Re: Joe Biden 2020

1252
HuckleberryFun wrote: Mon Oct 26, 2020 10:36 am Bernie Sanders wants to be Biden’s Labor Secretary. I can think of few fiercer advocates for working people. Biden may calculate that he owes Bernie for campaigning for him. He may also figure that it’s better to have Bernie inside the tent pissing out than outside the tent pissing in. The Vermont governor is a Republican, though, and that complicates things since he will name Bernie’s successor. Although an intriguing idea, I’m guessing that Bernie will stay in his gadfly role in the Senate

https://www.politico.com/news/2020/10/2 ... ary-431266
Bernie deserves it, but VT law does complicate things. Depends on how many seats Democrats capture in the senate, it could be tight. VT Democrats have a candidate to run, the state's single congressman has held that seat since 2006 and has been reelected every two years. Don't know how partisan Scott is, he could agree to appoint someone who was a place holder and agreed not to run for the seat. We will see.
"Everyone is entitled to their own opinion, but not their own facts." - Daniel Patrick Moynihan

Re: Joe Biden 2020

1255
I would still like to see Dems crush in down ballot races. The Repubs must suffer for 40 years. Pro gun states will stay pro, and anti gun states will stay anti, and the Supreme Court is not a worry for a year (if packing) and a generation if not.

CDFingers
Crazy cat peekin' through a lace bandana
like a one-eyed Cheshire, like a diamond-eyed Jack

Re: Joe Biden 2020

1256
Yup will Biden win and if he does, how long will his "coattails" be to pull in down ballot candidates? If he just passes 290 electoral votes as most of the prediction models now show, his coattails would likely be narrow. If he picks up NC, FL and even more of the tossup states that changes things. Any crossover Republican leaning Independents and Republicans could just vote for Biden and vote Republican for the rest of the ticket.

There is a lot of money pouring into the Republican senate races and some of those are likely to flip, it's reaching tossup races like GA's two senate seats, MT and maybe even AK, but that's a stretch. It will be an interesting election night and maybe even stretch to days like 2000.
"Everyone is entitled to their own opinion, but not their own facts." - Daniel Patrick Moynihan

Re: Joe Biden 2020

1257
Running JHK's election simulator a few dozen times a day lately, to see how polling updates change scenarios. There are some interesting cross-correlations - Nevada is much more important than anyone in the media seems to pay attention to. There's an interesting tool that flips all the state probabilities if one state flips, based on demographics - that'll make election night fun.

Blowout scenarios with 400+ EVs for Biden come up more than twice as often as Trump victories in the EC. I think I've seen one 270-268 scenario, and no ties. I'm hopeful for the blue wave, preparing for enough foul play by red to make it close, and counting on everyone doing the right thing.

Re: Joe Biden 2020

1259
The Cornell Review on Biden's firearm prohibition plan.
Well Regulated: Joe Biden’s gun control proposals
(1) Hold gun manufacturers accountable.
Biden voted against the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act in 2005, a law that protects firearm manufacturers from civil suits when their products are misused. The campaign blatantly lies when saying that this “protection [is] granted to no other industry.” To use an analogy: if someone in a Corolla saw me walking down the street and decided to run me over, I would never be able to sue Toyota. Firearm manufacturers should not be held liable just because a criminal decides to use one of their products in the commission of a crime. Legislation to leave firearm manufacturers vulnerable to excessive litigation and liability for the actions of people they have no control over is nothing more than a roundabout way to destroy the firearms industry, and by extension, the people’s ability to acquire arms.

(2) Get weapons of war off our streets.
Unfortunately, the people’s ability to exercise their birthright to every “terrible implement of the soldier” (Tenche Coxe, 1788) has been severely restricted for decades by legislation, most significantly the NFA and Hughes Amendment. In support of renewing the 1994 AWB, the campaign cites a Newsweek article on a then-unpublished study which argued that the ‘94-’04 ban reduced the lethality of public mass shootings. As one might guess, the entire study was bogus. Not only did it use a definition of “mass shooting” which differs from that used by the FBI, but it also played fast and loose with other data, such as including firearms not classed as “assault weapons” by the ‘94 AWB and then arguing that the ban reduced the lethality of public mass shootings. In a letter to the editor of the New York Times (which also publicized the study), economists Dr. John Lott and Dr. Carl Moody said that “the share of mass public shootings with assault weapons did indeed fall from 30% in the pre-ban period to 25% during the ban, it fell to just 14.8% in the post-ban period. If the ban was really the driving force behind the change, it makes little sense that the sharpest drop would occur after the ban expired.” In fact, evidence shows that the presence of concealed carry handguns is one of the largest determining factors in not only how likely a public mass shooting is to occur, but its lethality. The most effective means to reduce the number of deaths from public mass shooters would be to do away with restrictions on the carrying of handguns.

(2a) Ban the manufacture and sale of assault weapons and high-capacity magazines.
In this section, the reader is treated to the tired argument that because the federal government regulates the number of shells a gun can hold while duck hunting, this means that there is more care given to the safety of ducks than children. It is ridiculous on its face, in large part because the analogy doesn’t even make sense. There is no federal limit on shotgun magazine capacity, or even the number of shells a duck gun can hold, merely that there must be a temporary limiter in the magazine while actually hunting. In other words, a proper analogy would be allowing any magazine capacity but saying that a murderer can only load three rounds in their gun while killing. Moreover, there are plenty of other species whose hunting has magazine restrictions – the magazine limit on migratory bird hunting was put in place due to over-hunting and commercial hunting almost a century ago.

Re: Joe Biden 2020

1260
Cornell Review is a student run newspaper at Cornell University in Ithaca. Cornell is a mostly private Ivy League university in blue New York, not surprised by the article.
"Everyone is entitled to their own opinion, but not their own facts." - Daniel Patrick Moynihan

Re: Joe Biden 2020

1261
I've been reticent to post anything about the Biden/China shitstorm going on outside of major media coverage. I can now report that Glenn Greenwald, who cofounded The Intercept, has resigned over being gaged about reporting on it. There is something really fucky going on with this story. Zero mainstream coverage over a pretty serious accusation. I have no idea of the validity, but Greenwald is the first solid journalist to say anything over it.
But the brute censorship this week of my article — about the Hunter Biden materials and Joe Biden’s conduct regarding Ukraine and China, as well my critique of the media’s rank-closing attempt, in a deeply unholy union with Silicon Valley and the “intelligence community,” to suppress its revelations — eroded the last justification I could cling to for staying. It meant that not only does this media outlet not provide the editorial freedom to other journalists, as I had so hopefully envisioned seven years ago, but now no longer even provides it to me. In the days heading into a presidential election, I am somehow silenced from expressing any views that random editors in New York find disagreeable, and now somehow have to conform my writing and reporting to cater to their partisan desires and eagerness to elect specific candidates.

To say that such censorship is a red line for me, a situation I would never accept no matter the cost, is an understatement. It is astonishing to me, but also a reflection of our current discourse and illiberal media environment, that I have been silenced about Joe Biden by my own media outlet.
https://thenationalpulse.com/breaking/b ... iveOldPost

It's available on twitter, for those who dislike this source. And apologies for ruffling feathers.

Re: Joe Biden 2020

1262
featureless wrote: Thu Oct 29, 2020 2:38 pm I've been reticent to post anything about the Biden/China shitstorm going on outside of major media coverage. I can now report that Glenn Greenwald, who cofounded The Intercept, has resigned over being gaged about reporting on it. There is something really fucky going on with this story. Zero mainstream coverage over a pretty serious accusation. I have no idea of the validity, but Greenwald is the first solid journalist to say anything over it.
But the brute censorship this week of my article — about the Hunter Biden materials and Joe Biden’s conduct regarding Ukraine and China, as well my critique of the media’s rank-closing attempt, in a deeply unholy union with Silicon Valley and the “intelligence community,” to suppress its revelations — eroded the last justification I could cling to for staying. It meant that not only does this media outlet not provide the editorial freedom to other journalists, as I had so hopefully envisioned seven years ago, but now no longer even provides it to me. In the days heading into a presidential election, I am somehow silenced from expressing any views that random editors in New York find disagreeable, and now somehow have to conform my writing and reporting to cater to their partisan desires and eagerness to elect specific candidates.

To say that such censorship is a red line for me, a situation I would never accept no matter the cost, is an understatement. It is astonishing to me, but also a reflection of our current discourse and illiberal media environment, that I have been silenced about Joe Biden by my own media outlet.
https://thenationalpulse.com/breaking/b ... iveOldPost

It's available on twitter, for those who dislike this source. And apologies for ruffling feathers.
Ah yes, Glenn Greenwald, who relentlessly went after Hillary in 2016 (“Emails! Clinton Foundation!”) and helped Putin give us Trump. At it again, huh? Not a fan.

Don’t worry about coverage, Fox News,Ny Post, and all the usual right wing media suspects are giving it lots of attention.
Image
Image

Re: Joe Biden 2020

1263
HuckleberryFun wrote: Thu Oct 29, 2020 2:52 pm
featureless wrote: Thu Oct 29, 2020 2:38 pm I've been reticent to post anything about the Biden/China shitstorm going on outside of major media coverage. I can now report that Glenn Greenwald, who cofounded The Intercept, has resigned over being gaged about reporting on it. There is something really fucky going on with this story. Zero mainstream coverage over a pretty serious accusation. I have no idea of the validity, but Greenwald is the first solid journalist to say anything over it.
But the brute censorship this week of my article — about the Hunter Biden materials and Joe Biden’s conduct regarding Ukraine and China, as well my critique of the media’s rank-closing attempt, in a deeply unholy union with Silicon Valley and the “intelligence community,” to suppress its revelations — eroded the last justification I could cling to for staying. It meant that not only does this media outlet not provide the editorial freedom to other journalists, as I had so hopefully envisioned seven years ago, but now no longer even provides it to me. In the days heading into a presidential election, I am somehow silenced from expressing any views that random editors in New York find disagreeable, and now somehow have to conform my writing and reporting to cater to their partisan desires and eagerness to elect specific candidates.

To say that such censorship is a red line for me, a situation I would never accept no matter the cost, is an understatement. It is astonishing to me, but also a reflection of our current discourse and illiberal media environment, that I have been silenced about Joe Biden by my own media outlet.
https://thenationalpulse.com/breaking/b ... iveOldPost

It's available on twitter, for those who dislike this source. And apologies for ruffling feathers.
Ah yes, Glenn Greenwald, who relentlessly went after Hillary in 2016 (“Emails! Clinton Foundation!”) and helped Putin give us Trump. At it again, huh? Not a fan.

Don’t worry about coverage, Fox News,Ny Post, and all the usual right wing media suspects are giving it lots of attention.
Yeah, well... ;)

The point is, there are some serious accusations, same type of things we've recently impeached a president over, yet crickets? I get the timing element, tribal element and orange man bad element, but jesh. I'd like to have some real idea if I've voted for a guy with the same business character of Trump. Dig? Hard to ascertain if nobody but Fox, et. al. will even discuss it. My irritation is not so much that Biden might be just as crooked as the rest of 'em (I voted for him fully expecting it), rather the general entrenchment of media.

Re: Joe Biden 2020

1264
Serious accusations like Tara Reade? Remember her? She was dropped by her own lawyer and even Fox News finally admitted she wasn’t credible. Suddenly, silence about her ever since. Media conspiracy or editorial decision? I think the latter. Glenn Greewald’s high water mark was exposing what the GW Bush administration had been up to (see: torture, surveillance, etc). Since then, he’s devolved into a “both sides are equally bad so screw them both” crank.

I talked to one reluctant (“hold my nose hard”) Biden voter who, when the false Reade accusations came out, changed her mind and said heatedly “I will NOT vote for a rapist!” Now, it’s “oh well...ok...nevermind.” Mere accusations have an impact on elections and publishers & editors have to be the gatekeepers (hopefully honest ones) because that’s their job.

From Politifact:
“ Credible news organizations have found no evidence to corroborate Bobulinski’s claims about a role in the proposed venture for Joe Biden. Joe Biden’s financial documents show no indication of any income related to the venture.”

https://www.politifact.com/article/202 ... explainer/
Image
Image

Re: Joe Biden 2020

1265
Everyone on the left was traumatized by Trump's win in 2016 and this brings home memories of Comey and HRC e-mails. I know nothing about Greenwald's spat with The Intercept and its drama, except to say that all media both online and print are having difficult times keeping the doors open and staff paid. Apparently the doors stay open at the Intercept thanks to Pierre Omidyar, the billionaire founder of E-Bay. Last I read Greenwald lived in Brazil with his husband.

If the FBI is investigating the supposed Hunter Biden e-mails, they will neither confirm nor deny it, which is appropriate. Hunter Biden's involvement with Burisma was discussed at the impeachment hearings earlier this year and nothing seemed to stick. The current story is being peddled by Rudy Giuliani (Trump's personal lawyer) and speculation is his sources are Russian intelligence and it's coming out very close to the election, which makes it look like a desperation move by Trump. And reports that Fox News refused to publish the original story and reputable reporters at the New York Post (which published it) refused to put their names/bylines on the story also raised some flags. Fox and the NY Post are both owned by Murdoch's News Corp as is the Wall Street Journal.

If the story has legs, I expect it to on walk on it's own after the election. It's not time sensitive.
"Everyone is entitled to their own opinion, but not their own facts." - Daniel Patrick Moynihan

Re: Joe Biden 2020

1266
HuckleberryFun wrote: Thu Oct 29, 2020 3:31 pm Serious accusations like Tara Reade?
Yeah, no. :lol:
highdesert wrote: Thu Oct 29, 2020 4:10 pm Everyone on the left was traumatized by Trump's win in 2016 and this brings home memories of Comey and HRC e-mails.

[snippage]

If the story has legs, I expect it to on walk on it's own after the election. It's not time sensitive.
Yup. But it would fucking suck if Biden's impeachment begins after inauguration. Sweetpotato Hitler will have a couple of months to whip such up.

Like I say, I don't know one way or another, but grow tired of the full time polar opposite blitz from various media groups.

Re: Joe Biden 2020

1267
featureless wrote: Thu Oct 29, 2020 4:32 pm
HuckleberryFun wrote: Thu Oct 29, 2020 3:31 pm Serious accusations like Tara Reade?
Yeah, no. :lol:
highdesert wrote: Thu Oct 29, 2020 4:10 pm Everyone on the left was traumatized by Trump's win in 2016 and this brings home memories of Comey and HRC e-mails.

[snippage]

If the story has legs, I expect it to on walk on it's own after the election. It's not time sensitive.
Yup. But it would fucking suck if Biden's impeachment begins after inauguration. Sweetpotato Hitler will have a couple of months to whip such up.

Like I say, I don't know one way or another, but grow tired of the full time polar opposite blitz from various media groups.
If Biden wins I am near positive that there will be an immediate attempt at impeachment.
To be vintage it must be older than me!
The next gun I buy will be the next to last gun I ever buy. PROMISE!
jim

Re: Joe Biden 2020

1268
sig230 wrote: Thu Oct 29, 2020 4:35 pm
featureless wrote: Thu Oct 29, 2020 4:32 pm
HuckleberryFun wrote: Thu Oct 29, 2020 3:31 pm Serious accusations like Tara Reade?
Yeah, no. :lol:
highdesert wrote: Thu Oct 29, 2020 4:10 pm Everyone on the left was traumatized by Trump's win in 2016 and this brings home memories of Comey and HRC e-mails.

[snippage]

If the story has legs, I expect it to on walk on it's own after the election. It's not time sensitive.
Yup. But it would fucking suck if Biden's impeachment begins after inauguration. Sweetpotato Hitler will have a couple of months to whip such up.

Like I say, I don't know one way or another, but grow tired of the full time polar opposite blitz from various media groups.
If Biden wins I am near positive that there will be an immediate attempt at impeachment.
There is no logic to this. The house will continue to be democrat controlled after the election and most likely into the next session. Why would the democrats try to impeach a future democrat president. Let's stay within the constitutional possibility/reality.
Image
Image

"Resistance is futile. You will be assimilated!" Loquacious of many. Texas Chapter Chief Cat Herder.

Re: Joe Biden 2020

1269
featureless wrote: Thu Oct 29, 2020 4:32 pm
HuckleberryFun wrote: Thu Oct 29, 2020 3:31 pm Serious accusations like Tara Reade?
Yeah, no. :lol:
highdesert wrote: Thu Oct 29, 2020 4:10 pm Everyone on the left was traumatized by Trump's win in 2016 and this brings home memories of Comey and HRC e-mails.

[snippage]

If the story has legs, I expect it to on walk on it's own after the election. It's not time sensitive.
Yup. But it would fucking suck if Biden's impeachment begins after inauguration. Sweetpotato Hitler will have a couple of months to whip such up.

Like I say, I don't know one way or another, but grow tired of the full time polar opposite blitz from various media groups.
Yup, the Orange Thing will have 78 days in the WH if he's defeated and yes, he could stir up mischief. I'm hoping that Republicans and at least some of his followers overlook him and his Tweets.

The only entity that can impeach is the House which is expected to stay in Democratic hands, though it could flip in the 2022 midterm. If Republicans recaptured the Senate in 2022 it's highly unlikely they'd have enough votes to convict and remove, but Harris would replace Biden if convicted.

Time for less media and more walks and some limited family outings. Approximately 4 days until 00:00 hrs 11.3.2020.
"Everyone is entitled to their own opinion, but not their own facts." - Daniel Patrick Moynihan

Re: Joe Biden 2020

1270
It's up to the house and the house will be democrat controlled after election day and after the inauguration. There is only one possible impeachment scenario, democrats get control of both houses and impeach a second term trump. Which is highly unlikely considering trumps re-election prospects are slim. But, this is the only likely impeachment scenario.
Image
Image

"Resistance is futile. You will be assimilated!" Loquacious of many. Texas Chapter Chief Cat Herder.

Re: Joe Biden 2020

1272
featureless wrote: Thu Oct 29, 2020 5:03 pm
highdesert wrote: Thu Oct 29, 2020 4:51 pm Time for less media and more walks and some limited family outings. Approximately 4 days until 00:00 hrs 11.3.2020.
Thank you. Most excellent advice I've received in days. :)
Agree. :clap2: :beer2:
Image
Image

"Resistance is futile. You will be assimilated!" Loquacious of many. Texas Chapter Chief Cat Herder.

Re: Joe Biden 2020

1274
Gave up on the Intercept years ago, after it became apparent that Greenwald was more interested in tearing down Dems than fascists.

Worst case scenario: we have a choice between an experienced Democratic president with relatively decent personal skills and a tolerably liberal platform, who has unsavory business ties with China and Ukraine, or a fascist-leaning sociopathic narcissist Republican president who has proven himself utterly corrupt and incompetent, interested only in personal gain and humiliating those who oppose him, who has unsavory business ties to Russia, Turkey, China, and other countries.

If credible evidence came up, do you really think that the Democratic House would tolerate losing power in the next election rather than impeach and remove, knowing that Kamala Harris would be set up for the next 6 or 7 years?

It's a no brainer. Like, zombies would still vote blue.

Re: Joe Biden 2020

1275
highdesert wrote: Thu Oct 29, 2020 4:51 pm Time for less media and more walks and some limited family outings. Approximately 4 days until 00:00 hrs 11.3.2020.
I deactivated my Facebook account over a month ago and I’m not going back on there until after Nov 3rd. It’s been nice.
Tranquil. Also, more time for “projects.” :-)
Image
Image

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests