So what Lizzo is a hostage now? How does she look uncomfortable. You people are embarrassing yourself, yes you people.
I read Deckard's post and i know you dislike Trump being President as much he does but Democrats cannot run as if he is the scourge of the earth. You'll probably disagree but in terms of everyday functionality,, the government is fine. Embarrassing the country is a matter of opinion. In terms of strategy when there is a candidate, the candidate has to debate as an equal foe. Not taking him seriously is a prominent problem for the loas. Secondly the how did we let this happen to begin with mantra is an insult to the swing voters you're trying to win back. The argument against the incumbent has to be how has your life been affected by this administration. Not everyone is looking down on us.
I don't think anyone here has a problem with an honest debate about the candidates and their qualifications and whether they'd make a good President. In Pete's case, experience in government and life, lack of running large organizations, lack of connection with minority communities, etc are all legit arguments against him. As highly as I think of him, I've said numerous times that I'm not sure I see a path for him to win the primary because of many of these issues. But the fact that he signed NDA's for a job and worked for a consulting company and thus is questionable is simply not a valid criticism. That's just a smear tactic, and I think that's the garbage @Deckard was referencing.
You know me so well! Well, who is to say what's a valid criticism and what's a smear? I don't agree with Cometswin about how evil McKinsey is and what it says about Mayor Pete. But every voter should decide for themselves what are the important things to govern how they vote. Deck is implying Comet is morally culpable for the outcome of the election if he expresses an unapproved opinion. That's problematic.
Facts and evidence, for starters. Does anyone here believe that everyone who signed an NDA as a routine part of their job is automatically suspect when running for President? If not, then using it against one candidate is a smear and not a valid criticism where there's nothing beyond that in the argument. Do you really see the two as in the eye of the beholder? If I say Obama is secretly a Muslim extremist hellbent on destroying the US from within, without any evidence to support my claim, can we not say it's a smear as opposed to a valid criticism? We have to just say "well, it COULD be true, who's to say?!"
I think you're going a bit far afield from the post I objected to. Don't know if Deck would even agree with your framework of baseless smears vs valid criticisms anyway. To take an example, I said I wouldn't vote for Clinton in 2016 (and I didn't) on the basis that she circumvented government transparency law by conducting official business by private email. That's not a smear -- she really did do that, admitted it, and it's not disputed at all. By your framework, it's valid criticism. But Deck still thinks that makes me complicit in Trump's victory and all of his subsequent crimes.
No, I don't think that at all, JV. I do think you overreacted to my post, which wasn't directed at you. I also think you were short sighted not to see the potential consequences of trump being elected. They were obvious to me. However, you weren't the only one. My post was aimed at those I described in my post. In my humble opinion, you don't fit that description. I voted for President Obama back in 2008 in the primary, by the way. It isn't like I am a big fan of Ms Clinton. Heck, the woman doesn't know how to dress herself. How weird is that? However, she was obviously the better choice in 2016, warts and all. A majority of 3,000,000 Americans thought so. The antiquated, bizarre Electoral College system we have now certainly played its role, as did the Russians. All 16 or so national security agencies this country possesses think that Russia interfered in that election (and think they will attempt to interfere in 2020), despite trump's manic spewing of lies to the contrary. However, it is my belief that had those who couldn't bring themselves to vote for Ms Clinton, for whatever reason (yes, even your own, but I'm not mad at you), but particularly because they believed that she somehow manipulated the "system" in place by the Democratic Party to select its nominee in order to "prevent" Senator Bernie Sanders from getting the nomination instead (who isn't even a Democrat), as if he had a legitimate chance of doing so (he didn't), who I find the most exasperating. It would have made the difference, in my opinion. They still don't admit that they screwed up.
Maybe I overreacted or maybe you didn't recognize all the implications of what you said. I still don't really agree with you though. I mean, I do agree that Trump winning was the worst possible outcome and the thing to be most avoided in 2016. And I do think it is possible that Sanders' candidacy might have been the spoiler for Clinton in the general election. But, I still do not agree that Bernie Bros should not have been fervent in their support of him or shouldn't have been resentful of how the primary turned out. I don't think that primary was unfair, but voters don't owe anything to any candidate or party. They should say what they think, even if it's stupid, and vote how they want. Yeah, we ended up with a criminal president in the end, but I wouldn't change it. That election was a catalyst for change in the country that was already festering under the surface. Now we have it out and see what we'll become.
Good grief, JV. You’re all over the map, with all due respect. I’m not going to dissect every part of your post like some might, but I found this line remarkable. “Yeah, we ended up with a criminal president in the end, but I wouldn't change it. That election was a catalyst for change in the country that was already festering under the surface. Now we have it out and see what we'll become.” I just don’t understand that reasoning at all. We’ve seen trump and McConnell push through dozens of right wing federal judges, many with lifetime appointments and many the American Bar Association considers unqualified to be any kind of judge, much less being given such important positions. The pair have pushed through 2 very conservative Supreme Court judges after McConnell not even giving President Obama’s choice for a vacant seat on the court a hearing. That’s not even taking into account how much damage trump has done to this nation’s environment, his immigration policies, clearly driven by racism, his withdrawal from the Paris Accord on climate change. Heck, the list of things the man has done in the realm of foreign policy that has hurt the United States, our friends, and our allies is too long to list here. You wouldn’t change the outcome of the 2016 election, given the chance? Seriously? You see an actual value in that outcome for the country over the last three years and going forward? I simply don’t get it.
apparently young people hate Mayor Pete. who knew https://www.nytimes.com/2019/12/16/magazine/pete-buttigieg.html
I do find some of the complaints about his "privilege ridiculous in terms of many of these people come from people come from similar backgrounds. For me as a black man white guilt does nothing for me. It's condescending really but unfortunately there are other black people who soak it up.
I’m essentially a pacifist, who’s always had an interest in military history, equipment, and fiction. Go figure. Having said that, Hitler? Yeah, I think I would. Of course, I’m a huge fan of science fiction.
