Will Trump win again???

This forum made possible through the generous support of SDN members, donors, and sponsors. Thank you.
Get help with your application

Use all the free resources available to you from SDN: articles, guides, expert advising, forums discussions, and school research.

Status
Not open for further replies.
Advertisement - Members don't see this ad
That's actually an argument I'd believe.
And now, the strategy to defend the President coming from one of his primary ****olds and practicing sychophants is to say his is basically incompetent and not up for the job—at least based in veracity.

****hold? I'm not seeing the connection. Would you elaborate?
 
You know we are at an inflection point of support when the National Review underscores the limits of the Presidents legal protections and makes dubious his haphazard strategy to confront both a whistleblower and the impeachment inquiry in general. This follows the same line of thinking (or lack thereof) as to his continual, albeit erroneous, assertion that the process lacks due process (it does not, as it is a political proceeding, and not a per se criminal one, which would then afford itself with the rules of evidence per the 6th amendment).

 
Advertisement - Members don't see this ad
In the last couple of days we've seen:

1) Biden called Warren "condescending", with an "elitist attitude" and a "my-way-or-the-highway attitude."
2) HRC say that Warren's M4A won't ever get passed.
3) Bill Gates say that he questions how "open-minded" Warren is and that if she aggressively taxed his wealth he wouldn't be on board.

Hmmm. Is there a strategy afoot to undermine Warren? Is she NOT the "chosen one?" Perhaps it has something to do with the unconstitutionality of the independence of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau? That's one of Warren's claims-to-fame. Maybe the courts are about to deliver a blow to Warren, so her fellow Dems are trying to preemptively pivot her supporters?


Supreme Court agrees to hear case challenging independence of Consumer Financial Protection Bureau
 
Unless you're a farmer. Or manufacturer. Business investment is down big also
You are correct. Booming huh—

About half of American workers are low-wage earners — a dark side of today’s tight labor market. A Brookings Institution study shows that 53 million workers make $10.22 an hour, yielding annual pay of $17,950. But there’s worse: These workers are the most likely to remain at their current income level, according to the study. That’s in part because the fastest-growing jobs are also low wage. These are the 10 fields that the workers are concentrated in:

Retail
Data and records
Food prep
Janitors
Material movers
Food and beverage servers
Construction workers
Material dispatchers
Motor vehicle operators
 
Bloomberg's entry into the race spells major trouble for Trump. OTOH, it will be entertaining to see Democrats vote for someone whose picture shows up as the dictionary definition of "corporate."
 
Bloomberg's entry into the race spells major trouble for Trump. OTOH, it will be entertaining to see Democrats vote for someone whose picture shows up as the dictionary definition of "corporate."
Pretty sure a lot of Dems as well as never trumpers like myself will happily vote Bloomberg
 
Bloomberg's entry into the race spells major trouble for Trump. OTOH, it will be entertaining to see Democrats vote for someone whose picture shows up as the dictionary definition of "corporate."

It sounds like he’s not satisfied with the current democratic offering. Unlike peons like myself who simply stay home when all the choices suck, people with billions can decide just as primary season is starting to just enter a primary and see how things go.

Bloomberg doesn’t seriously think he will win but my guess is he hopes that maybe he can take away critical votes from one of the other candidates or bring people out of the woodwork and then drop out and endorse another candidate.
 
It sounds like he’s not satisfied with the current democratic offering. Unlike peons like myself who simply stay home when all the choices suck, people with billions can decide just as primary season is starting to just enter a primary and see how things go.

Bloomberg doesn’t seriously think he will win but my guess is he hopes that maybe he can take away critical votes from one of the other candidates or bring people out of the woodwork and then drop out and endorse another candidate.
Mostly agree, but would add, having been involved in politics (for a two term Governor and a six term US Senator) I know for a fact he is operating from his own internal polling, and while he would like to be able to set some of the public policy objectives on a national level, there is some data/analytics there that says there is a path to the nomination.

You have to remember is Bloomberg is the original metrics and analytics politician and lives and dies by numbers and data. He is quite literally the opposite of Trump: an actual billionaire, self made, incredibly generous (just ask Hopkins) and super analytical to the point of being dry.
 
Mostly agree, but would add, having been involved in politics (for a two term Governor and a six term US Senator) I know for a fact he is operating from his own internal polling, and while he would like to be able to set some of the public policy objectives on a national level, there is some data/analytics there that says there is a path to the nomination.

You have to remember is Bloomberg is the original metrics and analytics politician and lives and dies by numbers and data. He is quite literally the opposite of Trump: an actual billionaire, self made, incredibly generous (just ask Hopkins) and super analytical to the point of being dry.

There’s a damn terminal named after the guy. It’s a dirty business politics but it’s a game he’s played before. I don’t know his specific aims but he might be freaking out about as much as I am about Liz Warren.
 
Bloomberg's entry into the race spells major trouble for Trump. OTOH, it will be entertaining to see Democrats vote for someone whose picture shows up as the dictionary definition of "corporate."

Nope. Bloomberg entering the race is good for Trump. Bloomberg will siphon off votes from Biden and Buttigieg and ensure a Warren nomination. Maybe he steers the democratic platform to the center a bit, but I doubt that.

Bloomberg is a billionaire and if there is one thing that billionaires fear the most, it’s death. They are obsessed with legacy to a point of pathology. He’s old. He wants one more feather in the cap of his legacy before he disappears into the ether.
 
Nope. Bloomberg entering the race is good for Trump. Bloomberg will siphon off votes from Biden and Buttigieg and ensure a Warren nomination. Maybe he steers the democratic platform to the center a bit, but I doubt that.

Bloomberg is a billionaire and if there is one thing that billionaires fear the most, it’s death. They are obsessed with legacy to a point of pathology. He’s old. He wants one more feather in the cap of his legacy before he disappears into the ether.

He really wants to poke that beast huh? What’s he have against Biden? He’d rather warren even get past the primary and run head to head with trump because to me that’s a nightmare.

I guess he will have a legacy alright maybe not the one he intended.
 
There’s a damn terminal named after the guy. It’s a dirty business politics but it’s a game he’s played before. I don’t know his specific aims but he might be freaking out about as much as I am about Liz Warren.
And he basically has funded free medical education as well as a host of other majors at John Hopkins for the next century with the largest donation to a university in history -at close to two billion dollars.
 
Nope. Bloomberg entering the race is good for Trump. Bloomberg will siphon off votes from Biden and Buttigieg and ensure a Warren nomination. Maybe he steers the democratic platform to the center a bit, but I doubt that.

Bloomberg is a billionaire and if there is one thing that billionaires fear the most, it’s death. They are obsessed with legacy to a point of pathology. He’s old. He wants one more feather in the cap of his legacy before he disappears into the ether.
Hmmm, partially agree, except the portion that he can’t win it. Why -Trump. First, Trump broke the political play book about tried and true strategies and thus MB can and will forge his own path. Two, Trump is flawed and lots of folks want change. Three, Trump is just 4/5 years younger but I don’t think there is a person alive that would not say MB is in better health. Finally, cause MB can self finance it provides a variety of latitude in his strategy and if he wants-he could out spend the entire RNC without the costly time suck and promise making of the fund raising trail.
 
Hmmm, partially agree, except the portion that he can’t win it. Why -Trump. First, Trump broke the political play book about tried and true strategies and thus MB can and will forge his own path. Two, Trump is flawed and lots of folks want change. Three, Trump is just 4/5 years younger but I don’t think there is a person alive that would not say MB is in better health. Finally, cause MB can self finance it provides a variety of latitude in his strategy and if he wants-he could out spend the entire RNC without the costly time suck and promise making of the fund raising trail.

Oh I’m not saying he can’t beat Trump...though I think that’s easier said than done. Bloomberg is an establishment guy through and through. Trump’s anti-establishment rhetoric is part of his appeal. Bloomberg is just another NYC billionaire (which is ironic because so is Trump), and if there is one thing the country can agree on, it’s a deep hatred of anything New York.

While Bloomberg may have a shot at beating Trump in a general election, he has no shot at winning the Democratic primary. He’ll just knock Buttigieg out of the race a little sooner.
 
Advertisement - Members don't see this ad
And now, the strategy to defend the President coming from one of his primary ****olds and practicing sychophants is to say his is basically incompetent and not up for the job—at least based in veracity.

Image result for friend like this anemones who needs cartoon


He's too stupid to have the intent to commit a crime.

1573177244849.jpeg
 

Attachments

  • 1573177244864.jpeg
    1573177244864.jpeg
    10.6 KB · Views: 102
Mostly agree, but would add, having been involved in politics (for a two term Governor and a six term US Senator) I know for a fact he is operating from his own internal polling, and while he would like to be able to set some of the public policy objectives on a national level, there is some data/analytics there that says there is a path to the nomination.

You have to remember is Bloomberg is the original metrics and analytics politician and lives and dies by numbers and data. He is quite literally the opposite of Trump: an actual billionaire, self made, incredibly generous (just ask Hopkins) and super analytical to the point of being dry.
Mostly agree, but would add, having been involved in politics (for a two term Governor and a six term US Senator) I know for a fact he is operating from his own internal polling, and while he would like to be able to set some of the public policy objectives on a national level, there is some data/analytics there that says there is a path to the nomination.

You have to remember is Bloomberg is the original metrics and analytics politician and lives and dies by numbers and data. He is quite literally the opposite of Trump: an actual billionaire, self made, incredibly generous (just ask Hopkins) and super analytical to the point of being dry.
I'd like to know more about Bloombergs involvement with the governor and a 42 year senator. Can you elaborate?
 
Got it. Thank you.
Sorry for the confusion. I will say this I have had several occasions to meet with MB and his staff (when he was Mayor) and having been around a fair amount of politicians in my adult life, he is certainly one of the most prepared and smartest. Clinton (Bill) is in the same category, but with charisma, but offset by sizable character flaws.
 
Hmmm, partially agree, except the portion that he can’t win it. Why -Trump. First, Trump broke the political play book about tried and true strategies and thus MB can and will forge his own path. Two, Trump is flawed and lots of folks want change. Three, Trump is just 4/5 years younger but I don’t think there is a person alive that would not say MB is in better health. Finally, cause MB can self finance it provides a variety of latitude in his strategy and if he wants-he could out spend the entire RNC without the costly time suck and promise making of the fund raising trail.

And people wonder why Bernie or Warren have gotten so much traction. Bloomberg is a nice enough guy, but what the masses are craving is not another corporatist nyc billionaire septuagenarian who will cater to the donor class. A candidate who Wall St loves is assuredly not one who has the middle class working stiffs’ best interests at heart.
 
We're only 60 posts from the record! Dont slow down now. Keep typing everybody! After 61 more posts, we can all declare victory and have a group hug. That's about the only positive thing to come out of this thread
Looks like we have the record for most posts in a thread! Bring it in for a group hug!!! That's about all we can accomplish with this thread. I dont espouse political opinions on social media as very few can be persuaded. It then deteriorates into disparaging comments about someone's party or political thinking. I have enjoyed reading various comments and the accompanying spin added to enhance their case. Examining the ideology is an interesting academic exercise, but while we are discussing politics, politicians are enriching themselves in DC while they distract us with identity politics and whatever shiny object they can. Look how many politicians leave DC wealthy, and in other cases much wealthier. Most voters are just following the shiny object with bared fangs and foaming mouths, unaware of the fleecing they are receiving. Its disappointing to see how easy it is to influence people. Get out and vote them all out!
 
And people wonder why Bernie or Warren have gotten so much traction. Bloomberg is a nice enough guy, but what the masses are craving is not another corporatist nyc billionaire septuagenarian who will cater to the donor class. A candidate who Wall St loves is assuredly not one who has the middle class working stiffs’ best interests at heart.

You are right. But, I am very happy to see Bloomberg in this race. He is the only Democrat worthy of the nomination (Howard Schultz was THE MAN) IMHO. The rest are senile, inexperienced or crazy left-wing nut jobs.

Bloomberg is super rich. He cares about the middle class and the poor. When you see your demise around the corner your focus changes a lot. Bloomberg cares about his legacy as he knows his time on earth is almost up. Gates and Buffet care as well. These guys were raised to give back to the USA and the world. Bloomberg wants to help others and end his life with accomplishments other than 48 billion in the bank.
 

This guy was ruthless during his prime. He crushed worker strikes and was relentless in keeping wages down. He epitomized everything wrong about unbridled capitalism in the late 1800s.

Yet, in the end he gave most of it back. This is what Bloomberg, Gates, Buffet will also do with their wealth. They aren't saints by any measure but they are also not the devils Warren makes them out to be either.

FYI, Carnegie was worth DOUBLE in today's dollars what Jeff Bezos is worth today.
 

This guy was ruthless during his prime. He crushed worker strikes and was relentless in keeping wages down. He epitomized everything wrong about unbridled capitalism in the late 1800s.

Yet, in the end he gave most of it back. This is what Bloomberg, Gates, Buffet will also do with their wealth. They aren't saints by any measure but they are also not the devils Warren makes them out to be either.

FYI, Carnegie was worth DOUBLE in today's dollars what Jeff Bezos is worth today.

He also built America. There's a fascinating series called "The Men Who Built America." Highly recommend it - it's inspiring to see what truly great men can accomplish.
 
Advertisement - Members don't see this ad
He also built America. There's a fascinating series called "The Men Who Built America." Highly recommend it - it's inspiring to see what truly great men can accomplish.

He was also a ruthless business man who opposed child labor and worker safety laws.


Sent from my iPhone using SDN mobile
 

This guy was ruthless during his prime. He crushed worker strikes and was relentless in keeping wages down. He epitomized everything wrong about unbridled capitalism in the late 1800s.

Yet, in the end he gave most of it back. This is what Bloomberg, Gates, Buffet will also do with their wealth. They aren't saints by any measure but they are also not the devils Warren makes them out to be either.

FYI, Carnegie was worth DOUBLE in today's dollars what Jeff Bezos is worth today.

Their wealth as a percentage of gdp is not even in the same ballpark.
 
You are right. But, I am very happy to see Bloomberg in this race. He is the only Democrat worthy of the nomination (Howard Schultz was THE MAN) IMHO. The rest are senile, inexperienced or crazy left-wing nut jobs.

Bloomberg is super rich. He cares about the middle class and the poor. When you see your demise around the corner your focus changes a lot. Bloomberg cares about his legacy as he knows his time on earth is almost up. Gates and Buffet care as well. These guys were raised to give back to the USA and the world. Bloomberg wants to help others and end his life with accomplishments other than 48 billion in the bank.

America needs an actual populist, not a plutocrat who will throw some top round to the middle class and a ribeye cap to the donor class and then tell the middle class that both cuts are equally good.

Take the 30,000 ft view for a second and consider how obscene it is that gates or buffet or Bloomberg can utter two sentences and command this much political power and/or headline grabbing attention.

We need to be moving in the direction of making campaign funding public only, not in the direction of nominating a guy who can throw $100 million at an election like it's nothing.
 

This guy was ruthless during his prime. He crushed worker strikes and was relentless in keeping wages down. He epitomized everything wrong about unbridled capitalism in the late 1800s.

Yet, in the end he gave most of it back. This is what Bloomberg, Gates, Buffet will also do with their wealth. They aren't saints by any measure but they are also not the devils Warren makes them out to be either.

FYI, Carnegie was worth DOUBLE in today's dollars what Jeff Bezos is worth today.

All true. But how you live your life and the lives you touch matters. Did he give it back as a way of trying to buy his way into heaven? Maybe. I don't know.

I personally gave little to charity until my kids education and my retirement were fully funded. Since then I have donated copiously as opposed to expanding my lifestyle. I always admired those who tithe or give a percentage of their net worth annually before those goals have been met.
 
You are right. But, I am very happy to see Bloomberg in this race. He is the only Democrat worthy of the nomination (Howard Schultz was THE MAN) IMHO. The rest are senile, inexperienced or crazy left-wing nut jobs.

Bloomberg is super rich. He cares about the middle class and the poor. When you see your demise around the corner your focus changes a lot. Bloomberg cares about his legacy as he knows his time on earth is almost up. Gates and Buffet care as well. These guys were raised to give back to the USA and the world. Bloomberg wants to help others and end his life with accomplishments other than 48 billion in the bank.

He cares enough about the poor to “stop and frisk” them. Where were all the second amendment constitutionalists then?
 
He also built America. There's a fascinating series called "The Men Who Built America." Highly recommend it - it's inspiring to see what truly great men can accomplish.

And Stalin built and industrialized Russia...

Greatness is always a matter of perspective.
 
He cares enough about the poor to “stop and frisk” them. Where were all the second amendment constitutionalists then?

very hard to get a concealed carry in NYC. Based on local existing laws they had no leg to stand on. I do question on how law enforcement determined who to stop and frisk.
 
He was also a ruthless business man who opposed child labor and worker safety laws.


Sent from my iPhone using SDN mobile

He was also a visionary who played a pivotal role in changing America into the superpower it is. It was quite common for children to work in those days, so his approach wasn't exactly villainous relative to the rest of the world's.

As it turns out, men who create great things are generally complex. We can go back and forth all day about any historical figure - nobody is perfect, and the consequence of being great is that mistakes made along the way are correspondingly devastating.
 
America needs an actual populist, not a plutocrat who will throw some top round to the middle class and a ribeye cap to the donor class and then tell the middle class that both cuts are equally good.

Take the 30,000 ft view for a second and consider how obscene it is that gates or buffet or Bloomberg can utter two sentences and command this much political power and/or headline grabbing attention.

We need to be moving in the direction of making campaign funding public only, not in the direction of nominating a guy who can throw $100 million at an election like it's nothing.


You are correct again. I would guess 40% of the Democrat base will never vote for another NY Billionaire even one like Bloomberg. I do like seeing more reasonable moderates in the race because this country needs someone in the middle. The vast majority of all voters are moderates so a Bloomberg has appeal to many mainstream voters.
 
You are correct again. I would guess 40% of the Democrat base will never vote for another NY Billionaire even one like Bloomberg. I do like seeing more reasonable moderates in the race because this country needs someone in the middle. The vast majority of all voters are moderates so a Bloomberg has appeal to many mainstream voters.

Why exactly is Bloomberg a moderate again? He wants the government to dictate your soda consumption. I hardly believe that’s where his ideas of government intervention stop. Just being more center of Warren and Sanders doesn’t make you moderate. Schultz and Delaney are the only moderates I’m aware of this cycle and one didn’t run while the other never made so much as a splash. I shudder to think who the Republican candidate will be after Trump.
 
Virginia going blue was an easily predicted consequence of the DC suburbs spilling further and further into the state. It's been proceeding in slow motion for 10 or 20 years now. I'm not sure we can credit the voters in my fine state with doing anything except checking the D or R box the same way they and their parents always have. There are just more of the D-checkers living in northern Virginia than there were a few years ago. The simple truth is that it's not a swing state any more.
 
Why exactly is Bloomberg a moderate again? He wants the government to dictate your soda consumption. I hardly believe that’s where his ideas of government intervention stop. Just being more center of Warren and Sanders doesn’t make you moderate. Schultz and Delaney are the only moderates I’m aware of this cycle and one didn’t run while the other never made so much as a splash. I shudder to think who the Republican candidate will be after Trump.

Trump's a one-off phenomenon as personality goes, and whoever follows will be more in line with the personality we typically associate with politicians.

As policy goes, Trump is extraordinarily moderate.
 
Advertisement - Members don't see this ad
You, over the last 30 years— Virginia has become wealthier, more diverse, and more crowded. (Which is not all bad- my wife and one of my Ds did medical school in the area, and as such we have different experiences staring from the late 80s to just several years ago) The population has grown by 42 percent, from 6 million in 1990 to 8.5 million. Population density has increased by 38 percent, from 156 people per square mile to 215. Mean travel time to work has increased from 24 minutes to 28 minutes. The median home price (in 2018 dollars) has gone from $169,000 to $256,000. Density equals Democrats.

The number of Virginians born overseas has skyrocketed from 5 percent to 12 percent. The Hispanic population has gone from 3 percent to 10 percent. The Asian community has grown from 2 percent to 7 percent. In 1990, 7 percent of people 5 years and older spoke a language other than English at home. In 2018 the number was 16 percent.

If educational attainment is a proxy for class, Virginia has undergone bourgeoisification. The number of adults with a bachelor’s degree or higher has shot up from 25 percent of the state to 38 percent. As baccalaureates multiplied, they swapped partisan affiliation. Many of the Yuppies of the ’80s, Bobos of the ’90s, and Security Moms of the ’00s now march in the Resistance. Per the NR— How States Like Virginia Go Blue | National Review
 
You, over the last 30 years— Virginia has become wealthier, more diverse, and more crowded. (Which is not all bad- my wife and one of my Ds did medical school in the area, and as such we have different experiences staring from the late 80s to just several years ago) The population has grown by 42 percent, from 6 million in 1990 to 8.5 million. Population density has increased by 38 percent, from 156 people per square mile to 215. Mean travel time to work has increased from 24 minutes to 28 minutes. The median home price (in 2018 dollars) has gone from $169,000 to $256,000. Density equals Democrats.

The number of Virginians born overseas has skyrocketed from 5 percent to 12 percent. The Hispanic population has gone from 3 percent to 10 percent. The Asian community has grown from 2 percent to 7 percent. In 1990, 7 percent of people 5 years and older spoke a language other than English at home. In 2018 the number was 16 percent.

If educational attainment is a proxy for class, Virginia has undergone bourgeoisification. The number of adults with a bachelor’s degree or higher has shot up from 25 percent of the state to 38 percent. As baccalaureates multiplied, they swapped partisan affiliation. Many of the Yuppies of the ’80s, Bobos of the ’90s, and Security Moms of the ’00s now march in the Resistance. Per the NR— How States Like Virginia Go Blue | National Review
My problem with this - and I don’t really - is that the National Review makes insinuation that this is bad? Much more educated, affluent and diverse-seems like that’s the goal of any cosmopolitan and vibrant city.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.