Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

Reports of protests are overblown. A few incidents around the country, but nothing major.

5 (45.5%)

A few major incidents in capitals, but nothing much in DC.

5 (45.5%)

A major incident in DC, but nothing much around the country.

0 (0%)

More than 10 capitals have major upheavals, but nothing much in DC.

0 (0%)

A major incident in DC plus more than 10 capitals with significant upheavals.

1 (9.1%)

More than half the capitals around the country have problems with protesters, but DC is quiet.

0 (0%)

DC has major problems, while more than half the capitals around the country also have considerable trouble with protesters.

0 (0%)

Huge disruption to the day.

0 (0%)

Total Members Voted: 9

Voting closed: January 19, 2021, 10:49:21 PM

[barton]

A rough summer,  partly due to our demographics. 

Part of ours,  and Europe's vulnerability is that we are demographically older.   As that debate Bo posted brought up,  the average CV19 death is age 80.  Countries in the Third World,  experiencing much lower CV19 deaths,  are not only shorter on old folks, but other diseases and ailments (as well as  lack of medical care and nutrition) kill off the genetically weak and physically deprived in all age groups.   As a result,  we see nations with more slums and less modern sanitation that have very small outbreak numbers, even nations with weak governments and public health systems that are marginal.

Rich nations care for the old and genetically challenged: that's banging the dinner gong for novel and opportunistic pathogens.   Then add in that our wealth also means we (or a significant percentage of us)  can afford to travel great distances,  go overseas,  most of it in cramped hermetically sealed tubes.   This is why meaningful comparisons of mortality between countries require some similarities in living standards,  mobility, and methods of data gathering by health workers.   I wanted to stop and comment on this,  because it will be something to bear in mind as the popular media continues to bombard us with statistics,  often poorly contextualized. 

When you compare any two nation's or regions or provinces,  be sure and look at what percent of their populations are 80, or in that age range.   Look at comparative diabetes rates.   Look at per capita miles traveled per year.   Look at average air quality index.  Etc.   

With all this in mind,  nations like South Korea are doubly impressive in their numbers.   

[NeedsAdjustments]

I think Biden wins this election only with a massive turnout. My embarrassment lies with  a belief that "well he's not Trump" is enough to get that turnout.

So you think Trump should be a shoe-in to lose because he can't get out of his own way, but think it is embarrassing that people will turn out to vote against him...

Sorry, not following.

For what its worth, here is one poll that shows Biden voters more enthusiastic to vote in 2020 than Trump supporters:

https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/499077-fox-news-poll-biden-leads-trump-by-8-points-nationally

You could argue that what they are really enthusiastic about is voting against Trump, if you like.  But again I don't know how that supports your argument.

I have no problems voting against Trump. I don't believe that enough people feel that way to win the election for Biden. I believe a better candidate would be a shoo-in.

So because you think Trump might win, Democrats should be embarrassed.  Good argument.

I'll leave you with the points I already made:

Biden is in a historically strong position in the polling compared to others who tried to unseat an incumbent (and is arguably in a better position right now than any other Democratic candidate would be)

There is nothing to be embarrassed about in having Biden as a candidate, even if he wasn't your personal preference.

The party that should be embarrassed by Trump is the party that chose him to represent them, and the party that happily sits by and watches our democratic norms be shredded so that he might be reelected.

[kiidcarter8]

It's been awhile since Kid has happily updated us with even Rasmussen's numbers.


-16 yesterday for Trump approval

[bodiddley]

Sure Trump is more embarrassing, but I find Biden to be a hack and certainly an uninspired choice.  What has Biden ever been right on?  He was for the Iraq War, for full-on globalization, against the Bin Laden raid, a long time corporate shill, especially for the banks, but also for all the mega-corps registered in race-to-the-bottom Delaware.  Family corruption, likely of the sort that wasn't illegal, but certainly unethical.  Biden is well-known for mis-speaking and gaffe prone utterances.  Biden was all-in on the Clinton New Democrat path, making Dems more like Rockefeller Repubs by getting tough on crime, cracking down on welfare and coddling big business.  And Biden is already making noises about being bipartisan and compromising, the mostly failed Obama pathway.

Best thing is to get rid of Trump and hope Biden lasts only one term (or less).

[NeedsAdjustments]

Biden was all-in on the Clinton New Democrat path, making Dems more like Rockefeller Repubs by getting tough on crime, cracking down on welfare and coddling big business.  And Biden is already making noises about being bipartisan and compromising, the mostly failed Obama pathway.

Biden sucks because he is like Bill Clinton and Barrack Obama.

Great arguments being made on the forum today!  A+

[kiidcarter8]

I think Biden wins this election only with a massive turnout. My embarrassment lies with  a belief that "well he's not Trump" is enough to get that turnout.

So you think Trump should be a shoe-in to lose because he can't get out of his own way, but think it is embarrassing that people will turn out to vote against him...

Sorry, not following.

For what its worth, here is one poll that shows Biden voters more enthusiastic to vote in 2020 than Trump supporters:

https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/499077-fox-news-poll-biden-leads-trump-by-8-points-nationally

You could argue that what they are really enthusiastic about is voting against Trump, if you like.  But again I don't know how that supports your argument.

I have no problems voting against Trump. I don't believe that enough people feel that way to win the election for Biden. I believe a better candidate would be a shoo-in.

So because you think Trump might win, Democrats should be embarrassed.  Good argument.

I'll leave you with the points I already made:

Biden is in a historically strong position in the polling compared to others who tried to unseat an incumbent (and is arguably in a better position right now than any other Democratic candidate would be)

There is nothing to be embarrassed about in having Biden as a candidate, even if he wasn't your personal preference.

The party that should be embarrassed by Trump is the party that chose him to represent them, and the party that happily sits by and watches our democratic norms be shredded so that he might be reelected.

In terms of electibility maybe you are right at THIS TIME - that Biden wins easier than Sanders or Klobuchar or whoever.  Longtime Joe backers being the reason.

This doesnt mean he will be a better president than they would have. 

[NeedsAdjustments]

This is a good analysis of Joe's progressive agenda, for those interested:

https://www.vox.com/2020/5/26/21257648/joe-biden-climate-economy-tax-plans

If he is too middle-of-the-road for you ("uninspired") I don't necessarily disagree, but if your top priority is the removal of Trump, his candidacy is not at cross-purposes with that priority.

[kiidcarter8]

At this point, Lyndon Johnson was never going to win reelection, in fact he realized it in a pretty certain way. Jimmy Carter was never going to win reelection.


Wasn't Carter leading most of the way?

[kiidcarter8]

This is a good analysis of Joe's progressive agenda, for those interested:

https://www.vox.com/2020/5/26/21257648/joe-biden-climate-economy-tax-plans

If he is too middle-of-the-road for you ("uninspired") I don't necessarily disagree, but if your top priority is the removal of Trump, his candidacy is not at cross-purposes with that priority.

How confident are you that when the third quarter economy blooms and rallies start back up that we are not suddenly back in a dead heat?

[Hairy Lime]

I think Biden wins this election only with a massive turnout. My embarrassment lies with  a belief that "well he's not Trump" is enough to get that turnout.

So you think Trump should be a shoe-in to lose because he can't get out of his own way, but think it is embarrassing that people will turn out to vote against him...

Sorry, not following.

For what its worth, here is one poll that shows Biden voters more enthusiastic to vote in 2020 than Trump supporters:

https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/499077-fox-news-poll-biden-leads-trump-by-8-points-nationally

You could argue that what they are really enthusiastic about is voting against Trump, if you like.  But again I don't know how that supports your argument.

I have no problems voting against Trump. I don't believe that enough people feel that way to win the election for Biden. I believe a better candidate would be a shoo-in.

I have always thought of Biden as the Willy Loman of the national Democratic Party.

[NeedsAdjustments]

This is a good analysis of Joe's progressive agenda, for those interested:

https://www.vox.com/2020/5/26/21257648/joe-biden-climate-economy-tax-plans

If he is too middle-of-the-road for you ("uninspired") I don't necessarily disagree, but if your top priority is the removal of Trump, his candidacy is not at cross-purposes with that priority.

How confident are you that when the third quarter economy blooms and rallies start back up that we are not suddenly back in a dead heat?

First any economic rally, let alone one that puts the economy back on its feet by the fall, is far from certain.  I'd say odds are solidly against it in fact.

As for the race suddenly being "back" in a dead heat?  It never was.  Biden always had a lead in the polling.  You could argue that Trump's Covid-19 non-response and the resulting economic disaster has made a surprisingly small difference in this race.

[bodiddley]

At this point, Lyndon Johnson was never going to win reelection, in fact he realized it in a pretty certain way. Jimmy Carter was never going to win reelection.

Wasn't Carter leading most of the way?

Yep.  And Reagan was considered somewhat of an extremist and rather old with an outdated hairdo.  The debate really helped Reagan with his humor and quips and Hollywood timing and preparation.

Weird that Carter agreed to one debate just a week before the election.  Kind of a gamble that.

[bodiddley]

Biden mostly a finger-in-the-wind pol.

[kiidcarter8]

This is a good analysis of Joe's progressive agenda, for those interested:

https://www.vox.com/2020/5/26/21257648/joe-biden-climate-economy-tax-plans

If he is too middle-of-the-road for you ("uninspired") I don't necessarily disagree, but if your top priority is the removal of Trump, his candidacy is not at cross-purposes with that priority.

How confident are you that when the third quarter economy blooms and rallies start back up that we are not suddenly back in a dead heat?

First any economic rally, let alone one that puts the economy back on its feet by the fall, is far from certain.  I'd say odds are solidly against it in fact.

As for the race suddenly being "back" in a dead heat?  It never was.  Biden always had a lead in the polling.  You could argue that Trump's Covid-19 non-response and the resulting economic disaster has made a surprisingly small difference in this race.

ok so take the word back out of it

[kiidcarter8]

A month ago Biden-Trump were tied in at least one poll.