1. #7001
    The Undying Cthulhu 2020's Avatar
    15+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Rigging your election
    Posts
    36,799
    I just can't wait for this whole primary process to be over and done with. The Trump camp is holding their cards close to their chest - mostly because their news outlets of choice have not issued commands for what kind of one liners and propaganda they want Trumpers to spread yet. You know they're lining up big attacks for whoever wins the primary. I also guarantee you, if Biden or Bloomberg win the primary, they've got some random BS lined up to feed the Whackobins, something where they claim Bernie got cheated out of the nomination by the DNC because cheating or something.

    You know, exaclty what happened in 2016. The worst part was, most of those people bought that shit. They ate right out of the palms of the Trump crowd because they simply wanted to hate on Hillary some more. People seem to forget, but the right was railing on Bernie, calling him a communist and raking him over the coals early in the primary. But the moment they saw an opportunity to leverage the fanatical Bernie Cult against the moderates, the moderates took their pity, they took the propaganda, and swallowed it without chewing it a bit to think on where it was coming from.
    2014 Gamergate: "If you want games without hyper sexualized female characters and representation, then learn to code!"
    2023: "What's with all these massively successful games with ugly (realistic) women? How could this have happened?!"

  2. #7002
    Quote Originally Posted by Slacker76 View Post
    Is Bloomberg really a republican? I mean being against the NRA, supporting climate change policy. Taking on Big Sugar one gulp at a time. These are peculiar positions for a republican to hold.
    Just asking rhetorically.
    Yes. But I'm not surprised you took to defending him. I don't know if you have vested personal interests in this race, but the shilling on your part is just too hard.

  3. #7003
    Quote Originally Posted by NineSpine View Post
    Right, if democrats would pick a clinton they could definitely beat Trump... no holes in that argument at all..
    I feel its sad I have to tell you about picking someone based off their ideology, you deny that before all his scandals Clinton wasn't a popular President?

  4. #7004
    The Unstoppable Force Ghostpanther's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    USA, Ohio
    Posts
    24,112
    Quote Originally Posted by zenkai View Post
    I feel its sad I have to tell you about picking someone based off their ideology, you deny that before all his scandals Clinton wasn't a popular President?
    Bill was smart enough not to make stupid comments about his opponent's voters also.
    " If destruction be our lot, we must ourselves be its author and finisher.." - Abraham Lincoln
    The Constitution be never construed to authorize Congress to - prevent the people of the United States, who are peaceable citizens, from keeping their own arms..” - Samuel Adams

  5. #7005
    Quote Originally Posted by zenkai View Post
    I feel its sad I have to tell you about picking someone based off their ideology, you deny that before all his scandals Clinton wasn't a popular President?
    There is a rather long record of moderates being defeated the only way they win is to do it like Obama campaign as a progressive then pull a switcheroo. The American people seem to only give lip service to moderates when push comes to shove they want change candidates whether left or right.

  6. #7006
    The Undying Cthulhu 2020's Avatar
    15+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Rigging your election
    Posts
    36,799
    Quote Originally Posted by zenkai View Post
    I feel its sad I have to tell you about picking someone based off their ideology, you deny that before all his scandals Clinton wasn't a popular President?
    Yes, politicians are popular until they are under a lot of investigation, it's almost as if being constantly under investigation creates this veil of suspicion within the public, you know, like... oh...

    Hillary was extremely popular during the Bush years. She started off popular during the Obama years. And the Republican party knew that she was popular AND that she would be running. Why do you think they set her up for the Benghazi scandal where literally no wrongdoing happened? And Republicans OPENLY ADMITTED they were milking it to make her look bad. Why do you think they launched a huge investigation over her emails, when there was nothing unlawful, wrong, or corrupt about that incident?

    They know that someone simply being under the veil of investigation will create a public perception that they're a bad person. It was an almost decade long smear campaign so they could destroy Hillary in 2020. And now we have an actual corrupt president in the white house as a result. It's quite funny that people are freaking out over Biden making some public gaffes, when Trump just openly talks about sexually harassing women. But hey, this is a timeline where Republicans care more about smearing opponents to gain power rather than trying to govern well. You know, their jobs.
    2014 Gamergate: "If you want games without hyper sexualized female characters and representation, then learn to code!"
    2023: "What's with all these massively successful games with ugly (realistic) women? How could this have happened?!"

  7. #7007
    Quote Originally Posted by Slacker76 View Post
    Mind as well have fun now. The acrimony and gaslighting is only going to get worse.

    I mean it's like the little boys that cried wolf.
    The insisted that:
    Hillary is a republican.
    Harris is a republican and a cop.
    Warren is a republican.
    Even Joe Biden is a republican.

    Is Bloomberg really a republican? I mean being against the NRA, supporting climate change policy. Taking on Big Sugar one gulp at a time. These are peculiar positions for a republican to hold.
    Just asking rhetorically.

    Speaking of being a paid shill for the Sugar Lobby...
    Big Sugar: Sanders And Rubio Share A Sweet Tooth


    But on one issue, Sanders walks in lockstep with the political establishment on Capitol Hill—Uncle Sam’s sugar-buying scheme.

    The federal program that resembles a Soviet Union relic works as follows: the U.S. Department of Agriculture guarantees a price floor for American sugar, below which it spends hundreds of millions of dollars to buy up excess sugar and bump the price back up to the minimum. Uncle Sam then sells the sugar at a steep discount to ethanol producers. Limits on imports also artificially prop up the prices that domestic sugar producers can charge.

    American consumers get fleeced on two fronts. Not only must they foot the bill for the subsidy scheme, they also have to pay higher prices at the grocery store for sugar, cakes, and confections. The U.S. sugar regime is cronyism at its finest.

    Yes Bloomberg was at some point registered republican and democrat.
    Second, the likes of Clinton and Biden are put in Republican ''light'' camp because that is who they. Biden sells himself as a centrist and moderate but honestly from my pov being a centrist kind of lost it's meaning because the current batch of centrist consider it working towards the opposition (right-wing).

  8. #7008
    So, Bloomberg's name and personal numbers repeatedly in Epstein's black book. Probably just there because of business connections. Not because Bloomberg, who has had many sexual harassment cases against him, spends his free time bangin' kids right?
    Last edited by Martymark; 2020-02-18 at 12:47 AM.

  9. #7009
    Void Lord Elegiac's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Aelia Capitolina
    Posts
    59,338
    Quote Originally Posted by Martymark View Post
    So, Bloomberg's name and personal numbers repeatedly in Epstein's black book. Probably just there because of business connections. Not because Bloomberg, who has had many rape and sexual assault cases against him, spends his free time bangin' kids right?
    Might just be easier to compile a list of who isn't apparently in the guestbook on Rape Island. Christ.

    Between this and being unable to find a single Virginian Democratic Party member who hasn't done blackface, we have our unicorn.
    Quote Originally Posted by Marjane Satrapi
    The world is not divided between East and West. You are American, I am Iranian, we don't know each other, but we talk and understand each other perfectly. The difference between you and your government is much bigger than the difference between you and me. And the difference between me and my government is much bigger than the difference between me and you. And our governments are very much the same.

  10. #7010
    Quote Originally Posted by Martymark View Post
    So, Bloomberg's name and personal numbers repeatedly in Epstein's black book. Probably just there because of business connections. Not because Bloomberg, who has had many rape and sexual assault cases against him, spends his free time bangin' kids right?
    So, he is just like Trump? Except richer?

  11. #7011
    I Don't Work Here Endus's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Ottawa, ON
    Posts
    78,895
    Quote Originally Posted by Slacker76 View Post
    Mind as well have fun now. The acrimony and gaslighting is only going to get worse.

    I mean it's like the little boys that cried wolf.
    The insisted that:
    Hillary is a republican.
    Harris is a republican and a cop.
    Warren is a republican.
    Even Joe Biden is a republican.

    Is Bloomberg really a republican? I mean being against the NRA, supporting climate change policy. Taking on Big Sugar one gulp at a time. These are peculiar positions for a republican to hold.
    Just asking rhetorically.
    He was a Democrat.

    And then objectively, overtly switched his party allegiance to run for NYC Mayor as a Republican. And won, as a Republican.

    And now he claims to be a Democrat again.

    So there's a question that needs to be answered, in there; why did he switch, to run as Mayor? And why did he switch back, to run for President?
    Is it because he's picking the Party with the best opportunity for him to win? This makes him an exploitative manipulator without an ideological grounding for his candidacy.
    Is it because his views legitimately swung that significantly? Then A> I expect him to admit his mistakes in holding his prior views, dismiss those views as "bad", and B> I question whether his views might swing again, since he doesn't seem to have a firm ideological grounding.

    The first is reason to not support him, all by itself. The second requires explanation and a disavowal of his own Mayoral legacy, which he has not really done.

    This isn't like the bullshit "Warren used to be Republican" nonsense. Yeah, she used to. And then she changed. And she has admitted that her older views weren't great and that she's got a firm belief in the ideological underpinnings of what she supports now. She meets that second option's expectations, where Bloomberg does not.

    Biden, Hillary, and Harris aren't "republican", but they are center/center-right leaning, on the right-leaning edge of the Democratic Party. They would've been among the group with which there was ideological overlap with Republicans, if we went back to the '90s with them. This is valid reason to not support them for the primary.


  12. #7012
    Quote Originally Posted by Orbitus View Post
    So, he is just like Trump? Except richer?
    He has more money than Trump.
    He's won more elections as a Republican than Trump.
    He has more sexual harassment cases against him than Trump.

    So he's like Trump+++
    Last edited by Martymark; 2020-02-18 at 12:47 AM.

  13. #7013
    Scarab Lord downnola's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Made in Philly, living in Akron.
    Posts
    4,572
    Bloomberg doesn't have any delegates yet and doesn't seem very popular in polls (Even NY hates the guy). Why is everyone talking about him all of a sudden? Is the media pushing him as a realistic candidate or something?
    Populists (and "national socialists") look at the supposedly secret deals that run the world "behind the scenes". Child's play. Except that childishness is sinister in adults.
    - Christopher Hitchens

  14. #7014
    Quote Originally Posted by Martymark View Post
    So, Bloomberg's name and personal numbers repeatedly in Epstein's black book. Probably just there because of business connections. Not because Bloomberg, who has had many rape and sexual assault cases against him, spends his free time bangin' kids right?
    I don't doubt that his name is in there really, but could you link a source for it?

  15. #7015
    Quote Originally Posted by bmjclark View Post
    I don't doubt that his name is in there really, but could you link a source for it?
    Here you go buddy, because you haven't heard of a small website called google:

    https://www.truthorfiction.com/mods-...ns-black-book/
    https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2019...ial-black-book
    https://nymag.com/intelligencer/2019...-contacts.html

  16. #7016
    Quote Originally Posted by downnola View Post
    Bloomberg doesn't have any delegates yet and doesn't seem very popular in polls (Even NY hates the guy). Why is everyone talking about him all of a sudden? Is the media pushing him as a realistic candidate or something?
    Basically because for low info voters bloomberg is carpet bombing tv ads in states that are not even going to have their primary for a couple more months. His stuff is on all the time in wisconsin and our primary is not till april. He is spending enough in states to really hurt other candidates ability to put their own ads out because he is jacking the prices up because he has infinity bucks. People are taking him seriously because a lot of people recognize that the US is really close to an oligarchy if it is not already there so just are throwing up their hands and figure may as well have the richest oligarch theoretically on our side.

  17. #7017
    Quote Originally Posted by Martymark View Post
    So, Bloomberg's name and personal numbers repeatedly in Epstein's black book. Probably just there because of business connections. Not because Bloomberg, who has had many rape and sexual assault cases against him, spends his free time bangin' kids right?
    Not to be THAT guy but there are literally zero rape and sexual assault cases against him. The company has some which is a different topic.

    The dude is deffo guilty of fostering an environment tho

  18. #7018
    Quote Originally Posted by Martymark View Post
    So, Bloomberg's name and personal numbers repeatedly in Epstein's black book. Probably just there because of business connections. Not because Bloomberg, who has had many rape and sexual assault cases against him, spends his free time bangin' kids right?
    I understand that people do not like Bloomberg. However, lets keep the facts straight. There are cases of sexual harassment against him because of sexist remarks against his female employees. There are cases of gender discrimination against Bloomberg LP and even rape against one of Bloomberg’s executive.

    However, there are no sexual assault or rape charges against him personally. At least not yet. Also, although he did have a lot of girlfriends when he was single, there is not a hint of infidelity while he was married to his first wife and with his current live-in partner.

  19. #7019
    Quote Originally Posted by downnola View Post
    Bloomberg doesn't have any delegates yet and doesn't seem very popular in polls (Even NY hates the guy). Why is everyone talking about him all of a sudden? Is the media pushing him as a realistic candidate or something?
    AFAIK he was third in national polls last week or so. Dunno much about current polls tho so it might have changed

  20. #7020
    Quote Originally Posted by Endus View Post
    He was a Democrat.

    And then objectively, overtly switched his party allegiance to run for NYC Mayor as a Republican. And won, as a Republican.

    And now he claims to be a Democrat again.

    So there's a question that needs to be answered, in there; why did he switch, to run as Mayor? And why did he switch back, to run for President?
    Is it because he's picking the Party with the best opportunity for him to win? This makes him an exploitative manipulator without an ideological grounding for his candidacy.
    Is it because his views legitimately swung that significantly? Then A> I expect him to admit his mistakes in holding his prior views, dismiss those views as "bad", and B> I question whether his views might swing again, since he doesn't seem to have a firm ideological grounding.

    The first is reason to not support him, all by itself. The second requires explanation and a disavowal of his own Mayoral legacy, which he has not really done.

    This isn't like the bullshit "Warren used to be Republican" nonsense. Yeah, she used to. And then she changed. And she has admitted that her older views weren't great and that she's got a firm belief in the ideological underpinnings of what she supports now. She meets that second option's expectations, where Bloomberg does not.

    Biden, Hillary, and Harris aren't "republican", but they are center/center-right leaning, on the right-leaning edge of the Democratic Party. They would've been among the group with which there was ideological overlap with Republicans, if we went back to the '90s with them. This is valid reason to not support them for the primary.
    It was actually counterintuitive. He was lifelong Democrats. Ran for New York Mayor as Republicans which is not an advantage in New York city. He ran as Independent for his third term, after convincing an all Democratic city council to waive term limits, after two highly criticized terms, and won (51% to 46%) in an overwhelmingly Democratic city against a very popular Democratic candidate (Bill Thompson). How? The estimate was that the third term cost him $180 per vote.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •