Trump & Covid19

Discussion in 'Off-Topic Discussions' started by Kizmet, Mar 24, 2020.

Loading...
  1. Vonnegut

    Vonnegut Active Member

    It's okay, there's no need for an inspector general.... a few days ago your POTUS declared that his attorney will handle everything... don't worry about it... they know what they're doing... LINK

    [​IMG]
     
  2. Vonnegut

    Vonnegut Active Member

    To add to the previous conversations on Biden's failings and Trump solidifying his base...

    American's Prefer Trump's Leadership to Biden's in Coronavirus Response - National Review

    Not wanting to go into tearing down to the analysis that Politico did... but will simply state, Biden's earlier disappearance and bewildering speeches when he came out of hiding were deplorable. While we should certainly not see partisan politics during times like this, we do need visible leadership. Trump unfortunately has aced this, even if we (likely all) disagree with his methodology. I don't know a single person who can honestly state that Biden has offered any evidence of leadership during this time. It's a shame.
     
  3. nosborne48

    nosborne48 Well-Known Member

    Oy. I felt like HRC was treating me, and other Flyover Country Democrats, as children. I'm starting to think that in Biden, my party is treating me like a fool.
     
  4. Rich Douglas

    Rich Douglas Well-Known Member

    Biden was chosen by Democratic voters, as was Clinton. "My party" is that: voters.
     
  5. nosborne48

    nosborne48 Well-Known Member

    Yeah, I guess.
     
  6. Vonnegut

    Vonnegut Active Member

    ...and all it took was a collection of back room deals that were kept off the books. It's what the "voters" wanted, no?

    [​IMG]
     
  7. Rich Douglas

    Rich Douglas Well-Known Member

    Please tell us what deals were made and with whom. Oh, and of course, your sources for that information.
     
  8. Vonnegut

    Vonnegut Active Member

    Biden only experienced the resurgence that he did, from having his campaign meet with the other candidates and convince them to drop out. There are posts on this forum and I am sure you've read about some of the meetings in the political news. His campaign convinced other campaigns to drop out and support him, when they were arguably beating him at the time. While I won't speculate as to the content, I think we can both agree that there were promises, positions, etc. traded in exchange. Granted, that is normal politics... which is where perhaps my cynicism and disdain stems from. I work on a campus and live in a very liberal city... I have honestly not noticed a single Biden bumper sticker or lawn sign. Again, while this may be somewhat normal for politics, it occurred without direct voter input and in backroom deal-making/back-scratching. We can state that this is okay (although I won't) because we're really a democratic republic, and the campaigns people voted for made these decisions, but going down that line of semantics rationalization could also strengthen the argument that it is direct voter suppression. Shrugs, I hope you don't take offense if you're an active supporter of the DNC, but I am personally disappointed in how they put themselves in this position. It's even worse, that this is now two presidential complains where... well... I think one would have to stretch to make an argument that they were open, honest, and ethical in their process.

     
    Last edited: Apr 9, 2020
  9. Rich Douglas

    Rich Douglas Well-Known Member

    So, no sources, huh?

    You've changed your premise from secret meetings to meeting you don't like. Your premise is wrong; Biden was always a strong candidate in states outside the first two. There was no surprise; he always polled at the top. And note that the strongest candidates held on the longest; there was no fix.

    Even if there was, what you're describing is party politics, not some form of skulduggery.

    Finally, you're still not giving evidence of some sort of plot. I get that you don't like the outcome, but you're not showing that it came about in some subversive way. Feel free to do so, of course.
     
  10. Vonnegut

    Vonnegut Active Member

    Pardon, what are you wanting a source on? Are you disagreeing that party politics occurred? I've never said skulduggery or secret meetings, I said back room deals that are off the books, which as you mentioned is party politics. I wouldn't use the terms skulduggery or secret meetings, as this is unfortunately how party politics plays out and how candidates attempt to leverage themselves. Personally I believe the process this time was an improvement over the last time, which was entirely disappointing for all of the reasons that Debbie ended up resigning and that Donna and Warren cried foul on. As for this primary cycle, I am disappointed in the outcome and from the sounds of it, so are you. There's a long list of candidates from both sides, who I believe are more capable of leadership, competency, and dignity than the two we are going to have running up against each other. I also take something back, I am absolutely going to use the term skulduggery tomorrow. Although in a different context, it's going into the vocabulary of some six year olds tomorrow... because... yeah.
     
  11. Kizmet

    Kizmet Moderator Staff Member

    party politics = backroom deals

    That history is rarely written.
     
  12. Rich Douglas

    Rich Douglas Well-Known Member

    So, no?

    Yes, I'm disappointed in the outcome. But you're complaining about things that you have not established even happened, then you change the argument with a lot of verbiage that says little. I maintain that you're mad at the outcome so you complain that something wrong must have occurred to create it. Fine. Prove it. What "backroom deals" were made? I don't know of any, but I'd love to hear--specifically--what you know occurred. Sourced, of course.
     
  13. Kizmet

    Kizmet Moderator Staff Member

  14. Vonnegut

    Vonnegut Active Member

    Rich, I asked for clarification, as I didn't understand what you're wanting a source on. You're an intelligent and rational individual, you understand how party politics works, or as Kizmet clarified party politics = backroom deals. Brazile wrote an entire book about the travesty she uncovered as an interim chair, which specifically covers the backroom deals at the DNC during the previous primary season. You're an intelligent and resourceful individual who appears to earnestly cares about the democratic party. Are you implying you're not familiar with all that Brazile stated or wrote? I even included a video feed above, she was not exactly shy about her repugnance of how the DNC operated, she even wrote articles entitled Inside Hillary Clinton's Secret Takeover of the DNC. This is a central premise to my commentary, that has me confused by what you're asking, as you're too intelligent to not be aware of this... which leads my personal thought process to a few avenues; (1) you're falling into the Trump'opian line of decrying it as as "fake news" and "disgruntled grievances"... which I think you're too smart to traverse that path, (2) you're simply trying to deny well documented history in an effort to "win" an argument.... my perception is that you're too ethical for that sort of fraudulent dishonesty, (3) ...or you're simply upset with the verbiage or semantics... which I will presume is the case. With the DNC having a documented of history, literally written in a book from their very own interim chair, they've forfeited their ability to require exhaustive proof from their critics. Once a documented history is obtained, even in a court case, the burden of proof for further accusations is reduced. That's part of the problem when one loses their integrity, it casts a long shadow and transitions the burden of proving they're honest this time... onto them. We all know how party politics works, Biden tried to convince Amy's campaign into joining prior to the Iowa caucus when they started to realize how disastrous it would be for him. Obama reached out to Pete and helped to respectfully, convince him to endorse Biden, even prior to that the DNC/Biden campaign people tried to pull him and the other campaigns to their side as well. We even have commentary on it here in the other threads. I am sorry if you feel offended, but the original post that you got hung up on was simply a vent of disdain at the process NOT the outcome. While I am disappointed in the outcome, it is for the same reasons you elaborated on elsewhere. Although perhaps personally my disappointment is more elevated, as I have a growing apprehension in the DNC's ability to defeat Trump in the electoral college.
     
  15. nosborne48

    nosborne48 Well-Known Member

    The thing is, voters don't usually make rational choices. Never have. Voters tend to vote from their hearts, their feelings and their fears and prejudices. So if Biden appears fumbling and weak or self-interested and corrupt to a given voter, even if Biden isn't really these things at all, that voter will choose accordingly. An election is not a trial (though there are some scholars who feel that trials work more or less the same way after all.) Joe Biden is surely perceived as the choice of the Democratic Establishment. All those endorsements (131 so far according to Politico.com) make that pretty clear. But a swath of the traditional Democratic Base, rightly or wrongly, feels sold out by that same Establishment. Those people, some of them, are not so enthusiastic about electing Biden to the White House. There is undoubtedly an "enthusiasm gap."
     
  16. nosborne48

    nosborne48 Well-Known Member

    I was about to restate my prediction from some months ago that Biden would be the nominee and that Trump would win but I thought Hillary had it in the bag so maybe I'll preserve a discrete silence on that point.
     
  17. Kizmet

    Kizmet Moderator Staff Member

    I'd like to expand on that. This is actually more of a world view on my part. I think it's true of party politics but I also think it's true of lots of businesses and other organizations. You NEVER get the whole story on how decisions are made. There's always a backroom and it's always got a phone in it. Before you say it too loud please let me assure you that I know it's a little paranoid. I know. But there's a certain amount of evidence yo support the opinion and sometimes there's even something that's called proof although that's often a slippery commodity. So I'm not trying to paint politicians as being any worse than anyone else. I think deals of all sorts are made around the world everyday.
     
    Rich Douglas likes this.
  18. Rich Douglas

    Rich Douglas Well-Known Member

    I can't parse through all of this over and over again. You're more than welcome to the last word!
     
  19. Rich Douglas

    Rich Douglas Well-Known Member

    Can't argue with any of this except the endorsements. He's the candidate presumptive and it's natural for the party to gather around him. This is enhanced by the nature of his opponent, which is why we'll see Never Trumpers get behind Biden, too.

    Every generation resents the one(s) before it, hating the Establishment. Until they become it, of course.
     
  20. Rich Douglas

    Rich Douglas Well-Known Member

    I'm not saying "backroom" deals are not part of politics. It's so obvious that they are--and always have been--that I don't understand why some people complain about that. But it's also not enough to assume that took place with Biden--whether or not you would find it acceptable. If it is asserted that something occurred, fine. Prove it. That's all. (And no, it wasn't your assertion.)
     

Share This Page