Re: The Presidential Election of 2020
Posted: Sun Oct 11, 2020 11:55 am
That's an irrelevant question - Snooze never said he did. Assuming the current popular story about Ms Owens is true - and I have no opinion about that - she's an independent actor.tude dog wrote: Mon Oct 12, 2020 8:04 pm Since when does the Don need to pay for an enthusiastic audience?![]()
Define "Usual"magentaflame wrote: Tue Oct 13, 2020 1:48 pm Is it just me or did he sound a little more unhinged than usual during that rally/speech?
I won't say despotic. Manic? His delivery, his has voice has changed.LarsMac wrote: Tue Oct 13, 2020 4:06 pmDefine "Usual"magentaflame wrote: Tue Oct 13, 2020 1:48 pm Is it just me or did he sound a little more unhinged than usual during that rally/speech?
Frankly, I avoid listening to him.
Bah Humbug! ......I think we're going to have to begin running a betting book. I can't see the population of the US being that dumb. Fool me once kind of scenario.spot wrote: Tue Oct 13, 2020 8:56 pm He adopted a triumphal back-from-the-grave I'm the new Messiah follow me to glory tone. With three weeks to the election he's got his timing perfect.
President Trump resembles the hero of Gore Vidal's "Kalki" death-cult, the book is prescient. I thought it was before it turned out to be.
"His birth will be the end of the Kali Yuga, the final of the four eras in the endless cycle of existence". It's where Vidal got the name. It's why Sam was called Kalkin too, in Lord of Light.
"By the end, it doesn't seem like fiction at all that we're reading, but just another clever dissertation by Gore Vidal" - from Wikipedia. Surely that's true of every book the chap wrote though, it's why I enjoyed them so much.
Seriously?magentaflame wrote: Wed Oct 14, 2020 1:24 pm Bah Humbug! ......I think we're going to have to begin running a betting book. I can't see the population of the US being that dumb. Fool me once kind of scenario.
If he wins, I'm going to come back to this thread and call you a filthy name.spot wrote: Wed Oct 14, 2020 2:41 pmSeriously?magentaflame wrote: Wed Oct 14, 2020 1:24 pm Bah Humbug! ......I think we're going to have to begin running a betting book. I can't see the population of the US being that dumb. Fool me once kind of scenario.
I'll be very surprised if he loses next month.
What puzzles me is that although the result of the election will have an impact on my health, my welfare and my peace of mind, I'm not allowed a vote. If I ever need a definition of "Empire" I'll base it on that single fact.Snooz wrote: Wed Oct 14, 2020 5:14 pm If he wins, I'm going to come back to this thread and call you a filthy name.
I had that conversation in the Pub before all the lockdowns about that very subject. I posed the question 'doesn't the republican base have daughters and wives? Or do they think certain women deserve his crap and theirs are different and nobody would ever assume the same stance toward their daughters? One of our Prime ministers was a dead set mysoginist. When people got all up on him about being one he went and made himself "minister for women" . beyond reckoning.Snooz wrote: Fri Oct 16, 2020 3:44 pm I'm sure you're all familiar with the Lincoln Project, a group of "never-Trumper" Republicans. They've done some really good political ads (in addition to some amusing attack ads) but I think this is the best one yet.
The world according to President Trump is one of "America First" nationalism, ditching international agreements that he believes give the US a raw deal. It is transactional, disruptive and unilateralist. It is also personal and erratic, shaped by his gut feelings and relationships with leaders, and driven by his Twitter feed.
The world according to Joe Biden is a much more traditional take on America's role and interests, grounded in international institutions established after World War Two, and based on shared western democratic values.
It is one of global alliances in which America leads free nations in combating transnational threats.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election-us-2020-54472696
How many little girls watch the news?magentaflame wrote: Sun Oct 18, 2020 3:25 pmI had that conversation in the Pub before all the lockdowns about that very subject. I posed the question 'doesn't the republican base have daughters and wives? Or do they think certain women deserve his crap and theirs are different and nobody would ever assume the same stance toward their daughters? One of our Prime ministers was a dead set mysoginist. When people got all up on him about being one he went and made himself "minister for women" . beyond reckoning.Snooz wrote: Fri Oct 16, 2020 3:44 pm I'm sure you're all familiar with the Lincoln Project, a group of "never-Trumper" Republicans. They've done some really good political ads (in addition to some amusing attack ads) but I think this is the best one yet.
Fair enough.spot wrote: Tue Oct 13, 2020 12:04 amThat's an irrelevant question - Snooze never said he did. Assuming the current popular story about Ms Owens is true - and I have no opinion about that - she's an independent actor.tude dog wrote: Mon Oct 12, 2020 8:04 pm Since when does the Don need to pay for an enthusiastic audience?![]()
Friends of the Donald, it would seem. I am sure that he could, but he obviously doesn't need to. Someone else will pay for him.tude dog wrote: Mon Oct 26, 2020 12:33 pmFair enough.spot wrote: Tue Oct 13, 2020 12:04 amThat's an irrelevant question - Snooze never said he did. Assuming the current popular story about Ms Owens is true - and I have no opinion about that - she's an independent actor.tude dog wrote: Mon Oct 12, 2020 8:04 pm Since when does the Don need to pay for an enthusiastic audience?![]()
I should have stated the obvious. The enthusiasm showed by his supporter's audiences every time he speaks,
Who can buy such an audience?![]()
Seems four years ago Hillary outspent Trump, for all the good it did.LarsMac wrote: Mon Oct 26, 2020 1:48 pmFriends of the Donald, it would seem. I am sure that he could, but he obviously doesn't need to. Someone else will pay for him.tude dog wrote: Mon Oct 26, 2020 12:33 pmFair enough.spot wrote: Tue Oct 13, 2020 12:04 amThat's an irrelevant question - Snooze never said he did. Assuming the current popular story about Ms Owens is true - and I have no opinion about that - she's an independent actor.tude dog wrote: Mon Oct 12, 2020 8:04 pm Since when does the Don need to pay for an enthusiastic audience?![]()
I should have stated the obvious. The enthusiasm showed by his supporter's audiences every time he speaks,
Who can buy such an audience?![]()
That is how he has always played it. "Never pay cash. Let somebody else pick up the check."
No, we will not become Socialists. Too much big business running the country.Hope6 wrote: Thu Oct 29, 2020 3:54 pm Okay 5 days to go, it's getting down to the wire. I sure hope people are not stupid enough to do this to our country. It will be the end of our country as we know it!
https://www.dailywire.com/news/joe-bide ... ojan-horse
How to answer multiple choice questions. America invented the notion that accurately answering trivia indicates intelligence, as opposed to confirming the teaching material was red. The new-style education is consequently cheaper, though less educational, than it ought to be.magentaflame wrote: Thu Oct 29, 2020 10:25 pm I don't understand what scares Amersicans about socialism. What did they teach you at school?
Americans, as a rule, have no idea what "Socialism" is.magentaflame wrote: Thu Oct 29, 2020 10:25 pm Nothing wrong with being a socialist. I'm a socialist. I love it when someone mentions the word socialist to an American. It's funny. I don't understand what scares Amersicans about socialism. What did they teach you at school?
Question ...who owns Americas' postal service?
Do you have public hospitals?
Do you have public education ?
Well, THAT''s not Socialism. The Capitalists can do that to you, though, you know.Hope6 wrote: Fri Oct 30, 2020 5:20 pm I suppose if someone doesn't own property, if they rent where they live and the government tells them they will give them free medical care and a free education, I guess that would appeal to some people but we worked hard for our property. Our farmland and our house are all paid for we don't owe anybody anything and we did it all ourselves, and someone would come along and say, your property doesn't belong to you anymore but you continue to work on it and we'll let you keep part of what you make! NO WAY!!
how is that not socialism?LarsMac wrote: Fri Oct 30, 2020 5:34 pmWell, THAT''s not Socialism. The Capitalists can do that to you, though, you know.Hope6 wrote: Fri Oct 30, 2020 5:20 pm I suppose if someone doesn't own property, if they rent where they live and the government tells them they will give them free medical care and a free education, I guess that would appeal to some people but we worked hard for our property. Our farmland and our house are all paid for we don't owe anybody anything and we did it all ourselves, and someone would come along and say, your property doesn't belong to you anymore but you continue to work on it and we'll let you keep part of what you make! NO WAY!!
It's sad that the Trumpers, have so many people convinced that the Democrats want to do such things. But then, that is the burden of our education system, these days.
May I suggest that you find more reliable media to read?Hope6 wrote: Fri Oct 30, 2020 5:37 pm Well if you take the socialism question out of it would you want this as your country's leader?
https://spectator.org/biden-cognitive-p ... -dementia/
Have a quick look at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eminent_d ... ted_States and tell me how American compulsory purchase powers are different to what you're describing. Nobody in America has an absolute right to their property, not even a right to remain on it and keep part of what you make.Hope6 wrote: Fri Oct 30, 2020 5:20 pm I suppose if someone doesn't own property, if they rent where they live and the government tells them they will give them free medical care and a free education, I guess that would appeal to some people but we worked hard for our property. Our farmland and our house are all paid for we don't owe anybody anything and we did it all ourselves, and someone would come along and say, your property doesn't belong to you anymore but you continue to work on it and we'll let you keep part of what you make! NO WAY!!
Property taken by eminent domain may be for government use or by delegation to third parties, who will devote it to public or civic use or, in some cases, to economic development. The most common uses are for government buildings and other facilities, public utilities, highways and railroads. However, it may also be taken for reasons of public safety, as in the case of Centralia, Pennsylvania, where land was taken due to an underground mine fire.[2] Some jurisdictions require that the condemnor make an offer to purchase the subject property, before resorting to the use of eminent domain.
A socialist government in America would legislate to see that no person on Homeland soil is without access to "timely management and care for the purpose of combating disease, injury or disorder", without habitation fit for human use, without adequate nourishment or education, or without competent professional legal defense when called to answer before a court. I'd take those areas as a minimum immediate standard.tude dog wrote: Sat Oct 31, 2020 10:21 am Rather than trying to explain Socialism, I would rather let the socialist explain what it would mean for my
country.
Bernie Sanders is open about being a socialist and proud of it. For me, that is a good starting point in wondering what a socialist would do to my county.
Uh HUHspot wrote: Sat Oct 31, 2020 10:34 amA socialist government in America would legislate to see that no person on Homeland soil is without access to "timely management and care for the purpose of combating disease, injury or disorder", without habitation fit for human use, without adequate nourishment or education, or without competent professional legal defense when called to answer before a court. I'd take those areas as a minimum immediate standard.tude dog wrote: Sat Oct 31, 2020 10:21 am Rather than trying to explain Socialism, I would rather let the socialist explain what it would mean for my
country.
Bernie Sanders is open about being a socialist and proud of it. For me, that is a good starting point in wondering what a socialist would do to my county.
You never explained Socialism, just palaver of some promised paradise.spot wrote: Sat Oct 31, 2020 1:01 pm That would appear to be a different Marx altogether. As usual I have no idea what you're attempting to convey. You asked a question, I gave an answer, you refuse any engagement - par for the course.
oh woe are wespot wrote: Sat Oct 31, 2020 1:01 pmHow could any civilized person want their country to fall short on any of those minimum standards of decency.
I"m right here . Ask away.tude dog wrote: Sat Oct 31, 2020 10:21 am Rather than trying to explain Socialism, I would rather let the socialist explain what it would mean for my
country.
Bernie Sanders is open about being a socialist and proud of it. For me, that is a good starting point in wondering what a socialist would do to my county.
You carefully asked me not to explain socialism ("Rather than trying to explain Socialism") and I carefully didn't. You asked me to "explain what it would mean for my country" which I did, precisely, in legislative terms, and "woe are we" does indeed sum up your collective condition very well.tude dog wrote: Sat Oct 31, 2020 3:42 pmYou never explained Socialism, just palaver of some promised paradise.
oh woe are we
Then why did he run as a Democrat?tude dog wrote: Sat Oct 31, 2020 10:21 am
Bernie Sanders is open about being a socialist and proud of it. For me, that is a good starting point in wondering what a socialist would do to my county.
What I wrote was Rather than trying to explain Socialism, I would rather let the socialist explain what it would mean for myspot wrote: Sat Oct 31, 2020 11:21 pmYou carefully asked me not to explain socialism ("Rather than trying to explain Socialism") and I carefully didn't. You asked me to "explain what it would mean for my country" which I did, precisely, in legislative terms, and "woe are we" does indeed sum up your collective condition very well.tude dog wrote: Sat Oct 31, 2020 3:42 pmYou never explained Socialism, just palaver of some promised paradise.
oh woe are we
Socialism is not a paradise. It's just a different system of government which is more equitable.tude dog wrote: Sun Nov 01, 2020 1:10 pmWhat I wrote was Rather than trying to explain Socialism, I would rather let the socialist explain what it would mean for myspot wrote: Sat Oct 31, 2020 11:21 pmYou carefully asked me not to explain socialism ("Rather than trying to explain Socialism") and I carefully didn't. You asked me to "explain what it would mean for my country" which I did, precisely, in legislative terms, and "woe are we" does indeed sum up your collective condition very well.tude dog wrote: Sat Oct 31, 2020 3:42 pmYou never explained Socialism, just palaver of some promised paradise.
oh woe are we
country.
I should have been precise.
A socialist government in America would legislate to see that no person on Homeland soil is without access to "timely management and care for the purpose of combating disease, injury or disorder", without habitation fit for human use, without adequate nourishment or education, or without competent professional legal defense when called to answer before a court. I'd take those areas as a minimum immediate standard.
What is Socialism and how does it provide that paradise on earth?![]()