Jump to content

horncyclist

Legacy Members
  • Posts

    1908
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by horncyclist

  1. 22 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

    Bernie didn't run because he didn't want to be president. He didn't even want to run in 2016, he just couldn't let a pigfuckingly awful corporate harridan run as the party's anointed candidate without a challenge because he recognized the severity of the moment and the extended death of the working class.

    Warren might not have wanted to be president in 2016, either, which is fine. That's why I put "screwed" in quotation marks, because she hasn't actually been "screwed" by anything, she's just a first-time presidential candidate facing first-time presidential candidate problems.

    Warren didn't owe us a run in 2016. And no one owes her allegiance in 2020.

    He wouldn't even have run. He would've just campaigned for her (if she would've wanted him to).

    Does she win? Probably. 

    I'm not giving up on her. I'm going to do what I can next week and then in the lead up to Super Tuesday. I'll vote for her in Virginia.

  2. She really has to go all in on Iowa. Needs to win or be second to Bernie with Biden 3rd or 4th. If she wins, then she's suddenly the come back girl and it breaks her out of the cycle of decline. I can also see a scenario where Biden declines after losing IA and NH and she finds a lane as a compromise candidate for those who can't get behind Bernie.

    Really disappointed she hasn't rebounded more clearly. Trying to wrap my head around Bernie as the nominee and President. It's kind of a high risk, high reward/costs situation. I could see him being a disaster and letting the republicans recover from Trump somehow. 

    • Like 1
  3. 38 minutes ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

     

    I hope this is real momentum for her down the home stretch in Iowa. Reminded me of this take from Harry Enten:

     

    Does Elizabeth Warren surge too? What effect does impeachment trial next week have on Biden? Dems rally behind him? 

     

     

  4. 15 minutes ago, Mrs Whiggins said:

    Thank you for starting a thread on the Liar of State. He is not a Secretary as he does not seem capable of performing those duties as they relate to sound foreign policy, there for he is a LOS. Which in my logic (which many of you, like my spouse may find perplexing) makes him a LOSER.

    With that out of the way, here is some news regarding our once esteemed State Department.

    Friday was the deadline for Foreign Affairs officer Baluto to submit documents regarding the stalking of Ambassador Yovanovitch. He FAILED to do so. Of course he did.

    Here is the statement from the Chairman of the Foreign Affairs Committee, Eliot Engel:

    “The State Department’s failure to respond to the committee’s request is unacceptable, particularly as more information has emerged showing that Mr. Parnas apparently schemed directly with President Trump about Ambassador Yovanovitch. I have serious concerns that the security of an American ambassador and an American embassy were compromised. When she was called in the middle of the night and told to get on the next plane out of Ukraine, Ambassador Yovanovitch was warned, ‘this is about your security.’

    “I want to know what the State Department knew about it then and what actions have been taken. I’ll use all the tools at my disposal to get the answers I’m seeking from the department.”

     

    Thanks for the article on Pompeo @Bama Chick  Although I knew he had received concentrated Koch support, I did not realize he had presidential aspirations. Some of his behavior makes sense in light of his watching several of his machinations being set aflame.

    After Trump is acquitted, I don't know why the administration would respond to ANY congressional subpoeanas. I guess they might selectively to ones where they don't give a shit. But republicans in the Senate will basically be granting him a license to refuse to comply whenever it suits them? Would the McGahn case settle this? This all so insane. 

  5. So if he was so concerned about corruption on July 25, what did Zelensky do to address that concern? And why did the concern suddenly manifest itself when Zelensky was reluctant to make an announcement about a sham investigation? This is awful. GOP Senators might try to take over like they did from that lawyer lady during the Kavanaugh hearings. Let Linsdsey throw a fit and they all walk out. 

  6. 36 minutes ago, Horn Dog said:

    Good.  At this point I want the GOP to vote to not allow witnesses or documents.  Just get them on record voting for a full sham trial and acquittal.  DOTARD was never getting removed anyway.  Bolton or Malvaney were never gonna drop any bombshells either..they were gonna just refuse to answer or give vague, “I don’t recall” responses that would of provided just enough cover for the GOP.  The truth will continue to drip out regardless.  Bolton will release his book as will others who will want to cash in.  A  full blown and obvious GOP coverup is better politically for the dems, and gives them a chance at flipping the senate which is probably more important then the presidency.   

    Yeah, I think that's right. Though I think Bolton would have given them something. With each of them--and others--it would be hard to question them without documents.

    I just hope Democrats continue to fight the political fight effectively. Trump corruptly abused his power for personal gain, jeopardizing national security in the process, and then covered it up. The republicans, house and Senate, became complicit in that coverup by refusing to seek the truth. Say it again and and again and again. Then let the truth keep trickling out and vote them all out in November. A democratic president and Susan Collins and McSally gone (at a minimum). Yes, please. They should also keep pushing for the documents, which I think will speak for themselves. 

    • Like 2
  7. Where does Pence fit into this as the VP and his role as President of the Senate aka Breaker of Ties. Obviously he wouldn't come into play with the final vote because it requires 67 senators not to mention it would seem like a slight conflict of interest to let a VP cast any deciding vote that would put them in the POTUS chair.
    Does Pence break a tie if the vote is 50-50 to hear witnesses?  
    And if he's in the room, I hope one of the House managers publicly asks him to testify right then.
    He's basically recused by the Chief Justice presiding constitutional direction. They did that because the VP, who would become President, has a conflict of interest. I don't know what happens with ties through.

    Sent from my Pixel 2 using Tapatalk

  8. She's absolutely positioned herself as such, otherwise why start releasing plans where you're already set in a compromise of negotiating before even the first primary or caucus. At this point it's moot because unless polling is extremely inaccurate she doesn't have a chance.
    If Bernie is antagonistic then that's fine, because a lot of us young people are tired of a party that refuses to adapt without someone from the outside mounting a tremendous amount of pressure on the party apparatus. He absolutely has a moment of behind him if you bother to look at any of his rallies or pulling among people who are less than 40.
    This is wrong. She's rebounding in the poll averages. She's absolutely still in this. She needs to win Iowa.

    Sent from my Pixel 2 using Tapatalk

  9. Love the extremely long history of the Democratic party really improving our lives with incrementalism. It's why DSA candidates aren't becoming more popular!
    I don't see Liz an incrementalist and think she would get more change done than Bernie as President. Goals are not results.

    Sent from my Pixel 2 using Tapatalk

  10. 2 minutes ago, triplehorn said:

    How about the revelation last night that Lev Parnas was negotiating a quid pro quo between Trump camp and Firtash ---> Firtash's extradition to the US for criminal prosecution "would be taken care of" in exchange for some kind of dirt said from Firtash to implicate top Mueller investigation manager Andrew Weissmann.  Making the Firtash US extradition go away would have to incorporate Bill Barr.  

    As a Republic, it's these kinds of revelations that signal we're toast if nothing happens.

    If you have a whole political party--one with significant power--  become a party to the rampant crime and corruption, then nothing happens. You're going to see a "trial" where a majority of the jurors are co-conspirators. It's so insane where we are right now and we've just crept up to it like a frog in a pot of water creeping to a boil. 

    • Like 3
  11. Yep.  Nine months ago, I think the Democrats had 5+ options who would legitimately beat Trump in an election.  Now, after a year of hearing how bad each of them are, I'm not even sure Biden can do it.
    But then I take a step back and think of the Vanity Fair article I posted above and remember most Americans haven't even started paying attention.  
    This is what worries me so much about a Biden nomination. He's just not a good candidate and hasn't been exposed yet. Plus this Burisma shit which is like De Ja vu with Clinton emails. There's nothing there but it wont matter. Russia will trickle out out of context Hunter Biden emails and Trump will amplify. It's clear we're going to deal with Russian interference no matter what but we might want to not put up such an obviously flawed candidate.

    God help us if Trump is relelected.

    Sent from my Pixel 2 using Tapatalk

  12. Irrespective of what was actually said (and I would take Bernie's word over a habitual liar like Warren), choosing to leak this now is obviously a desperate attempt to revive a campaign that's in a death spiral.  
    How much do you get paid to post anti Warren shit? Asking for a friend. Her campaign is nowhere near a death spiral. She's third place nationally, near the top in all early and Super Tuesday states, and rebounding.

    Sent from my Pixel 2 using Tapatalk

  13. EOL3y8QWoAQbdDT?format=jpg&name=small
    Pow Wow Chow ain't going away
    Are you getting paid to post anti Warren shit? She would have a transformative agenda and knows how to get shit done. She grew up shit poor in Oklahoma and used what turned out to be a false family story of Indian heritage as she moved up to the top of her profession, an elite among elites, to try to make sense of her identity. That is hard and I can relate. It was a mistake and she's moved on.

    Trump is destroying this country and she's proposing reforms that would guard against the next Trump. She has my support 100%.

    Sent from my Pixel 2 using Tapatalk

    • Like 2
  14. Just now, bolverk said:

    You know, given the level of astonishing precision by the mussel hits on the Saudi refinery a few months ago, I wouldn’t be surprised if they shot over ‘dumb’ ballistic missiles over for a reason: show of force for domestic audience while minimizing the risk of casualties.

    Yes. And box Trump in...meanwhile get nukes and continue to spread influence. Iran may have  played this perfectly. I'm not 100% sure Fox News doesn't talk him into bombing Iran.

    • Like 1
×
×
  • Create New...