U.S. Politics - Thread

[The DoggFather]

I hope McCain's widow can sway some swinging voters. It all helps I guess.

Cindy McCain endorses Joe Biden

Cindy McCain endorses Joe Biden

Cindy McCain, the widow of longtime Republican Sen. John McCain of Arizona, said Tuesday night on Twitter that she endorses Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden.

www.cnn.com

No offence to you but why should people give a fuck what a wife of a crooked politician with an agenda thinks?

 

[KambahOne]

What do you think should be the consequences for China, for allowing a global pandemic to spread, resulting in essentially the shut down of the global economy?

There will be none! Not one single sanction, restriction or penalty will be imposed on China by the gutless, corporate West. Apart from the Dumpster and his rhetoric, nothing will be done against China as every single corporation that makes something is welded to that corrupt, lying government and will petition every politician they can to do nothing to risk their profits.

 

[wendog33]

No offence to you but why should people give a fuck what a wife of a crooked politician with an agenda thinks?

Maybe they don't but it may be another Republican having some influence on swaying some voters?

McCain did have some standing in their country for his service which Trump dissed so it's better than her endorsing Trump

 

[The DoggFather]

Maybe they don't but it may be another Republican having some influence on swaying some voters?

McCain did have some standing in their country for his service which Trump dissed so it's better than her endorsing Trump

My point is that she has to endorse trumps opponent.

Oh well, we are talking about Murikans so she will sway some brain dead morons.

 

[wendog33]

I really don't think money is what is needed to do it......people don't want money, they want sincerity. A lifelong republican masquerading as a democrat as some sort of personal power grab is not what was needed. I think people made that pretty clear during the primaries. Even Biden was a better option than Bloomers.

I think Biden would definitely improve relations with China, yeah.....Trump has been playing a very dangerous game in continuing to call them out to try and take heat off himself and I do worry about the repercussions of that.....it will lead to even more problems with a world economy that already has plenty at very least and an escalation to full on conflict is not out of the question . He really is a colossal jackass.

Agree. By throwing money I was thinking massive amounts on the campaign advertising blitz.

Seems to work a la Palmer.

 

[Dawgfather]

There will be none! Not one single sanction, restriction or penalty will be imposed on China by the gutless, corporate West. Apart from the Dumpster and his rhetoric, nothing will be done against China as every single corporation that makes something is welded to that corrupt, lying government and will petition every politician they can to do nothing to risk their profits.

100% agree. Which is partly why I enjoy seeing Trump as one of the only politicians to actually call out China for what they are.

 

[wendog33]

Things are personal for her, after Trump had a pretty poor crack at her late husband.

Just highlights the dangerous 8 year old in the WH.

 

[Flanagun]

Agree. By throwing money I was thinking massive amounts on the campaign advertising blitz.

Seems to work a la Palmer.

I think money is actually a big part of the problem for the Dems when it comes to electability. The party is so beholden to corporate donors it is resolute in its opposition to any move to adopt more progressive policies which would actually appeal to the many disenfranchised members of their base. That's why they didn't want a bar of Bernie. Some of his policies may have been a bit idealistic, but in this day and age, medicare for all, better access to education and a livable minimum wage should be a given policies for any left leaning party. In any case, if the Dems want to splash on a big advertising blitz, they really don't need Bloomberg's money. They spared no expense in trying to get Hillary Clinton elected in 2016 and it didn't work. Better to try and find a candidate voters will believe in. But that's just my take on it.

 

[wendog33]

I enjoy seeing other peoples thoughtful opinions and ideas, without insults.

I don't like Trump for all that he represents. Just my opinion.

I honestly can't believe that people could actually entrust him with the office of leader of the free World. But thats just me.

I didn't like Jo Bejelke Petersen, and Malcolm Fraser until he turned into a humanitarian nor Kevin Rudd or Clive Palmer, Tony Blair, Tony Abbott. Just not my kinda guys.

I like to add vids etc just to expand the discussion...not to stir up agitators who vehemently disagree with the content.


Everyone is welcome to have their say aren't they? This thread has mostly been very decent and debate has flourished when so many threads on TK turn to sheet bc others can't abide another opinion being expressed.

We all benefit when considered argument is presented rather than insults.

Something else thats going around now as to another reason Trump wants to get in his sc judge.

https://www.facebook.com/video.php?v=355262905836920

 

[Dawgfather]

They spared no expense in trying to get Hillary Clinton elected in 2016 and it didn't work. Better to try and find a candidate voters will believe in. But that's just my take on it.

I agree with most of this post.

But this is going to be very difficult to achieve, given existing democrat politicians have their 'blocs' and power bases, and they aren't going to let an 'individual' come in and take over.

Trump had the same problem with the republicans, but managed to crash through the wall.

 

[Flanagun]

I enjoy seeing other peoples thoughtful opinions and ideas, without insults.

I don't like Trump for all that he represents. Just my opinion.

I honestly can't believe that people could actually entrust him with the office of leader of the free World. But thats just me.

I didn't like Jo Bejelke Petersen, and Malcolm Fraser until he turned into a humanitarian nor Kevin Rudd or Clive Palmer, Tony Blair, Tony Abbott. Just not my kinda guys.

I like to add vids etc just to expand the discussion...not to stir up agitators who vehemently disagree with the content.


Everyone is welcome to have their say aren't they? This thread has mostly been very decent and debate has flourished when so many threads on TK turn to sheet bc others can't abide another opinion being expressed.

We all benefit when considered argument is presented rather than insults.

Something else thats going around now as to another reason Trump wants to get in his sc judge.

https://www.facebook.com/video.php?v=355262905836920

Yes, it's always nice to have a good discussion....and I am well and truly on the same page as you when it comes to Trump. Can't really watch the vid right now, but will come back to it later if I can.

 

[Flanagun]

I agree with most of this post.

But this is going to be very difficult to achieve, given existing democrat politicians have their 'blocs' and power bases, and they aren't going to let an 'individual' come in and take over.

Trump had the same problem with the republicans, but managed to crash through the wall.

A Dem trying to challenge their party base is an even trickier proposition, I think....the task of trying to find corporate donors who will support genuine progressive leftist policies is harder than the challenge that faced the republicans with trump. But there is also the reality that Republican voters are more predisposed to a sentiment which opposes big government. They were a bit more unified in their anti establishment stance.....but having said that, the anti establishment sentiment amongst the left was also strong and it took voter suppression to repress it.

 

[KambahOne]

100% agree. Which is partly why I enjoy seeing Trump as one of the only politicians to actually call out China for what they are.

lol apart from calling China CHI-NA, he's not saying anything different to what other pollies are saying. Everyone knows it came from China and that's all he's regurgitating.

 

[Dawgfather]

lol apart from calling China CHI-NA, he's not saying anything different to what other pollies are saying. Everyone knows it came from China and that's all he's regurgitating.

Most of the problem in 2020 is people unwilling to say things which don't fit the PC narrative.

So we shouldn't down-play the importance of someone in Trumps position of power actively standing up and telling people to think for themselves and say the things which they believe to be true.

Trump has also consistently questions why America still has troops in Afghanistan and Iraq and reduced their numbers (something that a war monger like Bush or Clinton would never have done).

 

[KambahOne]

Most of the problem in 2020 is people unwilling to say things which don't fit the PC narrative.

So we shouldn't down-play the importance of someone in Trumps position of power actively standing up and telling people to think for themselves and say the things which they believe to be true.

Trump has also consistently questions why America still has troops in Afghanistan and Iraq and reduced their numbers (something that a war monger like Bush or Clinton would never have done).

It's interesting you say that as we're having local elections over the coming month and I've asked every candidate (Labor, Greens, Independent and Liberal) that handed me a flyer in front of a shopping center the same question - "you pollies are willing to talk about the illegal activities of the criminal and corrupt state of China and what they are doing in the South China Sea, but will you talk about the illegal activities of the corrupt and criminal state of Israel and their illegal settlements, their illegal wall, the illegal annexing of the Golan Heights, their transgressions of the Geneva Convention and their immoral treatment of the Palestinian people?"

The only one willing to talk to me about those issues was the Greens candidate. All the others couldn't coward away quick enough.

Should I vote for a pollie with conviction or waste it on a major party?

 

[Dawgfather]

"live" interview with Joe Biden LOL

"Ok I lost that line"

 

[Dawgfather]

It's interesting you say that as we're having local elections over the coming month and I've asked every candidate (Labor, Greens, Independent and Liberal) that handed me a flyer in front of a shopping center the same question - "you pollies are willing to talk about the illegal activities of the criminal and corrupt state of China and what they are doing in the South China Sea, but will you talk about the illegal activities of the corrupt and criminal state of Israel and their illegal settlements, their illegal wall, the illegal annexing of the Golan Heights, their transgressions of the Geneva Convention and their immoral treatment of the Palestinian people?"

The only one willing to talk to me about those issues was the Greens candidate. All the others couldn't coward away quick enough.

Should I vote for a pollie with conviction or waste it on a major party?

Fair question, and ultimately the great thing about our democractic system is that you get to make your own mind up in the privacy of a voting booth. No one can intimidate you into voting one way or the other, and you get to use your own brain, education and life experience to choose who to give your vote to.

 

[Dawgfather]

On the topic of the November election. I have no doubt Trump will win now due to this Supreme Court issue. It takes the attention away from BLM and China virus. BOth of which play better for the Dems.

The supreme court plays perfectly to Trump's strengths - The democrats and media are snookered on the Supreme court issue because:

- If the media and democrats ignore the supreme court nomination, Trump will get a 6:3 conservative advantage on the supreme court without any resisstance.
- If the media and democrats pay non-stop attention to the supreme court nomination is shows voters the democrats just want to block what is the presidents' constitutional duty (to nominate judges).
- If Trump nominates Amy Barrett - he basically guarantees a huge turn out of religious voters in November.

 

[wendog33]

The following video after your post Dawgfather.

I seriously believe that Trump could not have answered those questions so cognitively or succinctly or as intelligently.

Shot down the narrative Sleepy Joe outa the park.

 

[CaptainJackson]

I think money is actually a big part of the problem for the Dems when it comes to electability. The party is so beholden to corporate donors it is resolute in its opposition to any move to adopt more progressive policies which would actually appeal to the many disenfranchised members of their base. That's why they didn't want a bar of Bernie. Some of his policies may have been a bit idealistic, but in this day and age, medicare for all, better access to education and a livable minimum wage should be a given policies for any left leaning party. In any case, if the Dems want to splash on a big advertising blitz, they really don't need Bloomberg's money. They spared no expense in trying to get Hillary Clinton elected in 2016 and it didn't work. Better to try and find a candidate voters will believe in. But that's just my take on it.

Dont forget bernie funded his campaign through no donations from corporate world