FWIS3

Incontheivable!

You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.

As you wish.

No matter who the DNC throw forward, Trump is gonna win again, right?

Yeah, that's what I'm thinking.

squ1d wrote:No matter who the DNC throw forward, Trump is gonna win again, right?

He might.

Yes, quite possibly. The mass purges of voter info have already begun...

He may well win again, but no way to guarantee he will win like not trying to get the best candidate to do so.

The field is thinning out. It looks like they are down to 10 serious candidates with 4-5 serious contenders based on the poles. The four in the lead are Biden, Sanders, Warren, and Harris with Buttigieg in 5th. Gilibrand dropped out this week. I can't say I am sorry to see her go.

I am wondering if Biden and Warren will team up to with Biden as the Presidential nominee and Warren as the VP?

Sadly, the Republicans have yet to produce a serious contender for the primaries other than Trump. Yes, I know that Joe Walsh has announced his intentions. Sadly, he is just a sanitized version of Trump.

Joe Walsh?
He's been running for president for 35 years.
How Ya Doin'?
https://www.rageon.com/products/joe-wal ... yUQAvD_BwE
https://www.worthpoint.com/worthopedia/ ... -461655253

I think there is 0% chance of Walsh not getting the nomination (apparently they're not even doing a Republican South Carolina primary this year to make sure of it), and he's just doing it to get some air time or similar.

Gillibrand was weird because she was in NH like every day, often getting close enough to here that it would have been pretty easy to go see her, but she really never caught on. I was joking that her dropping out is mainly notable because she's the first person who dropped out where my reaction wasn't "who?"

I do look forward to all the top people being on the stage at once. But because it's the evening of my courthouse wedding, I'm betting I'm not gonna watch this one either.

Rommie wrote:I think there is 0% chance of Walsh not getting the nomination (apparently they're not even doing a Republican South Carolina primary this year to make sure of it), and he's just doing it to get some air time or similar.

Gillibrand was weird because she was in NH like every day, often getting close enough to here that it would have been pretty easy to go see her, but she really never caught on. I was joking that her dropping out is mainly notable because she's the first person who dropped out where my reaction wasn't "who?"

I do look forward to all the top people being on the stage at once. But because it's the evening of my courthouse wedding, I'm betting I'm not gonna watch this one either.

I am sure you can find a recording of it somewhere.

Both the Washington Post and New York Times recently published articles about Joe Biden's inability to get facts straight. The Post's article is about his telling and retelling an incident whereby a soldier got a medal for heroism. Biden apparently has three versions of the story, none completely accurate and a couple wildly inaccurate. The Times refers to the Post article and Biden's response, plus some other stuff that really calls into question his mental acuity.

I like Joe Biden. I've said that before. He's a good man who has served this country well. But he needs to retire from public life.

Right now, I'm thinking Kamala Harris has the best chance to beat Trump, even though she's polling behind Biden, Warren and Sanders. If I had my choice, I'd like to see Elizabeth Warren in the White House.

I agree re: Biden. Last week-ish he was campaigning in New Hampshire, and he was talking about how happy he was to be in Vermont. Like, ok, it might be easy to forget where you are on a frantic schedule, but let's be honest, one of those states is slightly more important on the primary schedule.

I'm happy they whittled the pack down to 10 and think the trend we've seen from Biden in the previous debates will likely continue now that he'll be facing off against people like Warren on the same stage.

The Biden gaffes do make you wonder. It makes me wonder if we should have some sort of mental acuity test before allowing people to run for president. Unfortunately, or fortunately depending on how you look at it I strongly believe "Uncle Joe" is going to win the Democratic nomination. Who will be the VP nominee is still open IMO. Biden's campaign has already suggested that they will be choosing a VP running mate who is female and/or a minority but not necessarily both. Leaving it open for a Cory Booker VP or a Stacy Abrams VP option.

The primary (yes, I use that word on purpose) reason I think Biden is going to get the nomination is based on human nature. People were tired of the status quo and the "do nothing" government. So, they decided it would be fun and worthwhile to burn the house down. Now they are watching the house burning down in horror. Biden is offering them a "return to normalcy". He is promising them that things will go back to being the nice safe way of doing business in Washington DC and around the country. I think a lot of people are going to believe that and vote for a safe predictable candidate. And I think the DNC is going to believe that Biden can appeal to a lot of those moderate conservatives who no longer feel like they are a part of the Republican party. The so-called undecided, independent, moderate, and swing voters are all looking for someone they can get behind who is not going to keep throwing gas on the fire. A large number of people in this country want the system to change but they want it slowly and on their own terms.

after what we have been thru with Heir Trump I could use a little calm. We need changes, but first we need to heal and really THINK about the best paths forward.

Calm. Yeah. I vaguely remember what that was like.

I have a friend who says he wants Warren for the reason of "I want to stop paying attention to politics every second, and even if I don't agree with every plan she does have a plan for everything." Which is I guess what's she's going for in fewer words.

and then there's Sanford. hiking the Appalachian trail.

code monkey wrote:and then there's Sanford. hiking the Appalachian trail.

LOL

Debates 9/12/19. Last 10 Democratic candidates standing so far. Warren has made some serious strides since declaring her candidacy. Biden is still the front runner. Bernie is trailing and slowly going down. Will he be a spoiler again in 2020? Will Mayor Pete (they call him that because no one can pronounce his last name) wind up being a VP nominee? Tune in over the next 14 months to find out.

Finally caught one of the debates live! (Well, almost an hour of it, then we watched El Camino.) First, I thought it was pretty clear that the theme of the evening was attacking Elizabeth Warren. Seeing as the polls show she's sweeping up approval, and that's being siphoned off the ten other people on the stage who aren't front runners, I didn't think that was all that surprising. But damn, ultimately so many of the attacks are stupid given how indistinguishable many policies ultimately are from one another.

Sanders didn't really look like a guy who just had a heart attack, so props to him (but I'm not sure long term people will be excited to remember those health problems). If you'd told me one of the candidates had had one though, I would have chosen Biden- seemed confused more than once, like when he said he would eliminate and heavily increase the capital gains tax. I mean, I think Trump is showing his age too, but it sure as hell is not the "dazed look" kind that will not play well in a general election where people aren't going to be cordial.

As for the rest, man, I know why they're doing it but I hope they'll start winnowing out the field already. Or at least keep Marrianne Williamson in if you insist on everyone else for entertainment value.

The only reason I can think of for at least 7 of these candidates to keep pretending they have a chance at the nomination is so they can help shape the DNC platform and help shape policy. Brite keeps saying they would do more good if they ran for the Senate. I tend to agree. In some ways I do wonder if focusing on winning the Senate would be a better use of resources. But, I really want to see Trump gone. I think we would do better if he were replaced by a Turnip.

Didn't want to start a new thread so slight derail. We got our absentee ballots this week as we will be out of town on election day. I know it's an off year so not many contests, but our township is ridiculous. There are 4 contests total: Township trustee, fiscal officer, state board of ed rep and local board of ed officers. Each contest says: do not vote for more than 1. In each contest there is a total of 1 person to choose from. I've voted in every single election since I turned 18. My vote yesterday means absolutely, totally nothing.

Thumper wrote:Didn't want to start a new thread so slight derail. We got our absentee ballots this week as we will be out of town on election day. I know it's an off year so not many contests, but our township is ridiculous. There are 4 contests total: Township trustee, fiscal officer, state board of ed rep and local board of ed officers. Each contest says: do not vote for more than 1. In each contest there is a total of 1 person to choose from. I've voted in every single election since I turned 18. My vote yesterday means absolutely, totally nothing.

I beg to differ. I'm sure the number of people who voted is an important statistic, even if it doesn't impact the outcome.