Is the plan to let Biden secure the nomination then replace him with ??????

[churchmouse]

How so? With the Hillary / Bernie thing? Wasn't that in their rules that they could just make a switch?

Hillary stole it from the bern.

 

[CampingJosh]

He is Abe Simpson, not your party's Ronald Reagan

There have been no general elections where I have voted for more Democrats than Republicans.

I just can't get on board with the nationalism and protectionism that has become the Republican Party's platform in the last few years.

 

[mmpsteve]

There have been no general elections where I have voted for more Democrats than Republicans.

I just can't get on board with the nationalism and protectionism that has become the Republican Party's platform in the last few years.

Right, because the Dem Party platform is so much more impressive. Apply purple if you feel appropriate.

.

 

[KG1]

There have been no general elections where I have voted for more Democrats than Republicans.

I just can't get on board with the nationalism and protectionism that has become the Republican Party's platform in the last few years.

How would you feel about a nationalist policy of de-coupling from China given the current situation that has exposed our vulnerability?

 

[BugI02]

There have been no general elections where I have voted for more Democrats than Republicans.

I just can't get on board with the nationalism and protectionism that has become the Republican Party's platform in the last few years.

Were you happier with the globalism/off-shoring/import cheap labor to keep the Chamber happy shtick that was the Republican Part's platform pre-Trump? Were you happy with a party that gave you Mitt Romney as a candidate, for God's sake!

Forgive me, but so much Trump criticism seems to be of recent vintage and transactional rather than principled

 

[KG1]

There have been no general elections where I have voted for more Democrats than Republicans.

I just can't get on board with the nationalism and protectionism that has become the Republican Party's platform in the last few years.

I look at it this way. I got on board with a policy platform proposal of protecting OUR national interest for a change.

 

[CampingJosh]

Were you happier with the globalism/off-shoring/import cheap labor to keep the Chamber happy shtick that was the Republican Part's platform pre-Trump?

Yes.

Edit to add: Those aren't necessary how I would design a party platform, but I would be happy to go back to that.

 

[CampingJosh]

I look at it this way. I got on board with a policy platform proposal of protecting OUR national interest for a change.

We can't claim that our president is "the leader of the free world" if we want nothing to do with the rest of the world.

I don't see any reason to think that "OUR national interest" has to be adversarial toward our neighbors and trade partners.

 

[CampingJosh]

How would you feel about a nationalist policy of de-coupling from China given the current situation that has exposed our vulnerability?

Wouldn't make a difference. Unless you want absolute isolationism in such a way that even American aren't free (and probably even then), this thing was going to spread globally anyway.

 

[Libertarian01]

Biden is strongly afflicted with the horrible foot-in-mouth disease. He may well torpedo his own campaign.

It ain't over till it's over.

Regards,

Doug

 

[Twangbanger]

The election is Trump's to lose at this point. Every great president that I can think of has had a crisis of some sort, of a magnitude that raises the awareness of a broad section of the citizenry, and has risen to the occasion.

Trump is now faced with such a crisis. If he responds well (despite small missteps to date) and the crisis dissipates, he's re-elected. Even moderate democrats will be loathe to vote against a savior.

If he doesn't respond, he's proved he's not up to the task and he will be, rightfully, out on his ear.

Tell it to George HW Bush. Kuwait was judged a success, the last "war" that was popularly considered to have been handled well by an American President (try and quibble with semantics on that as you will, but it does not change facts). And yet he was still bounced on his ear. You can assign any reason you want, but the actual reason was that a _new_ recession began on his watch. All such Presidents in the modern era are voted out.

Trying to "competently manage" a recession is like trying to pick up a turd by the clean end. The only way to competently manage a recession, is to end it.

I simply have a different opinion. I believe that as long as Biden picks a nice*, white** woman as Veep, the election is his to lose.

* not a harpy
** 1/1024~1/4 or thereabouts

 

[Tombs]

The election is Trump's to lose at this point. Every great president that I can think of has had a crisis of some sort, of a magnitude that raises the awareness of a broad section of the citizenry, and has risen to the occasion.

Trump is now faced with such a crisis. If he responds well (despite small missteps to date) and the crisis dissipates, he's re-elected. Even moderate democrats will be loathe to vote against a savior.

If he doesn't respond, he's proved he's not up to the task and he will be, rightfully, out on his ear.

Considering he's attempting to drop $1k in every citizen's wallet every month until this crisis is over, and seems to have universal support from both sides of the isle to do it... It's hard to imagine anything more motivating than raw cash.

Finally a bailout for the common man instead of billionaires.

 

[KG1]

Wouldn't make a difference. Unless you want absolute isolationism in such a way that even American aren't free (and probably even then), this thing was going to spread globally anyway.

I'm not talking about the spread of a global pandemic. I'm referring to the aftermath such as our dependence on China for critical manufacturing of things such as pharmaceuticals for example.

 

[churchmouse]

We can't claim that our president is "the leader of the free world" if we want nothing to do with the rest of the world.

I don't see any reason to think that "OUR national interest" has to be adversarial toward our neighbors and trade partners.

Only if it fits their way of dealing with us.

 

[KG1]

We can't claim that our president is "the leader of the free world" if we want nothing to do with the rest of the world.

I don't see any reason to think that "OUR national interest" has to be adversarial toward our neighbors and trade partners.

Looking out for our national interests while at the same time engaging neighbors and trade partners does'nt have to be mutually exclusive.

 

[KG1]

Yes.

Edit to add: Those aren't necessary how I would design a party platform, but I would be happy to go back to that.

You would'nt happen to have a picture of Paul Ryan hanging in a prominent place would you?

 

[CampingJosh]

Considering he's attempting to drop $1k in every citizen's wallet every month until this crisis is over, and seems to have universal support from both sides of the isle to do it... It's hard to imagine anything more motivating than raw cash.

Finally a bailout for the common man instead of billionaires.

Weren't we all supposed to hate this plan when it was nanny-state government, running up the national debt, etc.? I don't remember reading any positive mention of Yang anywhere on INGO when this was his idea.

Only if it fits their way of dealing with us.

Which country has been holding back the freedom, security, and prosperity of the American people?

I can think of good arguments for two, both of which are giant territories in Asia. Trump has hurt our relationships with more than those two.

Looking out for our national interests while at the same time engaging neighbors and trade partners does'nt have to be mutually exclusive.

Agreed. That was my point.

Trump seems to be trying to make it so that they are exclusive. He seems more interested in getting political wins than setting up win-win relationships that create longterm stability with people around the world.

You would'nt happen to have a picture of Paul Ryan hanging in a prominent place would you?

I would gladly take Ryan's conservatism over Trump's nationalism.

 

[churchmouse]

Weren't we all supposed to hate this plan when it was nanny-state government, running up the national debt, etc.? I don't remember reading any positive mention of Yang anywhere on INGO when this was his idea.



Which country has been holding back the freedom, security, and prosperity of the American people?

I can think of good arguments for two, both of which are giant territories in Asia. Trump has hurt our relationships with more than those two.



Agreed. That was my point.

Trump seems to be trying to make it so that they are exclusive. He seems more interested in getting political wins than setting up win-win relationships that create longterm stability with people around the world.



I would gladly take Ryan's conservatism over Trump's nationalism.

In this were you or I in the negotiations with any of those country's.

Nope. Not me. And I will not take what the spinning heads in the MSM say about anything even the color of the sky. We have zero idea what was said or demanded. Trump is clipping the fat off of this. That's what's up here. So lets take this from another angle. Not the one told to us by a MSM with a viral case of TDS.

I am tired of supplying and bowing down to these people.

Now I know exactly what you will respond with but I am way cool with it.

This is not a kind world we live in and it gets rougher by the minute.

 

[KG1]

Weren't we all supposed to hate this plan when it was nanny-state government, running up the national debt, etc.? I don't remember reading any positive mention of Yang anywhere on INGO when this was his idea.



Which country has been holding back the freedom, security, and prosperity of the American people?

I can think of good arguments for two, both of which are giant territories in Asia. Trump has hurt our relationships with more than those two.



Agreed. That was my point.

Trump seems to be trying to make it so that they are exclusive. He seems more interested in getting political wins than setting up win-win relationships that create longterm stability with people around the world.



I would gladly take Ryan's conservatism over Trump's nationalism.

Ryan was just wasting time occupying the Speaker Chair. He advanced nothing of consequence.

 

[DRob]

Biden has committed to a female VP. Were he to win I think the most likely scenario is that he serves a few months then gets Epsteined.

That depends on whether he picks (is it really his pick?) Hillary or Oprah!