Doesn’t Matter Who Wins the K Race; We’re All the Same

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield

You say that, but why? She could run rings around Trump in discussing how the economy is performing for lower to middle class voters. And to placate the knuckledraggers, yes, she passes the “could have a beer with her” test. I remain totally confused as to why she’s unelectable except for some overestimation if Wall St’s ability to stop her.

Lots of people say, "run a man," because they think Hil lost votes because of her sex- and she did- (33% of hispanic males voted for Trump NWTAF?)- but it also got her some-

Howard Stern's take is what I'd use if I was the big wig politco that GGG claims to be- you know how Trump reduces everyone to a nickname? Crooked Hillary?

Give the nomination to the one who picks the best nickname for Trump- Vladimir Trump, Pussy grabbing Donald- polls are open!


ps- i don't look at re. lines unless notbob is around because I didn't think anyone else changed them- who is doing these?

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally Posted by Adder

So your take is that nobody cares about Russia, but they will care about the investigative tactics? That's strange, even for you (by which I mean a person who automatically credits every right wing conspiracy... has Hillary been indicted for the Clinton Global Initiative yet??).

It didn't seem to be about the economy in 2018. I'd argue it wasn't in 2016 either, but admit there's room to differ.

I’m not crediting any right wing conspiracy. I’m telling you how the GOP is creating one to muddy the issues and create the impression both sides were up to illegal or unethical shit.

People don’t care about Russia. The Democrats would do well to drop it. But if they don’t, the GOP is going to leak bad facts about the 2016 investigation in retaliation to muddy things.

The Democrats have a difficult path here because the public does not want impeachment and the GOP has enough info about the 2016 investigation to create a narrative that the investigation was politically motivated. Say “spying” enough and it sticks. Say “counterintelligence” over and over and people go to sleep.

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally Posted by Hank Chinaski

Lots of people say, "run a man," because they think Hil lost votes because of her sex- and she did- (33% of hispanic males voted for Trump NWTAF?)- but it also got her some-

Howard Stern's take is what I'd use if I was the big wig politco that GGG claims to be- you know how Trump reduces everyone to a nickname? Crooked Hillary?

Give the nomination to the one who picks the best nickname for Trump- Vladimir Trump, Pussy grabbing Donald- polls are open!


ps- i don't look at re. lines unless notbob is around because I didn't think anyone else changed them- who is doing these?

Yup. Never underestimate Howard’s grasp of what Joe Sixpack is thinking. He’s made a half a billion dollars off those instincts.

Tracy Morgan was great, btw. I loved that interview.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield

And my point to Ty was No one cares about this Russia thing. The game was played. It ended in a draw, and the crowd has left the building. If you wish to Monday morning quarterback it now, or cry that Trump's ability to avoid the moral judgment your side thinks he deserves, besides being a pointless conversation, this angle of attack is going to open the Resistance to counterpunches suggesting unclean hands on the part of Ds in the 2016 investigation sufficient to cause voters to think, even more than they do already, that this is just shithead politicians on both sides behaving as shithead politicians do.

It’s about the economy in the end. People are exhausted and annoyed with the power games.

Why don't you move to China then?

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop

Why don't you move to China then?

Why would I do that? Politics can be insipid and intellectually frustrating, but the game element of it can be fascinating. Even if, increasingly, it appears to be played by idiots, drunkards, and over-thinkers.

It’s so moronic, and then just when it appears totally unspooled, it self corrects in some often unpredictable manner. But then you also have the drama... Might this be the time it doesn’t? Is it possible we’re so dysfunctional we might go through some truly convulsive and radical change which may be great or may be horrible?

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally Posted by Adder

And they're going to leak that it was somehow politically motivated? No, they're going to leak that the FBI investigated credible allegations. Oh noes!

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/artic...s-a-wide-reach

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield

Why would I do that?

Better economic growth. It's all about the economy, you said.

[Greedy,Greedy,Greedy]

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield

Don’t take my word for it. Consult the polls. People see this as political.

The polls say we have a deeply and persistently unpopular President. Do you think that is because of the economy?

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally Posted by Greedy,Greedy,Greedy

The polls say we have a deeply and persistently unpopular President. Do you think that is because of the economy?

One can find him odious but like his economy. I think most people fall into that category.

The poll question to ask is, “What is more important to you? Having a proper President, or a good economy?”

The swing voters who’ll vote Trump in 2020 will be people who figure, “I can turn off the TV and ignore Twitter for a decent economy,” or from a negative perspective, “I want him out, but things are pretty good... why take a chance at fucking it up?” That group is impossible to quantify. But I’m comfortable saying it’s a whole lot bigger than the people lathered up about Russia and obstruction. I’d say it’s about 50x the size of that group.

People care more about the economy than the “rule of law,” particularly where the law appears to be used as a political tool.

[Adder]

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield

Don’t take my word for it. Consult the polls. People see this as political.

Which polls show people upset by the FBI’s investigative techniques?

[Adder]

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield

But if they don’t, the GOP is going to leak bad facts about the 2016 investigation in retaliation to muddy things.

They haven’t yet, and yet you’re acting like they have, because you’re a right wing dupe.

While you warn us of people like you.

You’re also so naive that you think the Dems can stop the GOP propaganda machine, much less stop dupes like you from believing their stories before they even offer them.

GOP has enough info about the 2016 investigation to create a narrative that the investigation was politically motivated. .

I’lol ask again, was Hillary indicted in October 2016? You said she would be. You have no ability to judge who has enough about what, because you instantly credit what ever the right wing says.

Granted, there are others as biased as you and maybe we need to be wary, but it would be nice if people like you would have more of a clue.

[Adder]

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/artic...s-a-wide-reach

Who was it that was sure Barr couldn’t be lying?

[Adder]

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield

One can find him odious but like his economy.

Please tell me you are not so stupid, in 2019, as to believe the president matters much to the economy. Seriously. Are you unwell?

Literally everyone else here has learned things and grown over the years, and you’ve still got your head so far up your ass that you haven’t a clue.

It’s wasn't the economy last time and it won’t be this time. Either his hate carries the day again, despite his rampant corruption, or people care about government run for the personal benefit of the ultra wealthy. We’ll mark you down as a meh, because we already know you certainly don’t care.

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally Posted by Adder

Please tell me you are not so stupid, in 2019, as to believe the president matters much to the economy. Seriously. Are you unwell?

For about 15 years I've been following this issue closely, both on this board and FB- I'd say the President's impact is proportional to whether your politics align with the current President, and whether the economy is strong.

[LessinSF]

Originally Posted by Greedy,Greedy,Greedy

The polls say we have a deeply and persistently unpopular President. Do you think that is because of the economy?

I'm thinking of betting me some Warren and/or Harris.

Donald Trump +115
Joe Biden +450
Bernie Sanders +500
Pete Buttgieg +900
Kamala Harris +1300
Beto O’Rourke +2000
Andrew Yang +2000
Elizabeth Warren +3000
Amy Klobuchar +5000
Tulsi Gabbard +5000
Cory Booker +5500
Mike Pence +6600
Kirsten Gillibrand +6600
Nikki Haley +6600
John Hickenlooper +10000
John Kasich +10000
Julian Castro +10000
Howard Schultz +10000
Andrew Cuomo +15000
Ted Cruz +15000

LessinHamburg