do.
It comes off as an easier and disingenuous alternative to honestly debating someone on what they actually said and being able to honestly make your case.
Here is a link to our Terms of Use and I would recommend that you read it to understand how we strongly believe in free expression here but we do not support members being frequently provocative towards others and disruptive simply because they disagree with another member’s opinion.
Disagreements and debates here are absolutely fine but making up false accusations against others to discredit them and their opinion is not a display of good faith or intellectual honesty.
I support our terms of service. All should abide by the operating principles at The Planet….I know I have erred at times when I got truly angry…I will counsel Jake to do as I try to do…….Stick with as neutral a tone as possible and let the facts woven together with logic and insight do the fighting.
I can say this about him….he is a real warrior when it comes to Russian Trolling. He has been fighting the fight about 8Chan for example long before even a few were aware of it….he has a very wide perspective regarding the power of the false information, propaganda machine that Putin’s people are working so hard to keep Trump, and the Trump legacy post Trump himself in place.
I would like to note that the first person to attack me personally here and make false accusations about me and my positions was you. Maybe you should read your own terms of service. Now in the particular. I did not make an attack on kesmarn with my statement. But was attacked for it in a personal snarky way. So I responded in kind. But what I said was based on fact. Obama did continue our wars and expanded our military operations around the world, particularly in Afghanistan and with the unending drone strikes. Obama intentionally gave about a trillion to the Banks with no strings attached. He then went on to the QE’s with the Fed to throw a trillion a year for several years at Wall Street in what was likely the greatest transfer of wealth to the already rich in history. So Obama fits the bill kesmarn described and my statement was not false. The US Intel community and Dems on Congressional committees along with Mueller sure did present how the Russians interfered with our election by the targeting of Hillary and the DNC while focusing on Bernie supporters especially in the swing states. The implicit denial of that by kesmarn is like Trump’s. And the accumulating and keeping of binders of negative materials with which to undermine Biden is very much like what the Russians fed to the Bernie supporters in order to undermine Hillary. If you missed it, Trump is our enemy, NOT Biden!
Now William by another name here and I go way back at Yabberz. Most all there were convinced for years that he was a Russian Troll. I was always unsure. But whenever he posted something that literally could have been lifted off of RT or Sputnik I would note it and call him Igor or Ivan. As an aside, I have made a sport of nailing Russian Trolls on sites around the Internet. And have been so accurate at times that the Russian Trolls organize a swarming to get me banned. This process was described in detail in one of the Congressional reports. So if I see someone who meets my Russian Troll criteria I will treat them as such. And you should be honored if Neimand/William/Ivan hangs here since if he is a Russian Troll he is a very senior one. Again, you can check with Murph on this if you like.
Ah, free speech. And Planet POV promoting that this site is dedicated to it. I disagree with you. Biden isnt our best. Biden isn’t the presumed nominee. Biden is a LIABIILITY. I substantiated why – and 51 percent of the Democratic party who identify as liberal aren’t bending over fearing what happens next if we don’t kiss Biden’s corporatist pinkie ring. WE THE PEOPLE can secure the nomination for the Democratic party and the White House without fear mongering by party members incapable of embracing change. Twice over during the election process leading up to elected day 2020 – my state allows for mail in voting with an audit verifying paper ballot – which means no Russian interference messes with our votes – counted on a secured computer system that never is connected to the internet or the Kremlin. The fact is this – if we want to dump Trump we band together and offer the people OUR best. Exactly what we didn’t do in 2016. And exactly what we MUST DO in 2020. And that’s no secret – to any American. That’s not just “my” opinion. I do have every free right to ponder – does jake really want Trump taken down – or not? Seating a new persident who will represent not only the Democratic party’s status quo or the GOP status quo but ALL people is the reason we hold presidential elections – in my opinion. The REASON for the 2020 election. I’m crystal clear on all of that. That is MY opinion.
Spot on, nehalem.
I’m sure you’re clear…for at least part of the day. What you took out of your original post is very telling. You dropped the Blue Cross reference. That tells me most all I need to know about you. Oh, and the syntax was cleaned up a bit. Another, box checked. But on the numbers, 51% of so-called Liberals represent less than 15% of the electorate. So to make that the main criteria for a candidate indicates you want the Dems to lose. Another box checked off. Hey, three strikes and you’re out or outed.
Here is what I wrote to Ad re. his concerns.
Thanks. But my recent Gabby insight is freaky. Oh, I forgot to mention, she gets near nothing but praise over at the Putin and Kremlin neo-Nazi site and some of our Alt Right ones as well…even though she isn’t White. She’s the only Dem candidate they don’t dump on. Go figure…
It is not your job to point the finger at other members accusing them of being real or imaginary Russian trolls. This is not Yabberz or any other site that allows it. If you had actually read our Terms of Use you would know this.
We don’r allow trolls or troll bashing here, and if anything needs to be dealt with, the people who own, run and finance this site would be the ones to deal with it. That would be AdLib and me.
My reply to Jake…
Yes, I read it in your replies to others. We don’t have many rules but would like the ones we do have, respected. They are the same rules we have had in our 10 years of The Planet.
Thanks.
So how do I report someone who passed my tested Russian Troll Duck Test to you so you can do your job?
I see you already have the necessary information.
Hope that’s not me you’re talking about Jake.
No, one way or another you are useful and even fun to have around. It’s the guys who could be your underlings and have not yet mastered English syntax and the American scene I find just annoying.
I want to second AdLibs direction in re. to reporting suspected trolling activity. Ad is very good at tracking t his stuff down. Use the Contact Us link to report what you think is going on and since that link is secure you can include examples in support of your position….links that show the kind of parallelism that you are very much aware will make your case.
Jake, I appreciate your frustration when you see someone who pops in here and appears to be a Russian troll.
When you see this and we haven’t responded yet, please use the Contact Us link to let us know and we will review it to take action as required.
If we let them create havoc here by allowing members to engage in hostile exchanges that violate our TOU, they win in their sabotage and we lose.
Thanks for understanding and your support on this.
Great. Will do. But I kind of like old William/Neimann. And if he is who I think he could be, it is an honor to have him around…and a real enlightenment of how the Kremlin thinks, what their latest wedge issues are and how they will frame them. It also helps us think about how best to counter them. And whether or not he is a Troll, he quacks like one and is thus just as useful. Now that other guy is a totally different question. He seems like the typical Trolls I’ve come across who do it for the draft exemption, the Vodka ration and some Kopecks.
I’m embarrassed Jake, oft have I said that there’s less to me than meets the eye and here you are elevating me to an undeserved station. Now, having firmly protested I admit to a rousing of interest by talk of vodka and kopecks.
The vodka and Kopecks comment was, again, NOT aimed at you! You would be paid in lots and lots of Rubles that would actually allow you to easily afford all those global trips. And whichever you are, quality single malt Scotch would be more your cup of tea. Maybe a 25 YO Macallan?
Thought that I had joined the site Jake but only just noticed that I’m designated guest. Is there a probationary period? Whiskey is not to my taste, other than the liqueur Glayva which I hope to find on Thursdsay night’s ferry; four litre bottles should serve for the year. Oh, you are likely to get an innocent man removed from the site with your recommendations of my supposed subversive prowess.
Nahhhhhhhh…it’s more likely to get me removed. And don’t know a thing about this place, just tagged along with Murph as I did with Yabberz…
Joking Jake, my dry English wit, you’re a boon to any site with your New York winning ways. I’m in a similar situation, wandering blindly around trying to figure how things work. Just noticed that a green bell appears, bottom right of the comment rectangle, when replying, which when ‘activated’ informs of a response to the post. I’ll ‘press’ it and see! Oops! seems that the default position already allows for a notification of reply. Think that I might consult the help section as a last resort if all else fails.
To show you how much I know about this place, I haven’t foggiest notion of what you’re talking about.
Midnight plus fifteen, night Jake my mattress beckons
Shucks Jake, you make me out to be some sinister Machiavellian creature whereas I’m just a kindly old Englishman looking for somewhere to place his metaphorical hat, engage in discussion. Problem being that wherever I go I seem to find the same old story, absence of such due to a, mainly homogeneity of opinion- an apartheid of political opinion. Have been perusing this site for a while, but although I subscribe to the New York Times, yes I pay Jake, I’m left feeling out of my depth, all of those numbers and graphs, the well written and argued positions. But I take solace in an opinion, born of long experience, that Democracy as we know it is a rigged game, a vote every now and then after which the show continues as usual; Obama was an example of that, “Yes we can”. Shook my head in dismay that people still fall for the same old con, and here we are again with some now thinking that Biden, or some other bought individual, will take them to the promised land.
Trying to figure out the persona you present as YOU here. So….you are a Brit. Maybe of you share your political alignment there that would help. Where are you on Brexit for example and the current leadership in your own fractious nation.
Hi Murf, you suggested this site In the dying days of Yabberz and so, after wandering around for a while, here I am: but if not welcome, seen as a disruptive force, I will quickly disappear without complaint. Also on New Yabberz but currently muted until August 15th because I failed to tow the party line, offering alternative explanations for events. Specifically, suggested that the shooter involved in the killings of twenty two Mexican migrants must be mentally ill to have committed such an act , not needing any encouragement from Trump: the iconoclasm didn’t go down well. By the way regardless of old Jake’s opinion of me don’t read anything sinister into the ‘party line’, phrase, just an expression in common usage.
Regarding my political alignment, disappointed in the main, but after Jeremy Corbyn became leader of the Labour Party I ,along with tens of thousands of others, joined in the hope that real equitable social change was now possible. An uphill task with the right wing of the party against both him and the agenda he would follow. Similarly, he would and was assailed by the media and lately there has been the antisemitism accusation orchestrated I believe because he, like I, is sympathetic to the plight of the Palestinians.
Regarding Brexit, I voted out, considering the organisation undemocratic, high officials chosen, sinecures rather than being subject to election. Nor did I appreciate our Parliament and laws becoming secondary, or our borders becoming open to all within the EU, changing the face of our society-in some places, towns Lincolnshire for instance, the newcomers being more numerous than the locals wherein amongst them, locals, a feeling of alienation, dislocation pervaded. To my mind a deliberate attempt to undermine the unity of the nation state, resulting in the indigenous British becoming just one group in a nation that once was theirs. Neither did I like, appreciate the Idea of a United States of Europe within which our identity would be further diluted. Xenophobia, little Englander, I think not carrying English, German, Dutch and Irish blood within, just a man uneasy and unappreciative of changes around him over which he has no control.
Yes I know a mass of messy contradictions.
Thanks for getting back to me on this. You have a number of complex, and at times contradictory positions. As do I. Your Party alignment is particularly intriguing given Labour’s committment to slow down the move to Brexit. Are you now of the same mind? A no-deal exit from the EU strikes me as a recipe for chaos. It seems that the leadership of that Party now holds to the same position. I share a number of your concerns re. the creation of a USE (United States of Europe)…..mostly out of the experience here of federalism’s impact on state government…and this is a relatively unified culture.
Lastly as far as being welcome….as long as we maintain civil tongues in our heads the Planet is accepting of opinions from all sides…..I have often found myself on the opposite side of the fence from the predomnant mindset here as well. But boy is this kind of dialogue needed.
“Predominant mindset”, Murph?
If wanting equality, a functioning government, fair pay for the work we do, adequate and affordable healthcare, dark money out of politics, justice that doesn’t discriminate, fair share taxes, control over our own bodies, a clean environment and an effort to stop global warming, then yes, we are of the same mindset and there is nothing wrong with that. It is why The Planet is far more civil than sites that allow troll bashing, personal insults, and discrimination against minority groups or those of other religious beliefs.
The mindset I refer is largely a matter of tone.
There is a tendency, Kalima, on virtually every site I know including this one, to look down on those who disagree with the “predominant mindset” on that site….whether rooted in the politics, social structure, or economy endorsed by and supported from the left, center or right. Some do this with frontal assaults that are rude and full of angry personalisms. Others are far more civil and reasoned in tone. I tend to follow that route and I have to be on guard as a result.
I actually think the Planet’s, and Yabberz before it, and other sites I know work hard to keep the dialogue respectful because that is what encourages dialogue, even when it comes from distantly opposed sides.
The mindset here is generally further “left” of mine. I get a good bit of criticism for it. And that is ok….but I know when I post some things they will be critiqued sharply, although politely, beause their starting point is distant from that of others here. And that too is fine.
As to your list:
-a functioning government
-fair pay for the work we do
-adequate and affordable healthcare
-dark money out of politics
-justice that doesn’t discriminate
-fair share taxes
-control over our own bodies
-a clean environment and an effort to stop global warming
….there is not a thing here that is not on my list as well.
If you are talking about recently, then I beg to differ. And if there has been any strong words, it was because someone was breaking our ToU. No one who has been here for a long time expresses anything that would be taken as being superior and if you have any complaints, you can express them in private to Admin.
If someone disagrees with your opinion, they have as much right to feel that way as you have and it has nothing to do with mindset. You have been here long enough to know that it is never personal. So unless you are standing up for someone else, I don’t understand what the issue is and I’m sure that it’s far more pervasive on other sites. The few times I went to Yabberz, it was a free for all of personal insults.
So you wrote this and realise that as all humans, sometimes one gets angry, that is very different from acting in a superior way. In fact, it doesn’t even come close.
“All should abide by the operating principles at The Planet….I know I have erred at times when I got truly angry…“
We are in agreement re. this. “If someone disagrees with your opinion, they have as much right to feel that way as you have and it has nothing to do with mindset.”
Well, that is one point cleared up.
Mexican “immigrants” not “migrants” and many born in the US who speak the English language more eloquently than many of trump’s brainwashed supporters who want to murder them.
“Immigrants” it is then, apologies for the mistake.
Also, 8 were visiting Mexican Nationals. Not immigrants at all. And the shooter explicitly said he did it to kill Mexicans. His manifesto on 8Chan repeatedly used Trump anti-immigrant and anti-Mexican terms. The shooter clearly was influenced and encouraged by what Trump said and Trump’s expressed attitudes. Moreover, the site he posted his vile Trump-like manifesto justifying mass murder on had Trump ads on it that where click links to Trump’s official campaign website offering the dregs who frequent that cesspool site free tickets to his rallies. These are Trump’s core base. These are the potential Brownshirts Trump has intentionally tried to attract from the day he first decided to officially run for Prez in 2015. Most of the White Supremacist mass murderers of late from New Zealand to El Paso posted their sick Trump-like manifestos on 8Chan, the site with the Trump ads and direct links to his campaign site.
Last campaign, I found that 8Chan for months sent more traffic to Trump’s official campaign site than Breitbart, FOX or InfoWars. Let that sink in. In the months leading up to the Gilroy shooting, 8Chan again was one of the top sources of traffic to Trump’s site. Trump and these White Supremacist mass murderers and want-to-be or soon to be mass murderers are joined at the hip. And we ignore or whitewash this at our peril.
I pointed it out because the word “migrant” is often used in place of “immigrant.” A migrant is a person who moves from one place to another within a country. Immigrants are those who move to another country.
I was aware of the distinction but thought that I had incorrectly designated the unfortunate individuals murdered in El Paso, but again thanks.
Most of the dead were residents of El Paso. Six or maybe more, were Mexican citizens who had crossed over the border legally, just to do some shopping. They were visitors shot down in cold blood too.
Lincolnshire only has a population of 1,082,300 and immigrants are not new to the East of England as I lived for many years in Derbyshire where many people from India and Pakistan had settled. They were hardworking people and some of the best doctors and nurses around. Still are.
Sorry but your comment sounds very xenophobic and also very Tory considering that the Brits, and I’m a naturalised Brit, had no problem with colonialism and still consider themselves to be special when the country is falling apart trying to prove it.
I no longer live there but friends and family do and if Tory anti-Europe racists hadn’t received the help of the Far Right’s Nigel Farage who told so many lies like his mate, trump, Robert Mercer and Putin, the country would not be in the pathetic shambles it is now.
In case you haven’t been following, another referendum would show that Remain would win. Google crashed on the day after the vote in 2016. The most asked question? What is the EU?
Are the Brits going to clean public loos, or mop up the blood in an operating room?
The country was systematically lied to by a bunch of racists and it will be the ordinary people, especially in rural regions, who will suffer and are already suffering the most. Good luck with that.
Brexit was also an initial part of Putin’s war on Western Democracies. Unfortunately, he has had some real successors. However, the French didn’t get sucked in by his efforts. Also, unfortunately, Brexit maybe an even greater success for Putin when a hard border starts a civil war in Ireland that will spread to England and see Scotland then also separate. The first thing the Dems must do if we win in 2020 is find a way to deep six Putin before he causes more havoc.
Those poor Brits, intellectually unable to consider their own interests, needing some Russian Godfather to direct them. Look at the modern world and our fingers are all upon it, not a Russian needed, not a Russian wanted. And, suggesting that the, let me wash my mouth out, FRENCH resisted that to which the British succumbed! Well, really Jake. On a more serious note the Irish border issue has become a ‘stick’ with which the EU are ‘beating’ us with, hoping to, thereby, prevent us leaving.
Brexit caused by low levels of education, study finds
A slight increase in higher education could have kept Britain in the EU
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/brexit-education-higher-university-study-university-leave-eu-remain-voters-educated-a7881441.html
The IRA, regardless of faction, does not use sticks if you missed it. And you giving this short shaft rings more of the Kremlin than the English countryside.
That nice, articulate President Obama visited and offered advice that we would be better served by remaining in the EU; we listened respectfully and voted out anyway. Now you would have it that those baaaad Russians manipulated us, resulting in an out vote. Most here are conditioned to jump at the mention of Russia, Pavlov would be proud, and so any advice from them would be like seed on stony ground. Those that voted out, the thinking amongst us, took the opportunity to try and save that which can be saved, language, history, culture-simples. Free of Europe, a nation once again!
If you had read the news like I did and do every day, the fact that Russia has been involved financially in trying to topple Democratic governments in Europe has filled the headlines for years. Being as you identify yourself as a thinking person, then it didn’t extend to what was obvious after Farage appeared on RT and visited Far Right groups to offer his support before and during their elections.
I used to do a daily news round up here, Morning Blog, and collected stories from all over the world. The same people who got trump elected, did, and are still trying to destroy democracy in Europe. You would have to be living in a cave to have missed all the thorough investigative reporting done by journalists who deal in facts and proof.
As I have said before, and in the article I posted to you, the British people were lied to by the government and by local Tory politicians towing the party line from Westminster.
I was back in November of 2016, sorting out my father’a estate, and I met his friends, all in their late 60’s and 70’s who still had no idea what they had voted for as millions of people like them. And you consider that a fair vote? The pulse of the British people?
The donor who gave the most to the “Leave” Party is being investigated for accepting Russian money. The proof is staring us in the face. As a European, I don’t find any of this funny enough to make jokes about. Then again, I must be be telling all this to a Conservative and therefore wasting my time.
All one need do is look at the origins and workings of UKIP, and then the Brexit Party to see how the Tories played into the hands of those you identify here….all part of the same leadership movement that is behind the curtain in country after country…as you also clearly identify.
Yes, and that is why it exhausts me to have to defend the proven facts, when as you know, I gave mountains of links at the time, and continue to do so even though I’m no longer able to publish my daily MB roundup.
As I said in my reply to another member, I find it disingenuous to joke about how the Russians and the same disinformation sources were used in Brexit, the 2016 U.S. election, and the elections that followed in Europe. We also know for a fact that bannon meddled in the election of far right candidates in Italy and Brazil, and that far from being disbanded, Mercer financed Cambridge Analytica, started the same kind of dubious company using a different name.
To then claim that everything in newspapers is what would be fake news, very Trumpian, is either putting your head in the sand because it doesn’t fit your chosen agenda, or very suspicious because I will naturally question their motive.
Yes, and Nigel Farage was and remains the instigator of bigotry, xenophobia, racism and Far Right propaganda. He is being investigated for breaking campaign finance law too. They all belong in jail as far as I’m concerned.
Your reading on this is very definitely in line with my own. The right loves to launch “conspiracy gambits” to bat down the progressive agenda….and, what I believe is that the right might as well have a shop called “Conspiracies R Us” given lists like yours.
When it comes to the vocal Brexiteers, I go with them being out there with the Far Right rather than just the RW. They have opted for Far Right talking points that mimic the Kremlin’s party line but either think no one notices because we don’t bother to follow up and dig deeper, or don’t care if people know who they really are and what their endgame agenda is.
When someone starts pushing it here, it’s plainly obvious because of my immediate acid reflux.
The only thing I find amusing about far right groups aligning themselves wit Putin is the fact that he doesn’t share all their hate filled agendas but like trump, he uses them for his own agenda to try weaken Europe. When they are no longer useful to him, he will drop them.
I read a number of British newspapers from the far left, Morning Star to the far right Daily Mail, in addition to which I actually pay to read the New York Times and if this wasn’t enough other English versions of Foreign (enemy) newspapers. Then courtesy of Jake321 recommendations, RT, Sputnik, Daily Stormer and lately Russia Insider ( That boy does have time on his hands). But it’s been a long time. I read and ask to whose benefit am I being told this?
That nice Mr Chomsky, ‘The Manufacture of Consent’ advises how the Media, owned and controlled by either wealthy individuals, governments or other organisations ‘massage’ information to control the narrative, this is how it is- this is what you should think. So the term ‘ Free Press’ disguises the fact that those in control are likely to have agendas interests at odds with those of the general population. Consequently, and particularly after Iraq, 9/11 and now this Epstein murder, sorry suicide I’m more than a little hesitant to accept anyone’s word, quite a quandary ; but when in doubt ‘follow the money’
“I read and ask to whose benefit am I being told this?” an important question
“So the term ‘ Free Press’ disguises the fact that those in control are likely to have agendas interests at odds with those of the general population.” a very important observation
I wasn’t asking if you read, it was about what you read and what stories you were following.
My blog started in 2009 and I found and followed stories every day, and published the most interesting and consistent sources that were then backed up by other sources.
If you listen to Noam Chomsky about not being able to trust what you read, where on earth do you get your information from? The Daily Mail is like a supermarket gossip rag.
There is some good and honest reporting out there by journalists who are not constricted by their bosses, but if you are not interested in finding out the truth because it might go against what you want to believe in, then you don’t have to read them. Having a story out from various reliable sources makes me dig deeper before I make my own opinions. No one can ever tell me how to think or what to think. I wasn’t born yesterday.
Everyone pays for the NYT and almost everything else now online.
I will never agree with your reasons for wanting to leave the EU, neither do the people I know over there, but the reason that it’s in such a bloody mess now is that the government wasn’t prepared, and as always, expected concessions because they thought they were special. They are not and every member country is expected to follow the rules. The U.K. is no exception.
It wasn’t a question of if you read, it was about what you read and what stories you were following.
My blog started in 2009 and I found and followed stories every day, and published the most interesting and consistent sources that were then backed up by other sources.
If you listen to Noam Chomsky about not being able to trust what you read, where on earth do you get your information from? The Daily Mail is like a supermarket gossip rag.
There is some good and honest reporting out there by journalists who are not constricted by their bosses, but if you are not interested in finding out the truth because it might go against what you want to believe in, then you don’t have to read them. Having a story out from various reliable sources makes me dig deeper before I make my own opinions.
Everyone pays for the NYT and almost everything else now online.
I will never agree with your reasons for wanting to leave the EU, neither do the people I know over there, but the reason that it’s in such a bloody mess now is that the government wasn’t prepared, and as always, expected concessions because they thought they were special. They are not and every member country is expected to follow the rules. The U.K. is no exception.
You also swore on a simple English Gentleman’s word of honor that there was no Russian interference in our elections. Not once but at least 3,847 times and counting.
Brexit chaos brought to us by the same people who foisted trump on America. Pots and pots of Russian money naturally stolen in bulk from the Russian citizens so Putin can get a tiny hard on fantasying about a powerful empire that will never materialise again.
He didn’t succeed in Germany or the Netherlands either. Bannon stuck his far right nose into the Italian election too. They are as crooked as a £3 note, and certifiable. Someone taking over the world is only in Marvel comic books. Trump is becoming unglued, and Vlad is nowhere as popular as he wants us too believe. The continuing protests prove that. The voters will prove it too all over the world.
I surely agree on this with hope in your last statement. Another take on what Putin is doing is less that he thinks he can ever hope to recreate the Russian Empire and again be a superpower but can try to diminish the strength of other countries and break them up along with their alliances. This to make Russia relatively more powerful without having to increase its own power. He knows that Russia does not have the ability to compete in the world as it is anymore. So he has to chop up others to look bigger in comparison. A small case in point, when the California organizer of Calexit was outed as being funded by the Kremlin, be packed up and fled to Siberia to join the group there that was behind the efforts to have a Texexit.
Although about local elections, the orders come straight from the Kremlin, and it’s good to see young people, under threat of being jailed, continue to protest. Like trump, Putin hates criticism and has banned internet sites that criticise him, and banned or imprisoned opposition leaders making fair elections impossible. Not that they were ever fair under Putin. Trump drools when he see this, and wishes he could do the same. Putin plays the tough guy, but lives in fear of losing power. Trump is dumb as a plank and thinks he already has the power of a king. Once they show any weakness, they fall. Putin will never topple Europe or NATO, and neither can trump.
—
Discontent and a push for political reforms have led to the largest protests in Moscow in almost a decade
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2019/aug/04/moscow-protests-police-crackdown-putin-russia
—
.
I hope you are correct about where this is going since one thing you said is very ominous. There is a Russian site that operates quite freely and whose operator has appeared on Putin’s RT. It glorifies Putin and Putin’s Russia and announced months ago that it would like to become the Russian Daily Stormer, about the time it published Putin’s Manifesto, which would have been welcome on the Daily Stormer. It has made its goal already with some of the most vile anti-Semitic material on the Internet. It has featured articles from the Daily Stormer and lots of neo-Nazis from the Daily Stormer and the like congregate and comment there. If you have a strong stomach you might check out Russia Insider. This is the direction Putin seems to want to take Russia. He must be removed before he has the chance to create a large new Nazi State with a massive nuclear arsenal that supports and helps to create other extreme nationalist Fascist states around the world.
Putin was a lower rank KGB agent in East Germany and overlooked for promotion so had to stay a few more years. When he returned to Russia he started to plot his revenge for being overlooked for promotion by building up his power. He was devastated and angry when the Soviet Union collapsed and blamed it on the West. Putin hates America and wants to destroy it. Trump is just a little head nodding dog toy in the back window of his expensive foreign car. A hypocrite whose country is failing because it has been plundered by the greedy, including Putin with his palaces like Saddam Hussein, and yachts to entertain his criminal oligarchs on. He’s just another fake living in the past with thoughts of grandeur. The only revolution he will ever see will come from the citizens brave enough to confront him en masse. He looks old and weak with his botox flattened face. Each country has a responsibility to take him on.
Trump used his power for his revenge on his perceived enemies like a 5 year old girl, tantrums included. When he’s no longer useful, Vlad will drop him like a hot potato. Trump looks pretty weak now trying to run from his well deserved label, racist. It was all he had to run on and as always, he misjudged the pulse of the nation.
Again, we see this very much the same. But as you know just what you say makes Putin so dangerous. That is why I hope if we win in 2020 the Dems will find a way to get him out. However, you actually maybe underestimating Trump, as I think Putin is. He better have really really good dirt on Trump or if Trump wins he will do to Putin what I want the Dems to do to him. Trump is an extreme narcissistic sociopath savant. There can be but one ruler of the Universe and that is him. When he feels he has consolidated his power here with a win he will move to make Putin kiss his azz or have him removed. And Trump will have dozens of times the power that Putin has to use against him. Oh, and recall that Trump always turns on those who have helped him and will always try to destroy anyone who he feels has gotten the better of him or is seem as more accomplished than him.
In terms of the US, Trump is no more a national majority leader than Hitler was. It doesn’t matter if two-thirds oppose him. He will concentrate on his one third to take total control. His game at this time is to mobilize his base into a very dangerous, hateful and potentially violent segment of the population that does NOT play by the rules. He is betting he can agitate enough of these folk so much that they will get out to vote even if they have not voted before to win in the Electoral College again. By the numbers he has a potential of some 15 million people to draw from and can take the EC even if we beat him by 5 million in the Popular Vote. Once he has power, there is little or nothing the majority two-thirds who oppose him will be able to do. The shock will be numbing and most will still want to play by the rules that he will not play by. And to save themselves, the power centers that opposed him in the business elite, the Media, the Intel Community, the Tech Sector, the Military, etc. will come to terms with him and it will be the end of our democracy.
If every person who can vote, votes, then unless they want 4 more years of incompetent chaos, fear mongering, overt racism and terror, trump will lose.
There have been signs from last year, and even more red alerts this year, that trump is leading the country into a huge recession. That’s why the big tarrifs planned for China that would impact his voters has been delayed for December and not September as directed. All the more reason, as if there aren’t enough already, to vote him out of office.
When it comes to most dangerous, I pick Putin any day.
Over the weekend, a crowd of over 50,000 protested for political reforms just a mile from the Kremlin.
Putin is high on my list too but so is Xi Jinping who, like Putin, has reworked the rules of the game in his country’s constitution such that he has a virtually unlimited tenure as head of state.
“If every person who can vote, votes, …” that is the great challenge every election….why did so many “Dem voters” stay home when it was Clinton vs. Trump……answer that question and one begins to get at how to be sure it does not happen again.
Yep but they won’t. 2020 will be about turn out. And Pence sure is bad but Trump is in a class off his own. He can become the Mussolini he apes. Pence is a milk toast who can’t.
Pence was unable to muster support from the crazy right for an agenda that they largely approved of because of his personality, or a lack of one. He is not so much milk toast as he is a failed rhetoritician.
Whatever it is, he’s no Trump and thus nowhere near as dangerous.
I’m confused about your reference to pence. He’s not running in 2020.
Anyone who doesn’t vote has lost the right to demand anything or complain about anything because they have let down the nation and crapped on democracy and the freedom to live as they choose. Another 4 years of the devil trying to destroy everything that’s worth fighting for in the world, and I will hang up my blogging hat in utter disgust at the insanity of people not realising or caring about why the next election is the most important one of their lives. There will be nothing left to talk about.
I share a lot of your anger. I consider those who chose not to vote in the three states where a combined 80,000 votes gave that man the election in 2016 and I wonder: Did these peole fail to understand that no matter how much they did not want Clinton, Trump was a far, far worse alternative? Here we find, once more, that ignorance and arrogance are fatal to the body politic.
Yep. My wife and I have half jokingly been comparing alternative countries to move to if Trump is re-elected. Yep, this is the most important election in our history. Oh, some folk a while ago were saying it’s better not to remove Trump before the election because Pence is worse.
If anyone could be worse than trump it would be dead-eyed, pence. He would come down on women’s productive rights, outlaw the LGBTQ rights and same sex marriage. Push his sick religious rights to discriminate against anyone his doctored Bible does not say you should discriminate against, and holler for his wife to come to the Oval Office before any other woman is let inside.
The way he sits behind trump not moving, makes you wonder if he died recently, and someone decided to stuff him with wet newspapers. Awful man.
Besides, he knew what was going on with Russia and lied like a pro to protect the traitor and criminal who should be in jail.
I fully concur…the man is sinister…I know this from friends in Indiana. He did not win a second term because he would have been trounced had he tried for one. Why?
Take a gander at https://www.cnn.com/2016/07/07/politics/mike-pence-donald-trump-vp/index.html which spells out why he was so unpopular as governor AND why he made a strong choice for Trump…..imagine him as President. If Trump were convicted in the Senate it would be Pres. Pence and unless the timing were perfect (i.e. close to the election) he would get a big boost from the “Dems pulled a coup” crowd. Another worry I have.
Yep but he doesn’t have the diabolical charisma that Trump has. His policies and ideology are more diabolical but he would have much less of a chance of getting away with it than Trump does. It’s easy to see Trump heading a Mussolini Blackshirt Movement. Pence…nahhhhhhhh…
And yes:
LOCK THEM UP!!!
I read that only whites can be racist and since those that have moved here, in large numbers, from the continent are, mainly, whites the accusation of the term racist seems ill fitting, inappropriate, intending to corral wide, legitimate concern within a narrow derogatory expression. Xenophobia, on the other hand, I have more sympathy with but still feel it’s inappropriate, deeming to explain all without really explaining anything at all. Rather, many ordinary people were and are uncomfortable with the speed and size of the unsolicited demographic changes foisted upon them and so, along with other concerns, voted to leave the EU.
Yep, with a little help from your friends in the Kremlin.
I think the word you are veering around is “bigotry” which encompasses racism and the hatred of others who may be white but are from Eastern Europe or other countries that are seen as “the other” by white nationalists in the UK, US or other white majority countries.
Antisemitism is often white people being bigoted towards other white people as is prejudice by white Christians against white Muslims.
It is disappointing that so many “regular people” are disturbed by “unsolicited” changing demographics (whatever “unsolicited” means) so please don’t tell them that in the world, white people have been minorities for very long time (there’s this little country called China these “normal people” shouldn’t be told about or they may jump right out of their white skin).
Just a suggestion, white people really shouldn’t suggest that they are the best authorities to determine what racism is.
Hi AdLib,
Thanks for allowing me on board, but with Jake321′ recommendations I don’t think that I’ll remove my ‘coat’ yet, make myself comfortable, as you may decide, or have already decided, that my stay is to be a short one. Oh yes, thought that I had joined, as recommended by Murph-a while ago, but seems that I only enjoy the status of guest?
Anyway, I ‘heard’ disapproval in your tone, a light sarcasm, condescension, flavoured with a sprinkling of self righteousness. If I misjudged, apologies. ‘Unsolicited’, unsought-unasked for. We were originally advised that the common market, now EU, was intended as a is trading block, designed to facilitate and enhance trade between certain industrial European countries, and on that basis the citizens of the UK, via referendum voted to participate. I along with many others, recognising the perfidious nature of our politicians, voted against-declined concerned that at a later date a Political Union, not part of the original deal, would be brought about.
And so it came to pass, the diminution of Parliament, a loss of sovereignty, control of major aspects of legislation, borders open to any citizen of the EU. These we did not vote for and these are what were slyly foisted upon us, and these we did not and do not like-well, those that voted for Brexit. As for the many that came here, often from depressed, less industrialised regions of the EU, who can blame them. Yet, we were not asked, being subjected to changes in spite of our concerns regarding the unplanned pressures being put upon housing, education, health, the general infrastructure, pressures that affect the masses disproportionately more than those, in control, lodged in their ivory towers-unaffected. Nor can I pretend that there have not been social tensions when large numbers of ‘others’ (using your term) have descended upon rustic rural country towns.
Racists and bigots, if you wish, but knowing better we refuse these appellatives which, in this instance, seek only to demonise those that will not bend their knee to interests other than their own.
Niemand, as may be apparent, I don’t mince words when it comes to minimizing or rationalizing away bigotry. I also don’t subscribe to or even understand the victim mentality that so many conservatives seem to rely on.
No one ever expressed in any way that you would be treated any differently than any other member when it comes to participating here.
Everyone is welcome to join and post at The Planet no matter their political perspective as long as they don’t violate our Terms of Use which are intended to prevent conversations from descending into base insults and mudslinging.
That isn’t to say members aren’t allowed to strongly dispute others’ positions or assertions.
My impression of your comment was that you were trying to dispute the label of bigotry for those who act in a bigoted way.
There is a simpler solution. If people don’t want to be described as bigoted, they shouldn’t support bigotry.
I’m not a believer in doublespeak or “alternative facts”. I don’t believe in the practice of insisting that a bigot should be allowed to be bigoted without having to be described as a bigot.
It is a tactic to call the accurate description of something that reflects badly on people one is sympathetic with as demonization. But truth is truth. The term “bigot” is not an arbitrary pejorative but is a description of the character of the views and/or actions of people.
I understand why, for instance, Trump rails so furiously about being assessed as a racist as a result of his racist words and actions but has hurt feelings about being accurately described as such. However, to refer to him in the reverse or to obscure the truth bout his racism would be dishonest.
What about the feelings of those who are assaulted by angry bigotry? Aren’t their feelings more deserving of recognition than those of the people assaulting them? Because they’re upset at being identified accurately for their actions?
What I found objectionable in your comment was that you appeared to be saying that people who express bigotry should have their reasons for being bigoted understood as being reasonable and be absolved of being referred to as bigots.
From my perspective, those who tolerate and rationalize prejudice, support prejudice.
Yes, we can objectively understand the insecurity and fear that drives white people into striking out at or demonizing non-white people who they see as “taking over” the white-dominated society they feel entitled to.
That doesn’t make it okay. It is an emotional flaw in people to think that they are justified in seeing any other person as inferior or deserving of denigration or demonization because they have a different skin color or nationality and are new to their community.
The UK is very provincial as are some Brits. As in the US, there is a long history of provincialism leading to prejudice against new immigrants.
It should never be validated that existing residents of a nation are justified in being hostile and prejudiced towards new residents solely because they have a different skin color or nationality.
Instead of yearning to have their prejudices understood and legitimized, which the majority of moral people will never do, people who have descended into resentment of all people of different races and/or nationalities should work to accept the world they now live in that is growing more multicultural.
They can’t go back in time, they can’t escape into an alternative dimension where all of “the others” have disappeared from their country. They are their fellow citizens and the only constructive path is to accept them as such.
Bravo!
Only members can comment so you must be a member. The only place the word “Guest” appears, would be if you are not logged in and are on our weekly Vox Chat page.
You might need to delete your Cookies in your computer settings.
AdLib said nothing about removing you, he was just pointing out a difference in opinion about what you wrote. We don’t ask people to leave for differing opinions.
Thank you, being a newbie I’m still stumbling around trying to find my metaphorical feet.
So it is all about immigrants and parties who instigated it like Farage’s ukip are not rabid racists? That’s amusing. I might no longer live there, but I’m not blind yet and I know how to read. Xenophobia fits because although white, they are from different countries. That’s what xenophobia means and I experienced its brutality first hand as a 9 year old from Germany.
Austerity and lousy governing damaged the U.K. not immigrants. They are not stealing jobs that the Brits would take. That’s Right wing propaganda.
Yes, I’m aware of the meaning of xenophobia. Don’t know your age but as the blue eyed, blonde haired, German speaking child of a German mother ( born 1948) life was not, initially, always easy for me either.
Blond green eyed, but not a word of English and a Catholic girl in a Protestant school. There were many blonde, blue eyed kids in my school so that wasn’t the problem. The problem was ignorance and hate. Things haven’t changed that much unfortunately.
But everyone consistent with RT and Sputnik as well as Putin’s manifesto over at Russian Insider, rapidly becoming the Russian Daily Stormer. But as I told AdLib, I like having you around. Very educational…
That’s a great rendition of the Kremlin Party Line, Ivan. Part of it seems near verbatim from Putin’s manifesto I found posted at the Russian neo-Nazi site, Russia Insider.
I smell a rat as well….I would probably avoid “Ivan” digs as I think it weakens your own standing.
Not sure about the “I smell a rat” Murph, look at my email address, my name and then peruse Facebook. Forgot to mention our friend Boris Johnson, what to say, the scion of privilege a product of his class and as such no friend of the working man. Some consider him a buffoon, but he just missed out on a first at Oxford and so should not be underestimated. However, he seems intent upon carrying out the popular will, perhaps also to escape the EU closing of tax loopholes, but time will tell. Ideally we leave and continue trading as is, but the EU jealous of the revenues from us are intent upon making our leaving very difficult. As for a trade deal with the US, that may be problematic, a cause of concern, especially if your Health Insurance companies are to be given free reign.
Perhaps I am too suspicious…so let’s assume we are both a bit idiosyncratic. Your concerns are generally mine as well. A point re. Johnson and the “popular will”…..I beieve that the public was duped from both sides in the referendum. One side hoped to use it to build a weakening coaltion. The hoped hoped to bring down that coalition, and if they were more successful than many thought they would be, bring down the EU. The history of the shadow party UKIP is a fine example of the use of temporary mechanisms to bring about such goals.
Point taken. Thanks…
Are you saying that I’m being plagiarised Jake, shocking! First it’s the Chinese stealing, appropriating Western technology and now those dastardly Ivan’s, without turning over a rouble, using other’s thoughts, opinions in their magazines.
LOL…same old Bill…sounds like that very generous English pension is still doing well by you. Damn, I’m quite well off but often have to get my clients to foot the bill for my world travels. Will be off to parts North of you or West of you as the case may be in a couple of months.
‘West of you’, wicked Jake, you are a one. North would be Scotland, but North East would encompass Scandinavia, Finland. As you know Jeanie is very good with the housekeeping and I’m trying to persuade her, February time, to return to Singapore ( Raffles is yet to be finished) and after a few days onward to Hong Kong, where, following a walkabout, we could catch one of their shiny, new bullet trains-YouTube- to Shanghai and later Beijing. Time’s passing Jake and so one should seize the day whilst one still has the strength to do so.
Beto, Warren and Cory Booker also took on trump. In fact, although not a front runner, Beto’s numbers went up to 6 points over trump while Biden and Sanders stood at 4. I agree, Beto’s was raw and from the heart.
That speech echoed this article in The Atlantic. President Obama wrote his own speeches.
—
He’s Getting Worse
Trump is turning the American presidency into a platform for the wholesale demonization of minorities.
JEFFREY GOLDBERG
AUG 5, 2019
https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2019/08/trump-getting-worse/595453/
I agree with most of your sentiment. But should note what today’s RCP average of the polls indicate. Warren ahead of Trump by 2.4, but this is meaningless since it is so close and likely within the margin of error. Sanders ahead of Trump by 5.3. O’Rourke ahead by 6.6 but just from a few very old polls and thus of little value. RCP had no current polls of Beto vs. Trump. If you have one, please let me know which it is. Biden ahead by 8.5 which is the only margin against Trump greater than our margin in the House races of 2018. Lots of time still to go. But as of now, Biden is our only candidate who beats Trump decisively.
Today’s polls. Tomorrow’s polls. So what. We can’t quite put our finger on what it is about Biden. It isn’t that he’s a leader. He’s being pushed on us – no one is seeking him out. He all but disappeared from sight post Obama – and when Obama was in office – was Biden really “necessary” as a Democratic party voice? No – he was not. It was ALL Obama to me. And everyone else knows that to be true, too. It was ALL Obama and his liberal values – to all of us. Its not going to be a 2020 election based on anything but the long list of critical issues – health care, immigration, gun reform, the war, etc – the people have waited far to long to see realized and know we never will – if Trump is re-elected. Warren, Sanders, Buttigieg, Gabbard – let’s talk – if we are to be the party of change that actually DELIVERS. Isn’t that how we play this election cycle – instead of relying on polls and trying to elevate hobbled status quo Biden – over Trump?
Biden had a very significant portfolio as VP.
Maybe thinking like this would assist you in getting to know him.
https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2012/12/joe-biden-the-most-influential-vice-president-in-history/266729/
Joe Biden: The Most Influential Vice President in History?
From the fiscal cliff to gun control to Afghanistan, Scranton’s favorite son has transformed himself from affable gaffer to West Wing powerhouse.
Barack Obama just can’t get enough out of Joe Biden these days. And anybody who’s been following Biden’s steady ascent in stature over the last several years — from gaffe-happy presidential contender to one of the most powerful vice presidents in U.S. history — couldn’t be less surprised.
Yep, Biden’s being pushed on us by the Dem voters, especially the non-White ones. Damn, CNN,MSNBC and the other kind of Left media sure are pushing anyone but Biden. But the folk like him, at least for now. And the Trumpites along with their Russian friends can’t figure it out. Nor can the Vanguard of the Revolution type Dems and Media. Left me help you out whichever of these befuddled type you are. The bulk of the voters, ours and in general, are sick and tired of all the excitement from the Drama Queen, Infant Terrible, in the White House. They want to take a break. They just want a calm, comfy, cuddly Unky for a while. Kind of like Ford after Nixon. And there is our very own Unky Joe to fill the bill. We just need to get Trump out so we can survive to go after all those wonderful things after.
Again, I’m not elevating Unky Joe. The voters are. But it is early and the Dems can be very creative in finding ways to screw it.
I don’t disagree with your perspective…..I am actively supporting Warren…..my post was about someone very clearly naming the reality in clear and cogent terms.
I think Biden is too old. I think his ideas are not as current as they need to be. And I think he has a lot of appeal to a lot of groups as his polling demonstrates.
All I have to say is that those who want someone else, and those someone else’s are going to have to make their case to the American voter in the key primary and caucus states. Nothing else matters.
Warren/Sanders. Warren/Gabbard – or Buttigieg. That’s where our party strength is. Why should the people dump Trump and then realize being dumbed down by a status quo corporatist occupying our White House next? What’s the point of that? I want single payer universal – or something as close to that as the people can secure. I want immigration reform that is common sense ethical and enforceable – that the world can appreciate is fair. I want war to end and only by seating a foreign policy credible president will we secure that. Biden is too military industrial complex comfortable – he can’t be trusted. Warren and Sanders resonateas champions for ending war. So does Gabbard and Buttigieg. It is what it is – and at the first caucus I attend – I don’t want anyone talking to me about polls. I know that much – for certain.
Your post just does not wring true to me. It seems to, at its heart say, if the Dems have Biden for their candidate, they are better off with Trump, or certainly no worse off. It strikes me that your purpose is to knock back the front runner and to push those whose support is weak currently or whose attraction is likely to make them less attractive in the long run. Just wondering.
Yep, you nailed him, Murph.
LOL…I wouldn’t expect you to like polls since most all show that the bulk of the voters disagree with you. And you know better than they what they need and should. And that is the nice interpretation. More likely is you are pushing a line that is intentionally counter to the bulk of the voters and would thus fail…
And in TX, Beto is beating Trump in the polls. Can you imagine if a Dem won TX? Game over!
And BTW, the latest gaffe from Biden today in IA:
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-08-09/biden-says-poor-kids-are-just-as-smart-as-white-kids-in-iowa
And this is the basket we want to put all of our eggs in to beat Trump? Biden is a self-sabotaging machine…like a 1979 Cadillac. He needs to be traded in for a newer model.
I agree Biden is coma inducing. I don’t know about O’Rourke. I want a single payer universal nominee and I am not shy about that fact. Bring up private insurance and I see and hear a candidate dog whistling his support of private insurance and big pharma that have had nothing but ill intent for the past intent – raping and pillaging Americans in regard to premiums and prescriptions costs. Americans committing suicide now – and losing all hope for the change we all need – we can’t stand before Americans, IMO, with noting but full on single payer universal – because it past time Americans were ALl treated the same. No more class system healthcare and bankrupting of Americans too. Is O’Rourke strong on an immigration plan Rust belt states can appreciate? I hope so. We won’t topple Trump in all 50 states if we fail to offer up every American the best CHANGE REALIZING PLATFORM WE CAN.
Single Payer……we have yet to see a plan that can be costed out such that it would work given all of the priorities. The ACA was working and rather well. With a few fixes (purposely unsupported by the GOP whose veto stopped them cold) the system would have continued to improve. Biden’s role in that was extensive both in design but in passage and implementation. I wonder who your “We” is…..when you speak of toppling Trump in 50 states you are either lacking in knowledge, are hopelessly optimistic, or are laying out a false trail.
This sounds like Russian trolling to me. Most all voters do NOT want a Single Payer system that eliminates their private health insurance. They want an improved ObamaCare system that covers everyone and lets them keep their private insurance with improvements. They like Unky Joe’s plan and kind of hate Spitt’n Bernie’s Revolutionary plan that Warren tags along on. And are you really for an immigration plan that shoots illegals at the border? Since that is what most folk in the Rust Belt States seem to want. Only a foreigner who knows nothing of the US today would ever even imply there was anyway we could topple Trump in all 50 states. That silly statement is a giveaway.
Both Biden and Beto are beating Trump in Texas by about the same small amount according to the RCP average of just a couple of polls. But the margin is not far enough beyond the error factors to have any meaning. Unfortunately, what I’m starting to smell is the same kind of crap that was thrown at Hillary by the Bernie supporters, often echoing Russian crap, that was important in giving us Trump as Prez. I hope folk who as of now represent the largest part of our voters can keep their cool and not counter attack in like manor. But it will be hard and Trump and Putin will smell victory instead of crap…
We need to be strategic in this…..and the kind of observations you are making need to be given their due while at the same time looking for the candidate with highest aspirational draw. Not easy to do. Especially given the nature of the electorate….where fact based discernment is in scarce supply.
Depends what the aspirations are. If it is some peace and quite for a while, Unky Joe is just the guy…
There are demands from many quarters for significant reform….the challenges are that their are differing agendas particular to unique groups…how does one bring a Tump opposition together.
Have the Young Turks and their friends stop thinking they are the Vanguard of the Revolution and accept getting Trump out as the overwhelming goal. Or the economy could go to hell then most any of our top people might be able to beat Trump.
To me the essential question….how to get everyone who has every reason not to want a second Trump term out to vote…..
Don’t know. But speaking of the Young Turks, Trump sure knows how to play the Dems like a fiddle. Getting Bibi to deny entry for the two Muslim Congresswomen is brilliant, regardless of the damage it is causing Israel.
Bibi knows how valuable his alliance is with Trump and the U.S.
Yep. But it will hurt Israel and that is why virtually all Jewish groups oppose this.
Any argument for trying to promote Biden is a dead in the water salvo if ever there was one. We don’t headline with Biden. We sink doing that – Bernie didn’t create the crises of no confidence – Biden did. WE HEADLINE WITH SOMEONE WHO GUARANTEES CHANGE. And can earn GOP votes as well as the growing numbers of liberal Dems – because the headline this week of Americans committing suicide in blue states due to being bankrupted and stripped bare by our corrupt healthcare system -isn’t something Biden can be trusted to fix. He has NEVER lead on a fix. He has never been the go to person on healthcare or immigration or war or education or…. so let’s get real. AND finally realize change. Our party’s liberal leaders have been talking about solutions for years now. Let’s make it happen.
Boy, this sure reads like false flag propaganda….there is just too much here that is unsupportable and it certainly looks like your aim is to spread out support away from front runners…leading, it seems, to a candidate lacking widespread support across the party’s ideological front (from left of center, to center, to right of center). BUT, the focus above all that must be clear is ANYONE but Trump. I mean that. And so should you if you are as you say you are.
The only change at this point the bulk of the voters want is Drama Queen Trump out and a vacation from all the excitement. And they love that Biden never met a Republican or anyone else he didn’t like and could work with to pass legislation. If you missed it, this is about most of the voters wanting to take a rest for a while before charging on into the unknown for the excitement of the Revolution…WEEEEEEEEEE…
The Fave just turned 18. (Yay! She can vote.) She quoted this Biden gaffe while we were at dinner tonight. She and her age cohort wouldn’t even consider voting for Biden. As she said: “He may be ‘well-intentioned’ (she was using her air quotes), but who would say something like that? He’s not the man for the job.” Her current favorites: Sanders, Warren and Buttigieg.
Both of my millenial college educated kids too – are tired of imagining another four years without CHANGE. Sanders. Warren. Buttigieg. And Gabbard – all make the cut with them – and surprisingly with my 85 year old liberal valued mother.
Exactly, nehalem. And they are in the ascendant now. Their lives have been severely damaged by politicians who have managed to tank the economy in 2008, make college unaffordable for them, send them off to stupid wars, deny them health care, keep their wages low and utterly fail them on gun control. They do NOT want somnolent old “Unkie Joe.” They view him as one of the sleepwalkers who allowed things to get to the state in which they are now. They are not going to vote for him.
Guess those millennials have been to busy taking selfies to notice we’ve been having a wee bit of change over the past few years. And guess your relatives both young and old are not typical Dems who like the calm, comgfy, cuddly Unky Joe, at least for now.
And overwhelmingly the non-White Dem voters support Biden and don’t seem to give a damn about what mostly White Progressives think is just so terrible they can’t wait to join the Lily White Trumpites and Russians in dumping on Biden. Hey, why not? It worked so well last time when similar was done to Clinton. And look we got a White Supremacist in the White House. They should be sooooooooo proud!
Congrats……question is her high opinion of the three you list based on anything but their public personas and oratory….what I am asking is has she looked at what they have done, what notches are in their belts, what trophies are on their mantles…..I have a sense of this with all three….Sanders is the least accomplished for all his years in Congress he really has done very little..he is a gadfly but does not seem able to put together alliances to get things done….Buttigieg is very promising as a person of real wit and wisdom with a record as mayor that certainly indicates that he has a bright future still not enough to go on for me….Warren is my current favorite: smart, hard working, running a good campaign, knows how to take policy from principle to operation….
Murph, I would say that they’re drawn to Sanders partly because his agenda was often so far ahead of his colleagues (anti-Iraq War, $15 minimum wage, Medicare for all) that he had little support from old school Dems. Young people had a different take on those issues, though, and — lo and behold — after the DNC establishment had its pants scared off in 2016 by the level of grass-roots support for Sanders, a lot of formerly timid souls suddenly found his earlier (socialist) positions quite palatable after all. Warren they support for many of the same reasons you do. And Buttigieg they see as a very acceptable presidential candidate, but more likely as a capable veep at this point in time.
But her home State Dem voters don’t see that quite as you do…
And the chance of a dem winning tx is still very, small. Beto lost his Senate race. Dems in Tx ….. about 30 percent…on average. O’Rourke against Cruz, who is a nasty piece of work, came as close as anyone can recall….I only hope for your sake that Bideni is not the nominee as that will leave you with an awful alternative will it not? I am banking on Warren right now….
Oh good Lord! Wtf?
Maybe a Dem winning Texas is not that far off and at least 5 repubs are resigning and won’t be running for re-election. Somehow after trump’s win, or rather stolen election, I believe that nothing is impossible except for trump becoming human that is.
I would take ANY of our candidates over Trump. I would take any option that even had Pence as Prez for a while. We need to survive to fight another day on other issues. At this point, the Dem voters support Biden by a wide margin. Our core non-White voters support him by even more. Against Trump, Biden has about a 9 point lead among all the voters (RCP Ave). This is almost twice what Bernie has. All the rest are beaten by Trump or beat him by what is likely within the margin of error. Most important, Biden is our only candidate at this time to beat Trump by more than we beat the Republicans in the House races in 2018. All the rest are NOT doing near as well as we did in 2018. And yes, it would be good if he was 20 years younger. He isn’t but if he still can keep the commanding lead over Trump, so what? (Oh, RCP shows Biden leading in all the primary states they cover. And most important, strongly in the swing Rust Belt States against Trump.) But as always…it is still early.
Remarkably succinct and cogent. Keep Our Eyes on the Prize. A Trump Free WH.
This little tidbit is one I particularly find useful: “Most important, Biden is our only candidate at this time to beat Trump by more than we beat the Republicans in the House races in 2018.” Puts the whole thing into a different framework.
Yep. Thanks.
By the way, AdLib and friends here have been having a bit of a problem with Bah Humbug Jake rocking their little comfy echo chamber. Oh, well. I might have to spend a bit for Medium. Don’t much like the attempts to whip me into line here…
For me, Medium is a ghost town. It is too insular and I have found it hard to connect with other islands and their conversations. So, I am cross posting with a long form with all of the images I want to use and textual design that I want to offer at The Planet and a simpler, stripped down version with a link back here at the Facebook forum NewYabz. That is promising. As to Ad and the old hands here…very progressive and strong thinkers and writers…but they play by the rules and engage directly but honestly and fairly. I tend to think more like you in many areas so I have direct experience to draw on.
I miss Yabberz…