The 2020 Presidential campaign.

Cameron wrote:

Robert J Sakimano wrote: wow - so far this afternoon, I've been called a "raving lunatic" and a "piece of shit"..

it's a good thing I don't take internet message boards seriously or I'd have to post a manifesto and move to Mio.

I have no respect for you. You are a smug, ignorant gadfly, and one of the most small minded human beings I have ever encountered.

You're almost as bad as steve.

**Googles 'ignorant gadfly'**

okay.. so now - just this afternoon - I've been called a "raving lunatic", a "piece of shit" and an "ignorant gadfly" (which apparently is an insect of some sort).

I'm gonna go sit on the deck and drink expensive Scotch.

sincerely,

bob

Robert J Sakimano
- Raving Lunatic
- Piece of Shit
- Ignorant Gadfly

steveschneider wrote:Just checked FB (yes I've logged on for the pandemic and yes the site sucks), a lot of cry babies out.

'Great a Rapist vs a Rapist'.

'a whole lotta people want somebody with literal shit for brains to be running this country.'

Literally seeing about 20 posts of pure vitriol towards Biden. At the end of the day I don't think these people got just how toxic the whole movement became. That's what happens when you believe you are morally superior and you fall in love with a cause as a group.

No one else seemed to want to talk about it when I brought it up a page or two back. But I'll go on record: I don't think he forcibly fingered that lady in a hallway. I think he probably did his regular creepy uncle shit, which is basically how her story went for a decade, but then she saw the me too explosion and got into Bernie and saw her chance.

But I find it extremely telling that there is basically the same amount of evidence here as there was with Kavanaugh, yet the response has been vastly different from the media and hypocrites like Alyssa Milano.

In summation, I have always thought "believe all women" was a silly and impracticable stance. Some women are liars.

Cameron wrote:

kingstonlake wrote:

Name a great, hell good one, in the Dem primary. Hint, its a trick question.

Other side of the coin: name a worse candidate in the field than Biden (of the ones that made it to SC, not counting the Marianne Willamsons of the world). I'll give you Bloomberg. You wanna argue any of the others?

If you have a good message or platform (supposedly) and fail to make it resonate with voters I'm gonna say it makes you infinitely worse than a guy who represents whats wrong with D.C. establishment, can't remember what day it is, or what he ate for breakfast.

Cameron wrote:

steveschneider wrote:Just checked FB (yes I've logged on for the pandemic and yes the site sucks), a lot of cry babies out.

'Great a Rapist vs a Rapist'.

'a whole lotta people want somebody with literal shit for brains to be running this country.'

Literally seeing about 20 posts of pure vitriol towards Biden. At the end of the day I don't think these people got just how toxic the whole movement became. That's what happens when you believe you are morally superior and you fall in love with a cause as a group.

No one else seemed to want to talk about it when I brought it up a page or two back. But I'll go on record: I don't think he forcibly fingered that lady in a hallway. I think he probably did his regular creepy uncle shit, which is basically how her story went for a decade, but then she saw the me too explosion and got into Bernie and saw her chance.

But I find it extremely telling that there is basically the same amount of evidence here as there was with Kavanaugh, yet the response has been vastly different from the media and hypocrites like Alyssa Milano.

In summation, I have always thought "believe all women" was a silly and impracticable stance. Some women are liars.

My boy Avenatti also had an accuser against Kavanaugh and no one believed her for a second. Fair or unfair some accusers just don't come off as credible.

Cameron wrote:

steveschneider wrote:

There were multiple candidates, this is who the voters picked.

This is who the voters of South Carolina picked. If the other moderates would have stayed in through Super Tuesday at least, I'm inclined to believe Biden is not the presumptive nominee today.

Biden won a lot more states than South Carolina.

Robert J Sakimano wrote:I'm gonna go sit on the deck and drink expensive Scotch.

sincerely,

bob

Robert J Sakimano
- Raving Lunatic
- Piece of Shit
- Ignorant Gadfly

Could you post your vitals? I'd like to see if anything is elevated.

I thought the party would be united, sounds like Bernie fans are going to have to put on a pair of diapers this coming November. I guess that's what happens when you hop on board one of the most toxic movements I've ever seen.

steveschneider wrote:

Cameron wrote:

This is who the voters of South Carolina picked. If the other moderates would have stayed in through Super Tuesday at least, I'm inclined to believe Biden is not the presumptive nominee today.

Biden won a lot more states than South Carolina.

I know. My point was that SC was a turning point. How many states had he won going into SC?

Biden beat the field of other moderates in precisely one state, then they all agreed to get out of his way.

Cameron wrote:

steveschneider wrote:

Biden won a lot more states than South Carolina.

I know. My point was that SC was a turning point. How many states had he won going into SC?

Biden beat the field of other moderates in precisely one state, then they all agreed to get out of his way.

I just think they understood the numbers. Unlike Bernie and Warren. Warren fucked Bernie as much as anybody else. There just wasn’t enough room for two far left candidates.

kingstonlake wrote:

Cameron wrote:

I know. My point was that SC was a turning point. How many states had he won going into SC?

Biden beat the field of other moderates in precisely one state, then they all agreed to get out of his way.

I just think they understood the numbers. Unlike Bernie and Warren. Warren fucked Bernie as much as anybody else. There just wasn’t enough room for two far left candidates.

No disagreement there.

But I really do think there was a path for a non-Biden moderate.

Cameron wrote:

kingstonlake wrote:

I just think they understood the numbers. Unlike Bernie and Warren. Warren fucked Bernie as much as anybody else. There just wasn’t enough room for two far left candidates.

No disagreement there.

But I really do think there was a path for a non-Biden moderate.

Probably. Which makes it even more confounding that other moderates focused so much on Iowa and NH. Honestly fuck them two states. I get it. You have to stay relevant but not a microcosm of America. You want to end Biden, you had to do it in SC. I guess in the end it’s a money game. Joe had enough to make it to SC

Other Teams Pursuing That wrote:Bob, if posting about politics meant someone is upset, you’d be considered a raging lunatic. Self Awareness, try it sometime.

Here's the full quote for the guy playing the victim card.

kingstonlake wrote:

Robert J Sakimano wrote:I'm gonna go sit on the deck and drink expensive Scotch.

sincerely,

bob

Robert J Sakimano
- Raving Lunatic
- Piece of Shit
- Ignorant Gadfly

Could you post your vitals? I'd like to see if anything is elevated.

at the risk of upsetting someone:

5'10"
168 lbs
32X32
RHR = 42 bpm
BP = 118/68

Thanks for checking dude!

Other Teams Pursuing That wrote:

Other Teams Pursuing That wrote:Bob, if posting about politics meant someone is upset, you’d be considered a raging lunatic. Self Awareness, try it sometime.

Here's the full quote for the guy playing the victim card.

it's cool dude. I don't take message boardin' seriously.

Funny Story (hope it doesn't offend anyone):

So, after my expensive Scotch I went for a walk through the seedy streets of my East Lansing neighborhood.

One guys has a "Bernie 2020" sign in his yard with a DIY addition that says "MSU Professors "Feel The Learn".. which is pretty funny.

So this afternoon, they had added an additional DIY sign. I thought "uh oh.. I hope they're smart and evolved enough not to be the whiny types".

The new addition said "But Now It's Biden's Turn".

steveschneider wrote:

Travis of the Cosmos wrote:Of course they will. That’s not socialism to them. Just like a Democrat promoting capitalist ideas is socialism. It doesn’t matter what is socialism and isn’t socialism and who is or isn’t whatever they are. All that matters is that we call any non republican socialist and most independents have no idea what the words even mean anyway so I guess we’ll see if they buy it but really it’s all just word soup anyway.

the point is it was always asinine to talk about any of that in the democratic primary, as it was never anything more than something for pundits to gab about, but we did and here we are.

It was clear that one of Bernie's weak points was how he he would pay for some of his programs. It's not unreasonable to assume that he was more susceptible to the 'socialist' attack than more of the other candidates and that it would be effective with the moderate independents that you need to win the battle ground states.

It doesn’t matter if it’s grounded in any kind of reality. That’s what you are struggling to wrap your head around. It doesn’t matter if it’s slightly true, not at all true, or completely true. It doesn’t matter even a little bit with the knit whits who make up a majority of the moderate independents that you’re referring to.

steveschneider wrote:I thought the party would be united, sounds like Bernie fans are going to have to put on a pair of diapers this coming November. I guess that's what happens when you hop on board one of the most toxic movements I've ever seen.

“You’re a bunch of babies who wear diapers!”

“Why won’t you just join me ugh.”

You’re no better than them steve I hope one day you see that.

I'm not sure why you guys are so negative about Biden's chances. I suspect that you're comparing the numbers that would enthusiastically vote FOR one candidate or another. The Dem candidate doesn't matter. It is the anti-Trump vote that matters, and I have no doubt that the enthusiastic anti-Trump vote far outweighs the enthusiastic pro-Trump vote. The most enthusiastic isn't enough to carry the election for either side, but the point is that the Dem party doesn't need to be united in support of Biden, it only needs to be united against Trump. And I don't see the tiniest cracks in that among any Dems whatsoever.

So the base is solid. Now look at the neutrals.
Hillary and Trump were the two most disliked candidates ever recorded (which goes back 40-50 years). I'd be surprised if Biden isn't starting well ahead of Hillary in that regard. Meanwhile, I absolutely believe that Trump is more disliked than he was when he got elected. I mean, do you guys see many, if any, non-Trump voters (whether Hillary, 3rd party, or non-voters) in 2016 that Trump has turned in their favor? I don't. But I do see non-Hillary voters that are very anti-Trump now.

I mean, as rabid as the Bernie supporters are, do you expect 10% to vote for Trump again? Do you expect African-Americans to have such low turnout again after Trump's racism was kicked up several notches since his election? You only need a few of each of those groups (or even one of those groups) to flip the results in Michigan, Wisconsin, and Pennsylvania.

MiamiSpartan wrote:I'm not sure why you guys are so negative about Biden's chances. I suspect that you're comparing the numbers that would enthusiastically vote FOR one candidate or another. The Dem candidate doesn't matter. It is the anti-Trump vote that matters, and I have no doubt that the enthusiastic anti-Trump vote far outweighs the enthusiastic pro-Trump vote. The most enthusiastic isn't enough to carry the election for either side, but the point is that the Dem party doesn't need to be united in support of Biden, it only needs to be united against Trump. And I don't see the tiniest cracks in that among any Dems whatsoever.

So the base is solid. Now look at the neutrals.
Hillary and Trump were the two most disliked candidates ever recorded (which goes back 40-50 years). I'd be surprised if Biden isn't starting well ahead of Hillary in that regard. Meanwhile, I absolutely believe that Trump is more disliked than he was when he got elected. I mean, do you guys see many, if any, non-Trump voters (whether Hillary, 3rd party, or non-voters) in 2016 that Trump has turned in their favor? I don't. But I do see non-Hillary voters that are very anti-Trump now.

I mean, as rabid as the Bernie supporters are, do you expect 10% to vote for Trump again? Do you expect African-Americans to have such low turnout again after Trump's racism was kicked up several notches since his election? You only need a few of each of those groups (or even one of those groups) to flip the results in Michigan, Wisconsin, and Pennsylvania.

the Bernie bros have to have something the whine about.

Travis of the Cosmos wrote:

steveschneider wrote:

It was clear that one of Bernie's weak points was how he he would pay for some of his programs. It's not unreasonable to assume that he was more susceptible to the 'socialist' attack than more of the other candidates and that it would be effective with the moderate independents that you need to win the battle ground states.

It doesn’t matter if it’s grounded in any kind of reality. That’s what you are struggling to wrap your head around. It doesn’t matter if it’s slightly true, not at all true, or completely true. It doesn’t matter even a little bit with the knit whits who make up a majority of the moderate independents that you’re referring to.

For his base of course it doesn’t but we will never win them anyway. Independent moderates aren’t going to take that bait. I just don’t see it.

Travis of the Cosmos wrote:

steveschneider wrote:I thought the party would be united, sounds like Bernie fans are going to have to put on a pair of diapers this coming November. I guess that's what happens when you hop on board one of the most toxic movements I've ever seen.

“You’re a bunch of babies who wear diapers!”

“Why won’t you just join me ugh.”

You’re no better than them steve I hope one day you see that.

I had on a pair of diapers when Trump won but no way I’d have a pair on if Bernie beat Biden I’d be stoked actually.

MiamiSpartan wrote:I'm not sure why you guys are so negative about Biden's chances. I suspect that you're comparing the numbers that would enthusiastically vote FOR one candidate or another. The Dem candidate doesn't matter. It is the anti-Trump vote that matters, and I have no doubt that the enthusiastic anti-Trump vote far outweighs the enthusiastic pro-Trump vote. The most enthusiastic isn't enough to carry the election for either side, but the point is that the Dem party doesn't need to be united in support of Biden, it only needs to be united against Trump. And I don't see the tiniest cracks in that among any Dems whatsoever.

So the base is solid. Now look at the neutrals.
Hillary and Trump were the two most disliked candidates ever recorded (which goes back 40-50 years). I'd be surprised if Biden isn't starting well ahead of Hillary in that regard. Meanwhile, I absolutely believe that Trump is more disliked than he was when he got elected. I mean, do you guys see many, if any, non-Trump voters (whether Hillary, 3rd party, or non-voters) in 2016 that Trump has turned in their favor? I don't. But I do see non-Hillary voters that are very anti-Trump now.

I mean, as rabid as the Bernie supporters are, do you expect 10% to vote for Trump again? Do you expect African-Americans to have such low turnout again after Trump's racism was kicked up several notches since his election? You only need a few of each of those groups (or even one of those groups) to flip the results in Michigan, Wisconsin, and Pennsylvania.

Yep, I posted an article by Amy Walter earlier that pretty much had this take. Biden, doesn't have to pack arenas, have the Strokes opening for him or wow us with his speeches. He just has to be a classic boring politician that is competent and his advantage is Trumps historic low approval rating.

I think people are under estimating Biden’s ability in a debate. He’s still sharp on policy and the history of politics. Maybe it’s long term memory. Trump is a simpleton with an expertise in 3-4 letter adjectives. An 80 year old Biden only has to hold his own to win a debate against the supposed “best and biggest economy in our unprecedented greatest ever never before seen beautiful economy”

kingstonlake wrote:I think people are under estimating Biden’s ability in a debate. He’s still sharp on policy and the history of politics. Maybe it’s long term memory. Trump is a simpleton with an expertise in 3-4 letter adjectives. An 80 year old Biden only has to hold his own to win a debate against the supposed “best and biggest economy in our unprecedented greatest ever never before seen beautiful economy”

I watched him vs Sanders and he did really good. Definitely won the debate. Sanders definitely cornered him a few times on his clear lies about social security and a few other attacks. Biden is definitely better in long form.

I kinda doubt there will be traditional debates for the general election. Maybe things turn around quick enough, but I would bet that either we'll have some sort of telecommute debate, which would be absolutely painful to watch, or no debates at all.

I suspect he racist, bigoted christian sexual predator will try to find ways not to debate.

Cameron wrote:I kinda doubt there will be traditional debates for the general election. Maybe things turn around quick enough, but I would bet that either we'll have some sort of telecommute debate, which would be absolutely painful to watch, or no debates at all.

He’s got so much more money than Biden for the election, all a debate would be is free airtime for Biden. He don’t want none of that.

kingstonlake wrote:

Cameron wrote:I kinda doubt there will be traditional debates for the general election. Maybe things turn around quick enough, but I would bet that either we'll have some sort of telecommute debate, which would be absolutely painful to watch, or no debates at all.

He’s got so much more money than Biden for the election, all a debate would be is free airtime for Biden. He don’t want none of that.

Good point. Who knows though Trump can’t resist free air time he might do it.

The Bernie melt down is up there with some of the biggest melt downs I’ve seen after a classic JLS same old Spartans game. Unreal.

Seeing actual Bernie Surrogates forward around a Tucker Carlson segment that is of course awful and agreeing with it. How do you even accommodate people that crazy? If Biden accommodates these loud ass nut jobs he will lose more moderates.

[tw]1248126784274665472?s=21[/tw]

Seriously what kind of a campaign hires a radical like this? And Shaun King. Both are going to do their best to sink Biden all summer.

Taking the “senile” route will backfire.

steveschneider wrote:The Bernie melt down is up there with some of the biggest melt downs I’ve seen after a classic JLS same old Spartans game. Unreal.

Seeing actual Bernie Surrogates forward around a Tucker Carlson segment that is of course awful and agreeing with it. How do you even accommodate people that crazy? If Biden accommodates these loud ass nut jobs he will lose more moderates.

Our daughter, who voted for Bernie in the primary, texted yesterday and said the Bernie folks on Twiiter are making her want to throw her laptop out of her window.

And she's 20.

Bernie still refusing to endorse Biden even after dropping it is asinine. He doesn't care about uniting the party and defeating Trump, he only cares about his platform. I like a lot of his policies, but this is the second time he's refused to endorse the Democratic nominee.

InTenSity wrote:Bernie still refusing to endorse Biden even after dropping it is asinine. He doesn't care about uniting the party and defeating Trump, he only cares about his platform. I like a lot of his policies, but this is the second time he's refused to endorse the Democratic nominee.

He’s not a Democrat.

steveschneider wrote:

Travis of the Cosmos wrote:

It doesn’t matter if it’s grounded in any kind of reality. That’s what you are struggling to wrap your head around. It doesn’t matter if it’s slightly true, not at all true, or completely true. It doesn’t matter even a little bit with the knit whits who make up a majority of the moderate independents that you’re referring to.

For his base of course it doesn’t but we will never win them anyway. Independent moderates aren’t going to take that bait. I just don’t see it.

Again, you are vastly overestimating people despite being constantly reminded how stupid people are every day on this board. It’s incredible really

kingstonlake wrote:I think people are under estimating Biden’s ability in a debate. He’s still sharp on policy and the history of politics. Maybe it’s long term memory. Trump is a simpleton with an expertise in 3-4 letter adjectives. An 80 year old Biden only has to hold his own to win a debate against the supposed “best and biggest economy in our unprecedented greatest ever never before seen beautiful economy”

Hillary “won” the debates.

Also there won’t be debates.

InTenSity wrote:Bernie still refusing to endorse Biden even after dropping it is asinine. He doesn't care about uniting the party and defeating Trump, he only cares about his platform. I like a lot of his policies, but this is the second time he's refused to endorse the Democratic nominee.

Is it though

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.cnn.com/cnn/2016/07/11/politics/hillary-clinton-bernie-sanders/index.html

Travis of the Cosmos wrote:

kingstonlake wrote:I think people are under estimating Biden’s ability in a debate. He’s still sharp on policy and the history of politics. Maybe it’s long term memory. Trump is a simpleton with an expertise in 3-4 letter adjectives. An 80 year old Biden only has to hold his own to win a debate against the supposed “best and biggest economy in our unprecedented greatest ever never before seen beautiful economy”

Hillary “won” the debates.

Also there won’t be debates.

Its 2020, Travis. The two elections aren’t even remotely comparable.

kingstonlake wrote:

Travis of the Cosmos wrote:

Hillary “won” the debates.

Also there won’t be debates.

Its 2020, Travis. The two elections aren’t even remotely comparable.

Okay.