Chat Forum
It is currently Fri Aug 23, 2019 11:10 pm

All times are UTC [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 2501 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 56, 57, 58, 59, 60, 61, 62, 63  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Mon Aug 05, 2019 2:15 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 8382
Location: Indiana
eldanielfire wrote:
openclashXX wrote:
eldanielfire wrote:
openclashXX wrote:
again, I don't see the reason for the hype around Tulsi Gabbard

other than being the most anti-war/anti-foreign intervention of the lot
(and one of the only ones that appears on Fox News from time to time), she seems like another fairly bland Democrat candidate with a suitably bland set of policy ideas :thumbdown:


That is exactly why she is hyped. The world and Americans themselves are fed-up of these no-con wars of regime change. Even republicans, both Obama made himself appear as a fairly anti-war candidate and Trump himself scored points off Hilary due to his prior opposition to the Iraq invasion. Sadly people were hugely disappointed in Obama still going to war after war on obvious regime change groups with the same old shitty bad results for the countries involved and America's reputation abroad. It may not be a daily thing in peoples lives in the US but not going to war again is certainly a point that unites many Democrat and Republican voters right now even if the political will in Washington still has a taste for war.


the most opportune moment for any candidate to successfully run on an anti-war platform was 2005-06 - at the height of the negative sentiment towards the Afghanistan and Iraq wars but just before the recession

whereas now the focus of any candidate looking to win has to be domestic, not foreign policy-related - Tulsi is a single-issue candidate and unfortunately I don't see that issue resonating so well with average voters who care more about jobs, healthcare, immigration etc than whether or not the US decides to align more with Saudi/Israel or Iran/Russia


I think quite the opposite, it resonates highly with all those voters, it's one thing they really want, but it isn't what will switch votes to you, but will be a vote loser.


Your run-of-the-mill civilian does not care about foreign policy. Anti-war activism of the past 15 years is as much isolationism as it is anything else. For anti-war activists, they have their president now even if it's not socially acceptable for them to say that out loud.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Aug 05, 2019 2:25 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 20932
Flyin Ryan wrote:
eldanielfire wrote:
openclashXX wrote:
eldanielfire wrote:
openclashXX wrote:
again, I don't see the reason for the hype around Tulsi Gabbard

other than being the most anti-war/anti-foreign intervention of the lot
(and one of the only ones that appears on Fox News from time to time), she seems like another fairly bland Democrat candidate with a suitably bland set of policy ideas :thumbdown:


That is exactly why she is hyped. The world and Americans themselves are fed-up of these no-con wars of regime change. Even republicans, both Obama made himself appear as a fairly anti-war candidate and Trump himself scored points off Hilary due to his prior opposition to the Iraq invasion. Sadly people were hugely disappointed in Obama still going to war after war on obvious regime change groups with the same old shitty bad results for the countries involved and America's reputation abroad. It may not be a daily thing in peoples lives in the US but not going to war again is certainly a point that unites many Democrat and Republican voters right now even if the political will in Washington still has a taste for war.


the most opportune moment for any candidate to successfully run on an anti-war platform was 2005-06 - at the height of the negative sentiment towards the Afghanistan and Iraq wars but just before the recession

whereas now the focus of any candidate looking to win has to be domestic, not foreign policy-related - Tulsi is a single-issue candidate and unfortunately I don't see that issue resonating so well with average voters who care more about jobs, healthcare, immigration etc than whether or not the US decides to align more with Saudi/Israel or Iran/Russia


I think quite the opposite, it resonates highly with all those voters, it's one thing they really want, but it isn't what will switch votes to you, but will be a vote loser.


Your run-of-the-mill civilian does not care about foreign policy. Anti-war activism of the past 15 years is as much isolationism as it is anything else.


They can well be connected, but resistance to US wars is still a position much if the US public are in, for a avriety of reasons. I think even the average run-of-the-mill civilian is fed-up of US lives being lost, US being blamed for wars which are obviously for regime changes and all for absolutely no obvious positives for the average US citizen as well as war fatigue.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Aug 05, 2019 2:30 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 8382
Location: Indiana
eldanielfire wrote:
Flyin Ryan wrote:
eldanielfire wrote:
I think quite the opposite, it resonates highly with all those voters, it's one thing they really want, but it isn't what will switch votes to you, but will be a vote loser.


Your run-of-the-mill civilian does not care about foreign policy. Anti-war activism of the past 15 years is as much isolationism as it is anything else.


They can well be connected, but resistance to US wars is still a position much if the US public are in, for a avriety of reasons. I think even the average run-of-the-mill civilian is fed-up of US lives being lost, US being blamed for wars which are obviously for regime changes and all for absolutely no obvious positives for the average US citizen as well as war fatigue.


As a military brat, I roll my eyes a bit at the run-of-the-mill civilian and how stupid they are when it comes to the rest of the world.

Donald Trump is anti-war, anti-involving the U.S. in the rest of the world's affairs. It's a right-wing anti-war. We're never doing anything with Iran, anyone that thinks we are you are the spitting image of a dumbass. So war at the moment is out of sight, out of mind. Anti-war people - if you could define them as a group and search their true inner feelings - they don't give a shit that millions of people died in Syria. They really don't.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Aug 05, 2019 4:03 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 20932
Flyin Ryan wrote:
eldanielfire wrote:
Flyin Ryan wrote:
eldanielfire wrote:
I think quite the opposite, it resonates highly with all those voters, it's one thing they really want, but it isn't what will switch votes to you, but will be a vote loser.


Your run-of-the-mill civilian does not care about foreign policy. Anti-war activism of the past 15 years is as much isolationism as it is anything else.


They can well be connected, but resistance to US wars is still a position much if the US public are in, for a avriety of reasons. I think even the average run-of-the-mill civilian is fed-up of US lives being lost, US being blamed for wars which are obviously for regime changes and all for absolutely no obvious positives for the average US citizen as well as war fatigue.


As a military brat, I roll my eyes a bit at the run-of-the-mill civilian and how stupid they are when it comes to the rest of the world.

Donald Trump is anti-war, anti-involving the U.S. in the rest of the world's affairs. It's a right-wing anti-war. We're never doing anything with Iran, anyone that thinks we are you are the spitting image of a dumbass. So war at the moment is out of sight, out of mind. Anti-war people - if you could define them as a group and search their true inner feelings - they don't give a shit that millions of people died in Syria. They really don't.


Don't get me wrong, you'll see in my posts that I believe the US desire to go against wars are not some kind hearted hippy feeling of peace and mankind to other peoples, it is due to war fatigue, it is due to being fed-up of hearing US deaths for seemingly pointless wars abroad, it is due to seeing "why the f#ck are we even in these wars".


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Aug 06, 2019 1:25 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 8828
Location: Texas
Biden apparently sent thoughts and prayers to the people of Houston and Michigan in response to the weekend shootings.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Aug 06, 2019 7:26 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 31630
I see the DSA are now for all out open borders:
https://twitter.com/daveweigel/status/1 ... 71104?s=19


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Aug 06, 2019 5:14 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed May 30, 2012 5:46 am
Posts: 10184
Bernie within 4 points of Biden in new NH poll, Tulsi at 3% after a good bounce from the debates.

Beto a 0%. :lol:

https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/4 ... -hampshire


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Aug 06, 2019 6:21 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 2691
Bowens wrote:
Bernie within 4 points of Biden in new NH poll, Tulsi at 3% after a good bounce from the debates.

Beto a 0%. :lol:

https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/4 ... -hampshire


Is that Tulsi’s second qualifying poll? Seems like it :thumbup:
She’s taken a break from the campaign for two weeks to do her national guard training.
#patriot #bunsofsteel


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Aug 06, 2019 6:21 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue May 01, 2012 9:32 pm
Posts: 3580
Location: look behind you
Beto is extremely popular in Texas. He should concentrate on that. Like taking on a senate seat again or going for vulnerable republican congressman. It would be far more beneficial to the Dem party if he did that.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Aug 06, 2019 8:23 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Oct 18, 2012 9:10 pm
Posts: 2519
Location: Boston
Bowens wrote:
Bernie within 4 points of Biden in new NH poll, Tulsi at 3% after a good bounce from the debates.

Beto a 0%. :lol:

https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/4 ... -hampshire


That’s pretty interesting actually, I had NH pretty well pegged as Biden territory. Very Rockefeller-Republican-y type of place. Next to Bernie’s Vermont, sure, but not especially similar. It does have some hints of Rust Belt-ness though, being a former manufacturing hub, and everything that entails.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Aug 06, 2019 8:53 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Oct 18, 2012 9:10 pm
Posts: 2519
Location: Boston
In all the commotion we can’t forget that Iowa and NH could potentially throw the nomination to one candidate or another. A lot of things have changed but I still think that’s pretty true. In a way it may be even more true given the media environment now and the fact that it will be all everyone will have to chew on for 11 days before Nevada.

If one of the big four bows out, or even looks like they obviously won’t win, that could produce a game changing exodus.

Looking now, it goes:

Feb 3 - Iowa
Feb 11 - NH
Feb 22 - Nevada
Feb 29 - SC
March 3 - Super Tuesday clusterfuck


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Aug 06, 2019 10:00 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed May 30, 2012 5:46 am
Posts: 10184
fonzeee wrote:
It does have some hints of Rust Belt-ness though, being a former manufacturing hub, and everything that entails.


So a couple of months ago when I was doing genealogy stuff I read up on the migration wave of French-Canadians to New England around the turn of the century. It wasn’t unlike what has happened at the southern border recently in that you had a thousands of people crossing over land to do menial jobs and ending up being resented by the established locals. Most of them settled in urban ghettos called “Little Canadas” and spoke only French and this went on for quite a while, into the 60s and even later in some places (a few border towns still speak mostly French). Predictably many of these places became wastelands after the mills and factories closed. New Hampshire has a few.

You probably saw Mike Gravel dropped out and endorsed Bernie - his parents are from that background. He spoke only French until grade school.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Aug 06, 2019 10:08 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 5591
Bowens wrote:
fonzeee wrote:
It does have some hints of Rust Belt-ness though, being a former manufacturing hub, and everything that entails.


So a couple of months ago when I was doing genealogy stuff I read up on the migration wave of French-Canadians to New England around the turn of the century. It wasn’t unlike what has happened at the southern border recently in that you had a thousands of people crossing over land to do menial jobs and ending up being resented by the established locals. Most of them settled in urban ghettos called “Little Canadas” and spoke only French and this went on for quite a while, into the 60s and even later in some places (a few border towns still speak mostly French). Predictably many of these places became wastelands after the mills and factories closed. New Hampshire has a few.

You probably saw Mike Gravel dropped out and endorsed Bernie - his parents are from that background. He spoke only French until grade school.



Fascinating stuff. Any book recommendations on the subject Bones?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Aug 06, 2019 10:13 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed May 30, 2012 5:46 am
Posts: 10184
A Distinct Alien Race :thumbup:


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Aug 06, 2019 11:15 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 5742
Seneca of the Night wrote:
I see the DSA are now for all out open borders:
https://twitter.com/daveweigel/status/1 ... 71104?s=19


Why don't they all just move to Venezuela and save time?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Aug 06, 2019 11:27 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Oct 18, 2012 9:10 pm
Posts: 2519
Location: Boston
Bowens wrote:
fonzeee wrote:
It does have some hints of Rust Belt-ness though, being a former manufacturing hub, and everything that entails.


So a couple of months ago when I was doing genealogy stuff I read up on the migration wave of French-Canadians to New England around the turn of the century. It wasn’t unlike what has happened at the southern border recently in that you had thousands of people crossing over land to do menial jobs and ending up being resented by the established locals. Most of them settled in urban ghettos called “Little Canadas” and spoke only French and this went on for quite a while, into the 60s and even later in some places (a few border towns still speak mostly French). Predictably many of these places became wastelands after the mills and factories closed. New Hampshire has a few.

You probably saw Mike Gravel dropped out and endorsed Bernie - his parents are from that background. He spoke only French until grade school.


Yeah, I remember your posts on that, didn't know there was a lot of French-Canadian immigration until I came out here and dug into the history a bit. Just seen an article saying 900,000 Quebecois came over between 1840 and 1930.

Apparently Berlin, NH has one of the largest Francophone populations in New England. And, sure enough:

Quote:
At the presidential level, Berlin is a reliably Democratic stronghold; however, President Donald Trump came close to winning the city in 2016 when he lost it by just under five points, marking the best performance for a Republican presidential nominee in the city in over two decades.


Here's a fun fact for ya that's on-topic: I was reading something recently about Maine that noted it was a stronghold of the KKK in the 1910s and 20s. Maine! Apparently they even helped get a governor or two elected. Of course there aren't any black people up there even now, so what was all that about? Anti-Catholic sentiment, thanks in large part to French-Canadian migration.

Saw the news about Gravel when I looked up the primary schedule. He and Bernie seem like they would be two peas in a pod. Saw he's from Western Massachusetts as well, which would also definitely fall into the post-industrial rust belt Trump-country category.

It really cannot be stressed enough how common that story is; people nod along when you talk about Ohio and Michigan, but it's every bit as true in inland Massachusetts, California, New Hampshire, etc.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Aug 06, 2019 11:37 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed May 30, 2012 5:46 am
Posts: 10184
Berlin is like 60-70% French-Canadians to this day and has been one of the hardest hit areas.

https://worldofdecay.blogspot.com/2010/ ... shire.html

The part of my family that came from Quebec actually first settled in Worcester, Mass before moving on.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Aug 07, 2019 2:12 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 2691
Kamala nosedives to 1% support among black Dems after Tulsi’s takedown. Quinnipiac poll.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Aug 07, 2019 2:25 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Oct 18, 2012 9:10 pm
Posts: 2519
Location: Boston
Ewinkum wrote:
Kamala nosedives to 1% support among black Dems after Tulsi’s takedown. Quinnipiac poll.


She is pretty unlikable so it's hard to say...but I do wonder if maybe now that there's been a black president, the idea of a black candidate isn't enough to excite black voters like it used to be? Is it the fact she used to be a prosecutor? Is it the fact she's half-Indian and not an ADOS (American descendant of slavery), and ergo "not really black"? Obviously true for Obama as well but perhaps there was still the novelty factor with him...is her platform that repugnant to black voters? Latent sexism in the black community?

Or, maybe the Obama turnout will never be seen again?

She's a poor test case but it's pretty damn interesting. It would have been unthinkable just a few years ago.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Aug 07, 2019 2:49 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 5742
Ewinkum wrote:
Kamala nosedives to 1% support among black Dems after Tulsi’s takedown. Quinnipiac poll.


Cant all be down to Tulsi the Terminator. KH reminds me of HRC. x( x(


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Aug 07, 2019 3:52 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 2691
fonzeee wrote:
Ewinkum wrote:
Kamala nosedives to 1% support among black Dems after Tulsi’s takedown. Quinnipiac poll.


She is pretty unlikable so it's hard to say...but I do wonder if maybe now that there's been a black president, the idea of a black candidate isn't enough to excite black voters like it used to be? Is it the fact she used to be a prosecutor? Is it the fact she's half-Indian and not an ADOS (American descendant of slavery), and ergo "not really black"? Obviously true for Obama as well but perhaps there was still the novelty factor with him...is her platform that repugnant to black voters? Latent sexism in the black community?

Or, maybe the Obama turnout will never be seen again?

She's a poor test case but it's pretty damn interesting. It would have been unthinkable just a few years ago.


I think it’s all of the above really.
Also I’d say the vast majority of people really haven’t decided on their candidate yet. Support is fluid and fluctuating wildly with the latest news.

She looks pretty repugnant in the daylight though.
Nobody likes a lawyer.
That goes double for a prosecutor.
Double again for a prosecutor who built her career on the backs of the black community.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Aug 07, 2019 3:56 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 2691
kiwinoz wrote:
Ewinkum wrote:
Kamala nosedives to 1% support among black Dems after Tulsi’s takedown. Quinnipiac poll.


Cant all be down to Tulsi the Terminator. KH reminds me of HRC. x( x(

Gillibrand was going to be my little Hilly this time, but she’s letting me down.
Kamala will have to do :(


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Aug 07, 2019 3:59 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 2691
Also.
Joe Rogan had The Bern on today! 8)

https://heavy.com/news/2019/08/bernie-s ... n-podcast/


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Aug 07, 2019 4:21 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 5742
I will learn more about Bernie in an hour on JRE than a month of mainstream news soundbites.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Aug 07, 2019 9:01 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 3990
Ewinkum wrote:
Also.
Joe Rogan had The Bern on today! 8)

https://heavy.com/news/2019/08/bernie-s ... n-podcast/

:thumbup: Looking forward to watch that.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Aug 07, 2019 4:54 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue May 01, 2012 9:32 pm
Posts: 3580
Location: look behind you
kiwinoz wrote:
Ewinkum wrote:
Kamala nosedives to 1% support among black Dems after Tulsi’s takedown. Quinnipiac poll.


Cant all be down to Tulsi the Terminator. KH reminds me of HRC. x( x(


Her issue is that she was a prosecutor and so representative of the system.
She'd need to team up with an outsider to shake that image off.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Aug 07, 2019 4:56 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 20932
tiddle wrote:
kiwinoz wrote:
Ewinkum wrote:
Kamala nosedives to 1% support among black Dems after Tulsi’s takedown. Quinnipiac poll.


Cant all be down to Tulsi the Terminator. KH reminds me of HRC. x( x(


Her issue is that she was a prosecutor and so representative of the system.
She'd need to team up with an outsider to shake that image off.


"If" she can shake it off. Her political opponents will constantly bring up her past which is fairly ugly in areas.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Aug 07, 2019 5:09 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 31630
Ewinkum wrote:
fonzeee wrote:
Ewinkum wrote:
Kamala nosedives to 1% support among black Dems after Tulsi’s takedown. Quinnipiac poll.


She is pretty unlikable so it's hard to say...but I do wonder if maybe now that there's been a black president, the idea of a black candidate isn't enough to excite black voters like it used to be? Is it the fact she used to be a prosecutor? Is it the fact she's half-Indian and not an ADOS (American descendant of slavery), and ergo "not really black"? Obviously true for Obama as well but perhaps there was still the novelty factor with him...is her platform that repugnant to black voters? Latent sexism in the black community?

Or, maybe the Obama turnout will never be seen again?

She's a poor test case but it's pretty damn interesting. It would have been unthinkable just a few years ago.


I think it’s all of the above really.
Also I’d say the vast majority of people really haven’t decided on their candidate yet. Support is fluid and fluctuating wildly with the latest news.

She looks pretty repugnant in the daylight though.
Nobody likes a lawyer.
That goes double for a prosecutor.
Double again for a prosecutor who built her career on the backs of the black community.


It's pretty interesting for sure. She looks dead in the water now, and the question is where is the black vote going to go? The ADOS thing has come out of nowhere and is going to be a big deal going forward. As it should be, as these upper class POCs are carpet bagging frauds. There can't be anyone that appeals I'd have thought. Maybe, bizarrely Biden is the best bet.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Aug 07, 2019 7:37 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 2691
Seneca of the Night wrote:
Ewinkum wrote:
fonzeee wrote:
Ewinkum wrote:
Kamala nosedives to 1% support among black Dems after Tulsi’s takedown. Quinnipiac poll.


She is pretty unlikable so it's hard to say...but I do wonder if maybe now that there's been a black president, the idea of a black candidate isn't enough to excite black voters like it used to be? Is it the fact she used to be a prosecutor? Is it the fact she's half-Indian and not an ADOS (American descendant of slavery), and ergo "not really black"? Obviously true for Obama as well but perhaps there was still the novelty factor with him...is her platform that repugnant to black voters? Latent sexism in the black community?

Or, maybe the Obama turnout will never be seen again?

She's a poor test case but it's pretty damn interesting. It would have been unthinkable just a few years ago.


I think it’s all of the above really.
Also I’d say the vast majority of people really haven’t decided on their candidate yet. Support is fluid and fluctuating wildly with the latest news.

She looks pretty repugnant in the daylight though.
Nobody likes a lawyer.
That goes double for a prosecutor.
Double again for a prosecutor who built her career on the backs of the black community.


It's pretty interesting for sure. She looks dead in the water now, and the question is where is the black vote going to go? The ADOS thing has come out of nowhere and is going to be a big deal going forward. As it should be, as these upper class POCs are carpet bagging frauds. There can't be anyone that appeals I'd have thought. Maybe, bizarrely Biden is the best bet.



They’re all carpet bagging in one way or another.
Peddling the suffering of your ancestors as an excuse for your own shortcomings is a hell of a thing to do, and if those ancestors could speak I bet they’d have some choice words for their descendants.
It’ll be interesting to see how the non ADOS POCs adjust to it, and whether it’ll fracture the monolith of the black vote.

Cory Booker is getting all sweary lately in a desperate bid to get a slice of the pie.
I’m surprised he hasn’t been doing better to be honest.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Aug 07, 2019 8:14 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 1021
Location: Saint Paul
Bowens wrote:
fonzeee wrote:
It does have some hints of Rust Belt-ness though, being a former manufacturing hub, and everything that entails.


So a couple of months ago when I was doing genealogy stuff I read up on the migration wave of French-Canadians to New England around the turn of the century. It wasn’t unlike what has happened at the southern border recently in that you had a thousands of people crossing over land to do menial jobs and ending up being resented by the established locals. Most of them settled in urban ghettos called “Little Canadas” and spoke only French and this went on for quite a while, into the 60s and even later in some places (a few border towns still speak mostly French). Predictably many of these places became wastelands after the mills and factories closed. New Hampshire has a few.

You probably saw Mike Gravel dropped out and endorsed Bernie - his parents are from that background. He spoke only French until grade school.


Interesting. There is an inner ring suburb here called Little Canada, but it seems that it was named after a French Canadian fur trapper, perhaps a relative of Ricky Gervais.

Driving around my über liberal neighbourhood of the Twin Cities I'm not seeing many yard signs. Not even for Klobuchar, which is perhaps not surprising given she is a moderate. I have seen a couple for Tulsi though.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Aug 07, 2019 8:32 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 2691
Tulsi’s at 3% in today’s Economist/Yougov poll.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Aug 07, 2019 9:09 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 15958
What's 3% gonna get her though? A bit more exposure, but no real chance of getting the nom.

A place on someone else's ticket as VP maybe?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Aug 07, 2019 9:21 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 5591
Ewinkum wrote:
Also.
Joe Rogan had The Bern on today! 8)

https://heavy.com/news/2019/08/bernie-s ... n-podcast/



Watched that yesterday. Thought he was truly impressive. Tbf since I'm a fan that doesn't really much. But rogan should really try and do that with more candidates. Bernie came across as passionate and pragmatic.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Aug 07, 2019 9:22 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 2691
Jay Cee Gee wrote:
What's 3% gonna get her though? A bit more exposure, but no real chance of getting the nom.

A place on someone else's ticket as VP maybe?


Not much really.
She’s looking for 2% or more in 4 polls so that she can qualify for the 3rd round of debates.
She already has Ecconomist/yougov in the bag so nothing gained there.
Might be an indicator of upward movement in other polls though.
I’d like to see her make it.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Aug 07, 2019 9:23 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 15958
Ewinkum wrote:
Jay Cee Gee wrote:
What's 3% gonna get her though? A bit more exposure, but no real chance of getting the nom.

A place on someone else's ticket as VP maybe?


Not much really.
She’s looking for 2% or more in 4 polls so that she can qualify for the 3rd round of debates.
She already has Ecconomist/yougov in the bag so nothing gained there.
Might be an indicator of upward movement in other polls though.
I’d like to see her make it.


Sure, but even then she's not really a contender. No one's gonna turn 3% into the nomination at this stage, so what's the real goal?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Aug 07, 2019 9:51 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 2691
Jay Cee Gee wrote:
Ewinkum wrote:
Jay Cee Gee wrote:
What's 3% gonna get her though? A bit more exposure, but no real chance of getting the nom.

A place on someone else's ticket as VP maybe?


Not much really.
She’s looking for 2% or more in 4 polls so that she can qualify for the 3rd round of debates.
She already has Ecconomist/yougov in the bag so nothing gained there.
Might be an indicator of upward movement in other polls though.
I’d like to see her make it.


Sure, but even then she's not really a contender. No one's gonna turn 3% into the nomination at this stage, so what's the real goal?


She’s the perfect VP for Sanders.
The longer she lasts (in the short term), the better.
The progressives have done an incredible job of mainstreaming their message this time around, and the sheer number of progressive candidates is largely responsible for that.
It’s hard to call Bernie crazy when he’s surrounded by others running on his ticket.

I wonder if it’s a strategy rather than just an accident, but the presence of Liz Warren and others has broadened the appeal of progressivism no end. It’s a short hop for her supporters onto the Bernie Train if she pulls out. They really need to have “The Talk” before Iowa.

There’s a bit of a controversy in Alberta at the moment involving the new Premier, Jason Kenney.
Allegedly, he ran a Kamikaze candidate when he sought the party leadership.
This candidates job was to sling all sorts of unpalatable muck at his main opponent so that Kenny could say “OMG. That’s shocking if true” while remaining above the fray himself.

Joe, Bernie and Liz can all keep their hands clean as long as they have a Tulsi or two around to do the dirty work.
I doubt it’s orchestrated. More a function of the lesser candidates needing to go hard to get noticed.
I want her to tear a strip off Liz next.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Aug 07, 2019 9:54 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 1021
Location: Saint Paul
Jay Cee Gee wrote:
Ewinkum wrote:
Jay Cee Gee wrote:
What's 3% gonna get her though? A bit more exposure, but no real chance of getting the nom.

A place on someone else's ticket as VP maybe?


Not much really.
She’s looking for 2% or more in 4 polls so that she can qualify for the 3rd round of debates.
She already has Ecconomist/yougov in the bag so nothing gained there.
Might be an indicator of upward movement in other polls though.
I’d like to see her make it.


Sure, but even then she's not really a contender. No one's gonna turn 3% into the nomination at this stage, so what's the real goal?


That's an interesting question and one that you could ask of over half the current contenders. Some sort of national exposure perhaps for a run at a later date? Of the senators running, I think all would regain their seats in 2020, so that is not it. BTW, Beto should cut his loses and run for the Texas senate seat.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Aug 07, 2019 10:07 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 2691
puku wrote:
Jay Cee Gee wrote:
Ewinkum wrote:
Jay Cee Gee wrote:
What's 3% gonna get her though? A bit more exposure, but no real chance of getting the nom.

A place on someone else's ticket as VP maybe?


Not much really.
She’s looking for 2% or more in 4 polls so that she can qualify for the 3rd round of debates.
She already has Ecconomist/yougov in the bag so nothing gained there.
Might be an indicator of upward movement in other polls though.
I’d like to see her make it.


Sure, but even then she's not really a contender. No one's gonna turn 3% into the nomination at this stage, so what's the real goal?


That's an interesting question and one that you could ask of over half the current contenders. Some sort of national exposure perhaps for a run at a later date? Of the senators running, I think all would regain their seats in 2020, so that is not it. BTW, Beto should cut his loses and run for the Texas senate seat.


Beto needs to pick a fight he can win.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Aug 07, 2019 10:08 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 8828
Location: Texas
puku wrote:
Jay Cee Gee wrote:
Ewinkum wrote:
Jay Cee Gee wrote:
What's 3% gonna get her though? A bit more exposure, but no real chance of getting the nom.

A place on someone else's ticket as VP maybe?


Not much really.
She’s looking for 2% or more in 4 polls so that she can qualify for the 3rd round of debates.
She already has Ecconomist/yougov in the bag so nothing gained there.
Might be an indicator of upward movement in other polls though.
I’d like to see her make it.


Sure, but even then she's not really a contender. No one's gonna turn 3% into the nomination at this stage, so what's the real goal?


That's an interesting question and one that you could ask of over half the current contenders. Some sort of national exposure perhaps for a run at a later date? Of the senators running, I think all would regain their seats in 2020, so that is not it. BTW, Beto should cut his loses and run for the Texas senate seat.
I assume it would position her well for a cabinet position, say secretary of defense.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Aug 08, 2019 1:44 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Posts: 5591
In true MSM fashion, the stories about the interview are all focusing on the joking question Rogan asked at the end about aliens. Also, the video is trending at number 1 on YouTube, which is impressive for an hour long video.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 2501 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 56, 57, 58, 59, 60, 61, 62, 63  Next

All times are UTC [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bayern, bessantj, BillW, Bing [Bot], comets, Crazy Ed, Cullen, Dan54., Flametop, Leinsterman, Lenny, Monkey Magic, mr flaps, Nolanator, obelixtim, Saint, shereblue, Sonny Blount, themaddog and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group