|
|
Post by williamtsherman on Jul 11, 2024 11:30:57 GMT -6
You are so full of shit you think your opinions are the truth. Devastating retort, Rusty. Just devastating. |
|
|
|
Post by williamtsherman on Jul 11, 2024 11:43:01 GMT -6
Regardless of your own political preferences, what tactical move would you suggest the Democrats make at this point? It's a very interesting and finely balanced question.
1) Stay with the 20% of Joe Biden's brain that's still left over from what was never a very high functioning brain in its best days.
2) Switch to Kamala Harris who ran for president for a full year in 2020, couldn't crack 3% among Democratic primary voters and was kicked to the curb by her doners prior to the Iowa caucus.
3) Jump over Harris to someone else, which will send into a hysterical screeching frenzy the highly vocal and influential arm of the Democratic party for whom identity politics is EVERYTHING.
Boy, I guess it seemed like a good idea to cover up Biden's condition at the time, eh? I mean, while you were getting away with it.
For the record, I would recommend #2 as the least awful choice.
|
|
|
|
Post by 00hmh on Jul 11, 2024 12:47:44 GMT -6
Regardless of your own political preferences, what tactical move would you suggest the Democrats make at this point? It's a very interesting and finely balanced question. Good question.
The most awful choice is seeing Trump reelected to most Democrats, so I suggest they will not worry a whole lot about defection of the faithful. The battle of old men does hide a Trump Achilles heel of his own age. The more the Democrats just put Trump and his rambling incoherent appeals to his most faithful out there, the better chance they have. I can't see him tacking to the middle very well.
Trump seems invulnerable in all but a few red leaning states, anyway. Those few are due to Trump himself, or horrible down ticket choices like North Carolina, certainly not due to any great affection for Biden. Democrats choosing the most left candidate would hurt there a bit.
A boring middle of the road establishment candidate has some risk of not bringing out the most left Democrats but that is less an issue than losing a moderate swing vote. Kamala is boring enough.
The identity politics is a double edged sword, anyway. You run against any identity (Christian nationalist, white nationalist, the rich, the poor, LBGQ whatever, or even the bogey man immigrant) that plays on fears which motivate your own base, but then it also energizes that identity group itself, and a fair number of people who aren't in but aren't scared by it, too, and think it is unfair or exaggerated.
|
|
|
|
Post by JacksonStreetElite on Jul 11, 2024 13:11:42 GMT -6
Regardless of your own political preferences, what tactical move would you suggest the Democrats make at this point? It's a very interesting and finely balanced question. 1) Stay with the 20% of Joe Biden's brain that's still left over from what was never a very high functioning brain in its best days. 2) Switch to Kamala Harris who ran for president for a full year in 2020, couldn't crack 3% among Democratic primary voters and was kicked to the curb by her doners prior to the Iowa caucus. 3) Jump over Harris to someone else, which will send into a hysterical screeching frenzy the highly vocal and influential arm of the Democratic party for whom identity politics is EVERYTHING. Boy, I guess it seemed like a good idea to cover up Biden's condition at the time, eh? I mean, while you were getting away with it. For the record, I would recommend #2 as the least awful choice. It's gotta be #2. Both campaigns are at their best when the focus is on the other guy, because they are both such horrible candidates. Reset with Kamala, tell her to shut her mouth (cause the more she talks the less she's liked), and return the focus on Trump. I told a friend one time that the 2016 election was one of the worst days in recent American history, and he thought I meant the election of Donald Trump, but I actually meant the only two options being such insanely horrible options. Each election it has just gotten worse. I'm no Martin O'Malley fan, but if he'd somehow beaten Clinton and Sanders for the 2016 democratic spot I think the country would be in a lot better place right now. |
|
|
|
Post by williamtsherman on Jul 11, 2024 14:40:11 GMT -6
Kamala has that sing songy "i'm trying to explain things to a particularly backwards 3rd-grade special needs class" sort of voice that people have an instinctive aversion to. Especially men.
|
|
|
|
Post by 00hmh on Jul 11, 2024 15:14:44 GMT -6
Well just to start at the top " End no fault divorce" and "Ban contraceptives" are both entirely false and fabricated from nothing in the original document. In the teeth pulling department, I've been looking at the Project 2025 document. It is not very exciting reading...
Since no fault divorce is a state matter, it is not addressed. In other legislative proposals by the same groups that advised Project 2025 curtailing no fault divorce is advocated.
However on page 4 it does invite the camel's nose under the tent flap:
"It’s time for policymakers to elevate family authority, formation, and cohesion as their top priority and even use government power, including through the tax code, to restore the American family"
There are numerous policy statements about promoting "stable" traditional families. Making divorce more difficult is part of the agenda of several groups advising Project 2025.
On abortion not only are there numerous actions under HHS proposed at and following page 447 , but the Justice Department will pursue criminal prosecution of several abortion related federal laws, notably the Comstock Act.
On page 562 referring to the Comstock Act:
Announcing a Campaign to Enforce the Criminal Prohibitions in 18 U.S. Code §§ 1461 and 1462 Against Providers and Distributors of Abortion Pills That Use the Mail. Federal law prohibits mailing “[e]very article, instrument, substance, drug, medicine, or thing which is advertised or described in a manner calculated to lead another to use or apply it for producing abortion.” Following the Supreme Court’s decision in Dobbs, there is now no federal prohibition on the enforcement of this statute. The Department of Justice in the next conservative Administration should therefore announce its intent to enforce federal law
This would ban abortions by use of the two drugs most commonly used for inexpensive very safe medical abortion. It MIGHT easily be applied to ban use of the mail to to deliver medical supplies to hospitals or doctors for use in abortion procedures.
Since some groups consider birth control medication actually causes an abortion the Comstock Act MIGHT be applied to some contraception methods.
On contraception, under HHS sections the Project Document proposes to:
Eliminate men’s preventive services from the women’s preventive services mandate. In December 2021, HRSA updated its women’s preventive services guidelines to include male condoms after claiming for years that it had no authority to do so because Congress explicitly limited the mandate to “women’s” preventive care and screenings. HRSA should not incorporate exclusively male contraceptive methods into guidelines that specify they encompass only women’s services.
Eliminate the week-after-pill from the contraceptive mandate as a potential abortifacient. One of the emergency contraceptives covered under the HRSA preventive services guidelines is Ella (ulipristal acetate). Like its close cousin, the abortion pill mifepristone, Ella is a progesterone blocker and can prevent a recently fertilized embryo from implanting in a woman’s uterus. HRSA should eliminate this potential abortifacient...
This would at the least make contraception more expensive, too expensive for some, and would take an important drug used for contraception out of play.
|
|
|
|
Post by 00hmh on Jul 11, 2024 15:50:33 GMT -6
Regardless of your own political preferences, what tactical move would you suggest the Democrats make at this point? It's a very interesting and finely balanced question. Both campaigns are at their best when the focus is on the other guy, because they are both such horrible candidates. Reset with Kamala, tell her to shut her mouth (cause the more she talks the less she's liked), and return the focus on Trump... I'm no Martin O'Malley fan, but if he'd somehow beaten Clinton and Sanders for the 2016 democratic spot I think the country would be in a lot better place right now. I agree. Although almost any other candidate would have been less hated than Hillary. Sanders had his moment rallying the left, and that scared the mainstream Dem power brokers. Without Hillary it's not clear whether he would have prevailed, similar to the disastrous but much more likable George McGovern back in the day.
The party system of politics means we don't get the best candidates, we usually get either those most "popular" within each party, or "best funded." That increasingly means nobody cares about the mainstream of either party who in the past produced less divisive candidates who could compromise, and govern.
|
|
|
|
Post by williamtsherman on Jul 11, 2024 16:52:09 GMT -6
Hello Cleveland!
HELLO CLEVELAND!
|
|
|
|
Post by fanatic4bsu on Jul 11, 2024 17:45:10 GMT -6
Did I just hear Biden refer to Trump as Vice President Trump when talking about Kamala Harris…yep, I did.
I can’t vote for either one of them…these are the two best options to be President of the United States?
|
|
|
|
Post by chirpchirpcards on Jul 13, 2024 21:19:04 GMT -6
Nothing says "Left is the side of peace and reason" like an assassination attempt
|
|
dcat
Freshman
Posts: 97
|
Post by dcat on Jul 14, 2024 6:15:04 GMT -6
Nothing says "Left is the side of peace and reason" like an assassination attempt True. And don't forget it's the left that is walking us into a nuclear war. Today's left is a far cry from the left of 60's & 70's. |
|
|
|
Post by williamtsherman on Jul 14, 2024 7:05:04 GMT -6
In a campaign, there is always a balance between firing up your base for turnout purposes and convincing the undecideds. About now, I would think Trump's base is about as fired up as a base can be. I would think he should focus on the undecideds at this point. Also, the leadership of the secret service has some questions to answer, but seeing the agents put their own bodies about Trumps made me choke up a bit.  |
|
|
|
Post by chirpchirpcards on Jul 14, 2024 9:02:30 GMT -6
|
|
|
|
Post by williamtsherman on Jul 14, 2024 10:50:19 GMT -6
|
|
|
|
Post by 00hmh on Jul 14, 2024 12:42:36 GMT -6
Stupid young men with access to deadly weapons...
|
|
