Front Office Football Central

Front Office Football Central (https://forums.operationsports.com/fofc//index.php)
-   Off Topic (https://forums.operationsports.com/fofc//forumdisplay.php?f=6)
-   -   The Biden Presidency - 2020 (https://forums.operationsports.com/fofc//showthread.php?t=97045)

Edward64 05-31-2023 12:24 PM

I'd think many are positioning themselves for the VP slot (unless they get lucky) and/or positioning for 2028. My guess is Christie is also thinking a rehabilitation tour.

Ideally there is a strong and viable candidate to Trump but, right now, the more splintered the GOP the better. A dark horse may arise.

QuikSand 05-31-2023 12:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Edward64 (Post 3402874)
Ideally there is a strong and viable candidate to Trump but, right now, the more splintered the GOP the better. A dark horse may arise.


...better for whom? Trump, presumably. He's already got around 35% of the party base on firm lockdown. In a 1:1 battle he might have some trouble, but if it's him against a clown car of aspirants each pulling a few votes here and there, that's great for him.

Ksyrup 05-31-2023 12:56 PM

See 2015-16.

GrantDawg 05-31-2023 01:43 PM

I think there is a guy that stands on a street corner and yells about being from planet Zebob that has a better chance of winning the nomination than Christie.

GrantDawg 05-31-2023 01:46 PM

If you were going to create a non-MAGA candidate to beat Trump, what would they look like? I just can't picture one at all.

Atocep 05-31-2023 01:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GrantDawg (Post 3402881)
If you were going to create a non-MAGA candidate to beat Trump, what would they look like? I just can't picture one at all.


A moderate evangelical that's willing to go toe to toe, highlight Trump's flaws, and call him out on his religious pandering. Like I said, it's threading the needle but doable.

Nearly anyone else needs to pull part of the MAGA base away from Trump and none of those candidates seem to understand not showing weakness is the top thing MAGA looks for. Own the libs is 2nd because if you're weak you're not going to own the libs hard enough. DeSantis doesn't get that and it's why Trump has been able to bury him.

molson 05-31-2023 01:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GrantDawg (Post 3402881)
If you were going to create a non-MAGA candidate to beat Trump, what would they look like? I just can't picture one at all.


Maybe a young military guy? That seems to be the go-to Republican candidate in TV shows when they want to portray him as widely popular.

GrantDawg 05-31-2023 02:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Atocep (Post 3402883)
A moderate evangelical that's willing to go toe to toe, highlight Trump's flaws, and call him out on his religious pandering. Like I said, it's threading the needle but doable.

Nearly anyone else needs to pull part of the MAGA base away from Trump and none of those candidates seem to understand not showing weakness is the top thing MAGA looks for. Own the libs is 2nd because if you're weak you're not going to own the libs hard enough. DeSantis doesn't get that and it's why Trump has been able to bury him.

It is not "nearly anyone else", it is anyone. You cannot win the nomination without somehow pulling some MAGA support, period. It is too big a percentage of the party now. I would say a moderate has to somehow appeal to at least 10-15% of that base more than Trump or a Trump-lite. And to hope to win the general, they have then keep 70-80% of them on board and voting while pulling a majority of moderate independents. (All numbers pulled from my butt, yet I don't think far off)

GrantDawg 05-31-2023 02:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by molson (Post 3402884)
Maybe a young military guy? That seems to be the go-to Republican candidate in TV shows when they want to portray him as widely popular.

What's his positions? How is going to thread the needle of getting at least some of the extremist support without losing more moderate support? I have a hard time imaging the platform. Pro-choice but banning late term abortions? How does he back off on the Anti-CRT, Anti-woke garbage, yet still sell him self to evangelicals? I think the financial part is easy. The classic GOP "I'm going to cut your taxes, reduce the deficit, and spend more money on defense than can possibily exist in the world" lie people will always buy.It is all the social issues that will be the mine-field.
I mean, really big charisma would make a huge difference. An ability to destroy Trump verbally while not breaking a sweat is a must as well.

NobodyHere 05-31-2023 02:21 PM

Sounds like it's almost time for the 2024 Republican Nomination Thread

Ksyrup 05-31-2023 02:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GrantDawg (Post 3402887)
What's his positions? How is going to thread the needle of getting at least some of the extremist support without losing more moderate support? I have a hard time imaging the platform. Pro-choice but banning late term abortions? How does he back off on the Anti-CRT, Anti-woke garbage, yet still sell him self to evangelicals? I think the financial part is easy. The classic GOP "I'm going to cut your taxes, reduce the deficit, and spend more money on defense than can possibily exist in the world" lie people will always buy.It is all the social issues that will be the mine-field.
I mean, really big charisma would make a huge difference. An ability to destroy Trump verbally while not breaking a sweat is a must as well.


My brother and I were just talking about this. His exact quote was, the GOP needs another Eisenhower.

GrantDawg 05-31-2023 02:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by NobodyHere (Post 3402888)
Sounds like it's almost time for the 2024 Republican Nomination Thread

Done.

stevew 05-31-2023 02:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GrantDawg (Post 3402881)
If you were going to create a non-MAGA candidate to beat Trump, what would they look like? I just can't picture one at all.


Straight Pete Buttigieg

GrantDawg 05-31-2023 03:12 PM

The first vote dealing with the debt limit law. Typical political games.


NobodyHere 05-31-2023 03:15 PM

What's going on there?

GrantDawg 05-31-2023 03:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by NobodyHere (Post 3402906)
What's going on there?

Dems trying to force the GOP to have the majority of the vote. It is in protest of the whole process.

NobodyHere 05-31-2023 03:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GrantDawg (Post 3402907)
Dems trying to force the GOP to have the majority of the vote. It is in protest of the whole process.


Is there an actual point to this protest? It looks like silly nonsense from my perspective.

GrantDawg 05-31-2023 03:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by NobodyHere (Post 3402908)
Is there an actual point to this protest? It looks like silly nonsense from my perspective.

It means something to them. It is the same performative stuff that goes on pretty regularly in the House. I predict as much earlier.

GrantDawg 05-31-2023 03:36 PM

To be fair, there is a reason that does make some sense. Minoroty Leader Jefferies told McCarthy that the bill must pass with at least a majority of the Republicans voting for it. If a huge number of Dems vote for it, it will allow the Republicans political cover to vote against it. That would protect them from primary attacks that they "caved to the WH".

molson 05-31-2023 05:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Atocep (Post 3402870)
I really think some of these people, like Christie, think they can peel the non-maga GOP away and beat Trump.


Trump could always die too. Or have a massive stroke or something. Or be charged with a lot more stuff. Or murder and eat a baby. Who knows.

Ksyrup 05-31-2023 05:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by molson (Post 3402924)
Trump could always die too. Or have a massive stroke or something. Or be charged with a lot more stuff. Or murder and eat a baby. Who knows.


The latter few would increase his support. The first, when it happens, will result in him being treated even more as a religious figure than he is already. Not to mention, the conspiracy theories will be OFF THE HOOK!

Atocep 05-31-2023 05:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ksyrup (Post 3402926)
The latter few would increase his support. The first, when it happens, will result in him being treated even more as a religious figure than he is already. Not to mention, the conspiracy theories will be OFF THE HOOK!


If Trump died while campaigning he'd be the GOP Tupac. There'd be so many conspiracies about him being alive and sightings, ect.

JPhillips 05-31-2023 06:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GrantDawg (Post 3402907)
Dems trying to force the GOP to have the majority of the vote. It is in protest of the whole process.


The more votes from the GOP the better for McCarthy.

GrantDawg 05-31-2023 06:36 PM

In the end, there were only 29 "nay" votes from the GOP. Only 52 Dems voted "yay."

Sent from my SM-S916U using Tapatalk

Lathum 05-31-2023 07:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GrantDawg (Post 3402950)
In the end, there were only 29 "nay" votes from the GOP. Only 52 Dems voted "yay."

Sent from my SM-S916U using Tapatalk


29 is a terrible number. He is so weak.

GrantDawg 05-31-2023 08:23 PM

Tje vote on the actual bill is getting overwhelming support. 268-90 right now.

Sent from my SM-S916U using Tapatalk

bronconick 05-31-2023 08:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lathum (Post 3402962)
29 is a terrible number. He is so weak.


71 no's, now.

GrantDawg 05-31-2023 08:25 PM

The Dems actually outvoted the GOP by 20 in the final count.

Sent from my SM-S916U using Tapatalk

GrantDawg 05-31-2023 08:26 PM

Bronconick, that was for the rule vote.

Sent from my SM-S916U using Tapatalk

Edward64 05-31-2023 08:50 PM

Now off to the Senate.

Edward64 05-31-2023 09:24 PM

Good luck and more power to her. If one isn't happy in the US, take the initiative and remake your life somewhere else. Plenty of other immigrants willing to take her place.

But somehow I doubt she's thought through this well, and suspect she won't be happy in the long run. Assume she'll be able to return if she so chooses (dual citizenship and all that).

Tara Reade: Woman who accused Biden of sexually assaulting her in 1993 defects to Russia | CNN
Quote:

A former staffer who accused Joe Biden of sexual assault has defected to Moscow, telling state media that she felt “safe” in Russia and would seek citizenship there.

Tara Reade, who drew headlines during the 2020 presidential race by accusing then-candidate Biden of sexually harassing and assaulting her, said she decided to go to Russia after receiving threats in the US.
Quote:

Reade said she decided to come to Russia following death threats she received this year after she reiterated her accusations regarding Biden and announced on Twitter that she was willing “to testify under oath in Congress if asked.”

“When I got off the plane in Moscow, for the first time in a very long time I felt safe, and I felt heard, and I felt respected. That has not happened in my own country,” Reade said.
:
Reade said that “this illusion of Russia as an enemy is propagated by a few Washington elites who are determined to cause problems.”

GrantDawg 06-01-2023 06:25 AM

Does sort of beg the question, why didn't the Republicans call her to testify in congress?

albionmoonlight 06-01-2023 07:18 AM

I guess it isn't fully over yet, but the House's part of it is.

McCarthy took Biden from "we won't negotiate" to an intensely-negotiated deal. And he got his conference to pass it. And there does not appear that there will be a formal challenge to his Speakership--just a lot of hot air blown his way.

He deserves credit--this could have blown up in the GOPs face several times as they stepped on rakes (which is clearly what the White House was expecting/hoping for). And it didn't. He did pretty much what he said he was going to do the whole time.

Atocep 06-01-2023 11:34 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GrantDawg (Post 3402988)
Does sort of beg the question, why didn't the Republicans call her to testify in congress?


‘Manipulative, deceitful, user’: Tara Reade left a trail of aggrieved acquaintances - POLITICO

Because even by republican standards she isn't remotely believable.

GrantDawg 06-01-2023 12:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Atocep (Post 3403013)

You know how easy that is to pass off as character assignation, though? "The Dems are just attacking the victim..." "Believe women!" etc. etc.
I can't help but wonder if there isn't a bigger smoking gun out there. One other than she doesn't come off as credible, because that has never stopped Republicans before.

Lathum 06-01-2023 02:51 PM

Not a great look.


NobodyHere 06-01-2023 03:19 PM

One fall for a guy his age can have a lot of bad consequences. He really needs to consider not running (no pun intended) in 2024.

Lathum 06-01-2023 04:02 PM

He tripped over a poorly placed sandbag, so of course the ghouls are pivoting to claiming he's blind.

Our country is irredeemable at this point.

GrantDawg 06-01-2023 04:30 PM

Dude is 80 and he bounced up like he was 25. That's the bigger story. I'm 54, and I fall probably once a week. I don't bounce up like that.

Sent from my SM-S916U using Tapatalk

molson 06-01-2023 06:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GrantDawg (Post 3403064)
Dude is 80 and he bounced up like he was 25. That's the bigger story. I'm 54, and I fall probably once a week. I don't bounce up like that.

Sent from my SM-S916U using Tapatalk


This should be a thing at presidential debates. Every candidate gets shoved to the ground, and we can see how quickly they get back up. The shover could be a celebrity, like maybe the Rock.

NobodyHere 06-01-2023 06:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by molson (Post 3403079)
This should be a thing at presidential debates. Every candidate gets shoved to the ground, and we can see how quickly they get back up. The shover could be a celebrity, like maybe the Rock.


How is this not a thing yet?

GrantDawg 06-01-2023 06:53 PM

I would buy that on PPV even.
Meanwhile, Senate has the debt ceiling bill up fir vote. They expect it won't officially pass until midnight because they have to slap down 11 amendments first.

Sent from my SM-S916U using Tapatalk

thesloppy 06-01-2023 07:25 PM

Presidential combine

thesloppy 06-01-2023 07:27 PM

"I voted for Wilbur, his policies are garbage now, but his short-shuttle was off the charts!"

Kodos 06-01-2023 07:28 PM

Presidential burpee contests!

Edward64 06-01-2023 07:36 PM

Presidential Olympic Games ... running, cycling, swimming, and definitely boxing & Greco Roman wrestling.

Lathum 06-01-2023 07:41 PM

I've no doubt Biden is in better physical shape than Trump. He should actually challenge him to some series of physical events. A triathlon or something. Trump says no he looks like a coward. Says yes and he gets embarrassed.

Ksyrup 06-01-2023 07:49 PM

Karaoke contest. Not singing, but the warmup exercise.

Atocep 06-01-2023 09:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by molson (Post 3403079)
This should be a thing at presidential debates. Every candidate gets shoved to the ground, and we can see how quickly they get back up. The shover could be a celebrity, like maybe the Rock.


Trump would get a bone spurs waiver.

cuervo72 06-01-2023 10:07 PM

Good luck trying to shove Christie to the ground.

RainMaker 06-01-2023 10:14 PM

Let Herschel Walker run.

PilotMan 06-01-2023 10:14 PM

This is rather shocking

https://twitter.com/ArmandDoma/statu...564147200?s=20

Ghost Econ 06-02-2023 06:03 AM

And people laughed at Shia Lebouf in Eagle Eye.

albionmoonlight 06-02-2023 06:33 AM

Biden should veto the debt ceiling bill and launch into the Roddy Piper "Just when you think you have the answers, I start changing the questions!" promo.

Brian Swartz 06-02-2023 06:57 AM

I would for real not even joking just cancel the debates. They're nearly irrelevant and have been for a whiole.

Oh, we're still over-reacting to Biden tripping? Ok.

NobodyHere 06-02-2023 07:17 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cuervo72 (Post 3403115)
Good luck trying to shove Christie to the ground.


I think the secret is that you have to hit him in the stomach.


Fidatelo 06-02-2023 07:21 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by thesloppy (Post 3403091)
Presidential combine



Pretty sure that's the next step towards President Dwayne Elizondo Mountain Dew Camacho.

Edward64 06-02-2023 07:21 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Brian Swartz (Post 3403129)
I would for real not even joking just cancel the debates. They're nearly irrelevant and have been for a whiole.


I want to see the Democratic & GOP series of debates (after it's been weaned down some). I want to hear from the "others".

I do agree that if it comes down to Biden & Trump, the Presidential debates are close to meaningless as everyone clearly understands both candidate's positions and pros/cons.

But if it came down to a Biden & DeSantis, sure I want to hear them debate. If it was a Dimon & DeSantis, absolutely I want to hear them debate etc.

Lathum 06-02-2023 07:31 AM

Debates are pointless. If you're basing your vote on a debate just stay home.

All they are is candidates giving an answer to a completely different question because they want to wedge in their agenda. Now with trump they have become WWE level.

Edward64 06-02-2023 07:32 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by NobodyHere (Post 3403131)
I think the secret is that you have to hit him in the stomach.


Wrong.

Move around and get him to the ground. The Hackney method from the glory days of no weight limit MMA.

https://www.facebook.com/watch/?v=355436859605558

Brian Swartz 06-02-2023 07:34 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Edward64
But if it came down to a Biden & DeSantis, sure I want to hear them debate. If it was a Dimon & DeSantis, absolutely I want to hear them debate etc.


Serious question: why? What does a debate tell you about their ability to do the job of being President that you don't learn from how they handle the eleventy bazillion other public appearances they make, their public statements, how they run their campaign, how they conduct themselves at their convention, etc.

Edward64 06-02-2023 07:57 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Brian Swartz (Post 3403137)
Serious question: why? What does a debate tell you about their ability to do the job of being President that you don't learn from how they handle the eleventy bazillion other public appearances they make, their public statements, how they run their campaign, how they conduct themselves at their convention, etc.


I think many here think debates are meaningless because they (1) believe they are well informed and (2) made up their minds already. That may be the case, but there are still many first-time voters & independents.

Would I vote for Trump vs Biden? No ... but if Biden is clearly confused and performs poorly, that may change my decision (see Admiral Stockdale or somewhat relevant comparison Diane Feinstein).

See below for some reasons to continue debates.

Opinion: Why America needs presidential debates now more than ever | CNN
Quote:

First, the objection that debates don’t influence the election outcome because they don’t change voters’ minds. In close elections such as 2000 and 2016, where narrow margins in one or a few key states determined the outcome, debates could make the difference. Exit polling from 2016, for example, showed that 21% of voters said Supreme Court appointments were “the most important factor” in their choice – the topic for the first 15 minutes of the third debate – with 56% of those respondents having voted for Trump.

In our view, they were among Trump’s most effective 15 minutes of the entire campaign. He reminded wavering Republicans after the uproar over his lewd comments in the “Access Hollywood” tape why they wanted a Republican in the White House.

Quote:

Our research with pre- and post-debate surveys consistently shows that debates influence undecided and wavering viewers. It’s true that many voters use debates to confirm their vote choice, not to change it. However, in this election year, where the undecided group is small but millions of young Americans are eligible to vote for the first time, the debates could be crucial shaping new voters’ choices and deciding the outcome.

Quote:

Then there’s the argument that debates are not substantive and present no new information.
:
Many studies reveal that viewers gain important information from debates. Our reviews of hundreds of focus group transcripts since 1992 shows that every group had members who say they learned something new. Knowledge gained from debates by first-time and leaning, but not committed, voters increases confidence in their choice and may even influence their decision to go to the polls at all.
Quote:

Town hall viewers also found this event more engaging and reported heightened political interest and decreased political cynicism following their exposure to a town hall exchange.
And ends with what I agree with. There are disastrous debates, but fix it vs eliminating them.

Quote:

Rather than scrapping time-honored debates – either primary or general – why not continue to improve them?

GrantDawg 06-02-2023 10:04 AM

Debates definitely move polls. It is really the only time most people even pay attention to many politicians. It has also shown how some candidates deal with pressure, even as low pressure as they are set up. There have been stars that have come out of debates, and favorites who have completely tanked because of debates.
Debate formats can be improved for sure, but removing is a bad idea.

Sent from my SM-S916U using Tapatalk

JPhillips 06-02-2023 10:26 AM

Debate questions should be made public a week before the debate. Coming up with answers as quickly as possible isn't really a part of the job.

Vegas Vic 06-02-2023 11:14 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lathum (Post 3403060)
He tripped over a poorly placed sandbag, so of course the ghouls are pivoting to claiming he's blind..


I guess the question that hasn't yet been answered is why the fuck was a sandbag on the stage next to the podium?

Lathum 06-02-2023 11:37 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vegas Vic (Post 3403155)
I guess the question that hasn't yet been answered is why the fuck was a sandbag on the stage next to the podium?


My assumption is perhaps it was windy, they were in Colorado I believe, and it was holding something down such as a wire of cord.

the whole thing is so stupid. Anyone who ha children has done something similar 100 times over.

albionmoonlight 06-02-2023 11:56 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lathum (Post 3403157)
My assumption is perhaps it was windy, they were in Colorado I believe, and it was holding something down such as a wire of cord.

the whole thing is so stupid. Anyone who ha children has done something similar 100 times over.


You clearly haven't seen leftist conspiracy theory twitter speculating that a secret service agent secretly loyal to Trump put it there to make Biden trip.

albionmoonlight 06-02-2023 12:07 PM

to be clear, I find leftist conspiracy twitter as silly as MAGA conspiracy twitter

flere-imsaho 06-02-2023 12:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fidatelo (Post 3403132)
Pretty sure that's the next step towards President Dwayne Elizondo Mountain Dew Camacho.


President Dwayne Elizondo Mountain Dew Camacho, when presented evidence of his policies empirically not working, went and changed his policies, making him, which sets him apart from every GOP President since (and maybe including) Eisenhower.

JPhillips 06-02-2023 12:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by albionmoonlight (Post 3403160)
You clearly haven't seen leftist conspiracy theory twitter speculating that a secret service agent secretly loyal to Trump put it there to make Biden trip.


Having done a lot of that kind of work it was either a union guy that was too lazy/didn't have time or it was someone from the Air Force Academy thinking they were helping but causing problems instead.

GrantDawg 06-02-2023 01:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JPhillips (Post 3403153)
Debate questions should be made public a week before the debate. Coming up with answers as quickly as possible isn't really a part of the job.

Large part of being a president is communication. Presidents constantly are not just giving speeches but answering questions from the press and the public. Many times those questions aren't given to them a week in advance, and how they answer them can have huge political, financial and diplomatic consequences. So, they absolutely should have to answer questions they aren't given ahead of time.

PilotMan 06-02-2023 01:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by albionmoonlight (Post 3403162)
to be clear, I find leftist conspiracy twitter as silly as MAGA conspiracy twitter



They have a lot more in common than not.

JPhillips 06-02-2023 05:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GrantDawg (Post 3403174)
Large part of being a president is communication. Presidents constantly are not just giving speeches but answering questions from the press and the public. Many times those questions aren't given to them a week in advance, and how they answer them can have huge political, financial and diplomatic consequences. So, they absolutely should have to answer questions they aren't given ahead of time.


But Presidents flub those all the time and the staff "clarifies." I don't really care what's the first thing they say, I care about what they and their team are going to do. The gotcha debate format obscures rather than illuminates.

GrantDawg 06-02-2023 06:10 PM

I disagree. If you can't handle the softballs in a debate format, you are a poor for the job.

Sent from my SM-S916U using Tapatalk

thesloppy 06-02-2023 07:02 PM

I guess I could see the parallels between talking to other world leaders, but otherwise I share the opinion that the debates are useless. The last thing I want is the President doing is making crucial decisions, absolutely alone, in real-time. I have always felt like the best debate answer would be repeating: "My job is president is to collect the best experts for each position and rely heavily on their experienced advice before making the most informed decision I can, and that is what I would do in this case." Rinse, repeat for every single question.

The debates should be a 15-minute infomercial for each side, describing exactly what particular policies will be the cornerstones of their campaign, and which particular people will be the cornerstones of their cabinet.

Vegas Vic 06-02-2023 07:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by albionmoonlight (Post 3403162)
to be clear, I find leftist conspiracy twitter as silly as MAGA conspiracy twitter


The whole thing is being blow out of proportion. With that being said, this one certainly didn't age very well.


Brian Swartz 06-03-2023 12:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Edward64
I think many here think debates are meaningless because they (1) believe they are well informed and (2) made up their minds already. That may be the case, but there are still many first-time voters & independents.


That's not why I think they are meaningless.

Quote:

Originally Posted by GrantDawg
Debates definitely move polls.


I would respectfully challenge this assertion. I can't think a of a single debate in the last several cycles that even moved polls enough to be close to the margin of error in impact.

Quote:

In close elections such as 2000 and 2016, where narrow margins in one or a few key states determined the outcome, debates could make the difference. Exit polling from 2016, for example, showed that 21% of voters said Supreme Court appointments were “the most important factor” in their choice – the topic for the first 15 minutes of the third debate – with 56% of those respondents having voted for Trump.

In our view, they were among Trump’s most effective 15 minutes of the entire campaign.

This is a terrible argument. One, nothing connects SCOTUS appointments, which are always an important issue, to what Trump said in the debate. The only evidence we have that this was a result of the debate is that the authors says so. Secondly anything can change the result of a close election. Bad or good weather in key districts. Reactions to unrelated events in the news cycle. A minor slip by a candidate in the weeks leading up to it. If it's that close, you're practically flipping a coin.

The article claims that they have impact, but cites not a single verifiable fact which supports that claim.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Edward64
There are disastrous debates, but fix it vs eliminating them.


Fix it how? The problem isn't with debates themselves as a thing, but with two other factors. One is the electorate. People determining their vote primarily by the letter in front of the candidates name, followed by a much greater interest in 'gotcha' soundbites, taking what people say out of context, and general distortion/sensationalism/demagoguery as compared to rational discussion of issues is the problem. That's not fixable by anything other than a societal change. I.e. the reason that the Trump-Biden debates were a disaster is primarily because a significant amount of people not only tolerated but desired Trump's behavior. Interrupting opponents in debates, softball questions, etc. have escalated over recent decades by candidates in general.

If voters punished candidates who act like complete asshats at a serious event, then yes debates could matter in that sense. They don't.

The other reason is the point that JPhillips made. I agree with GrantDawg that communication is a key part of a President's job, but we have tons of info on what they do on that front prior to the debate. It's not like they don't make speeches, interact with the press, have a track record or lack thereof to examine, etc. We have very long campaigns and by the time the debates show up in the general we know plenty about the candidates.

bronconick 06-03-2023 01:12 PM

Until (If?) this country becomes less partisan over everything, debates are a waste of time and money. Right now, elections are almost entirely about turnout.

Flasch186 06-03-2023 02:11 PM

I totally agree with BS

It’s simply car crash style of entertainment if you want to call it that

No one is held to account for the things they say and then double back on after getting into office so the words are less than meaningless. They’re just sales and marketing and worth less.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

NobodyHere 06-03-2023 03:22 PM

It looks like they don't exactly hire the "best" for secret service detail

Secret Service agents didn't see an intruder get into a Biden official's home because they were distracted on their cellphones

Thomkal 06-03-2023 03:51 PM

oh boy I hope they were removed from that detail.

Edward64 06-03-2023 09:29 PM

Congrats Joe.

Kevin, you proved the naysayers wrong this time. Frak the Freedom caucus. All you need is to compromise enough with Democrats, and they will be enough to help you override the crazies (include the recall threat).

But for now, back to regularly scheduled programming on inflation & recession worries.

Quote:

The White House Twitter account tweeted this image on June 3, 2023, saying, "Today, President Biden signed the bipartisan budget agreement into law -- avoiding a first-ever default while protecting key investments in the American people."

Edward64 06-04-2023 09:55 PM

Tragic situation but good to know the Air Force/NORAD was on the ball.

Wonder what happened to the pilot, sounds like cabin depressurization/oxygen ala Payne Stewart.

Quote:

Residents in the Gambrills area told 11 News the sound sounded like an explosion, thunder or an earthquake.

"Our Ring notifications were going crazy with so many different options. Was it the Navy? Or was it a sonic boom? Or was it an earthquake?" said Sandy Abuarja, of Gambrills.

"I heard a plane overhead, so I thought maybe it was a jet and it crossed the sound barrier, but I've heard that before and it also seemed a little too loud," said River Grannis, who was visiting the Gambrills area.

Shortly after 3 p.m., there were multiple calls to 911, and 11 News received multiple inquiries.

Early on, the city of Annapolis Office of Emergency Management said the loud "boom" was caused by an authorized Department of Defense flight, which caused a sonic boom. The city of Bowie tweeted it confirmed the loud boom was a sonic boom from a plane out of Joint Base Andrews.

NORAD sent a statement to 11 News, saying F-16 fighter aircraft responded in coordination with the FAA to an unresponsive Cessna 560 Citation V aircraft over Washington, D.C., and Northern Virginia.

albionmoonlight 06-05-2023 08:53 AM

Chinese Warship Cut Off U.S. Destroyer

I know very little about the norms of international relations.

Is this normal sabre rattling by China? Or is this a more pointed fuck you than normal?

Lathum 06-05-2023 09:23 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by albionmoonlight (Post 3403310)
Chinese Warship Cut Off U.S. Destroyer

I know very little about the norms of international relations.

Is this normal sabre rattling by China? Or is this a more pointed fuck you than normal?


I just heard an interview with former NATO commander James Stavritis. HE came across as it being a more pointed FU. Said it was an incredibly dangerous maneuver and had the ships collided both could have sunk. Said the order likely come from pretty high up.

Edward64 06-05-2023 09:38 AM

I think both. I read stories of US & Soviet/Russian subs playing games with each other. There's been collisions.

I think it's inevitable these naval & air incidents continue for the foreseeable future as both are positioning in APAC. It's the bully asserting itself and the once-former/less of a bully helping out the nerds scenario.

Atocep 06-06-2023 11:18 AM

Republicans Urge Immigrants to Stay in Florida, Fearing New Law's Impact

Other than the obvious panic because people aren't showing up to work and are moving out of the state, I dont understand the messaging here. Is "we were just trying to scare you a bit" supposed to make people feel more comfortable?

This reeks of the find out part of fuck around and find out.

albionmoonlight 06-06-2023 11:21 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Atocep (Post 3403396)
Republicans Urge Immigrants to Stay in Florida, Fearing New Law's Impact

Other than the obvious panic because people aren't showing up to work and are moving out of the state, I sent understand the messaging here. Is "we were just trying to scare you a bit" supposed to make people feel more comfortable?

This reeks of the find out part of fuck around and find out.


It seems like a new system that significantly increases legal immigration while more strongly enforcing rules barring illegal immigration would be a win/win that a majority of people would support.

But I just don't see the pro-immigration and the anti-immigration sides trusting each other enough to actually get a deal through.

JPhillips 06-06-2023 11:39 AM

Since Bush2 there's been room for an immigration deal, but the far right has made it impossible to get it through Congress. The short time Obama had 60 Senate votes was taken up by the ACA. Most of the past twenty years there's been a majority in favor of this type of bill, but like so much, majority will doesn't matter.

GrantDawg 06-06-2023 11:48 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by albionmoonlight (Post 3403397)
It seems like a new system that significantly increases legal immigration while more strongly enforcing rules barring illegal immigration would be a win/win that a majority of people would support.

But I just don't see the pro-immigration and the anti-immigration sides trusting each other enough to actually get a deal through.

I have seen the pro-immigration side willing to make a deal like that multiple times. In the end there is a segment of the anti-immigration that just wasn't zero POC entering the country.

albionmoonlight 06-06-2023 12:14 PM

As expected, the MAGA caucus members, having vented about McCarthy, are now taking the smart approach and backing down and saying it's time to look forward, etc. etc. etc.

At the end of the day, the Biden/McCarthy negotiation ended up being . . . pretty normal. The extremes of both sides weren't happy (at least not in public), but it pretty much met in the middle and let everyone come out claiming a win.

I think that it has just been so long since we've seen normal legislating that we all kind of forgot what it looked like.

Ksyrup 06-06-2023 12:16 PM

McCarthy is holding back on agreeing with the Senate for more Ukraine money which I'm guessing is part of the internal negotiation.

Edward64 06-06-2023 12:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by albionmoonlight (Post 3403405)
I think that it has just been so long since we've seen normal legislating that we all kind of forgot what it looked like.


It's definitely been a while.

Edward64 06-07-2023 06:16 AM

I'm not sure what the answer is. Merck has a right to recoup their investments, and US certainly do not want to de-incentivize pharmas on new research.

Below reports that non-generic versions are being targeted. Patents are good for 20 years but there are ways that pharma's extend their patents.

https://www.cnbc.com/2023/06/06/merc...otiations.html
Quote:

Merck has sued the Department of Health and Human Services over Medicare’s new powers to reduce drug prices under the Inflation Reduction Act.

The suit in federal court in Washington, D.C., is the opening salvo in the pharmaceutical industry’s efforts to weaken the program.
:
Under the Inflation Reduction Act, HHS will select 10 drugs to be drawn into a first round of price negotiations. Those drugs will be some that Medicare Part D spends the most money on and that have no generic competition.
I agree with below. The US is subsidizing pharma profits where they could instead charge more globally.

Quote:

Bill Sweeney, the AARP’s chief lobbyist, accused the pharmaceutical industry of fighting to “pad their profits” while Americans face the highest drug prices in the world.

“Seniors and taxpayers are tired of being the piggy bank for the profits of big drug companies,” Sweeney said in a statement Tuesday. “Lawsuits like this are simply an attempt to keep high profits by gouging America’s seniors.”

I break it down into (1) payer (2) provider and (3) pharma & other medical products. Good step in addressing pharma. Need to also work on payers & providers.

Lathum 06-07-2023 09:00 AM

Not sure where to put this. Chris Licht out at cnn. What a disaster.

GrantDawg 06-07-2023 09:30 AM

Next up at CNN, Kendall Roy.

Sent from my SM-S916U using Tapatalk

Lathum 06-07-2023 09:41 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GrantDawg (Post 3403489)
Next up at CNN, Kendall Roy.

Sent from my SM-S916U using Tapatalk


haha

We just started watching this show. About 6 episodes in so far.

QuikSand 06-07-2023 11:56 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GrantDawg (Post 3403489)
Next up at CNN, Kendall Roy.

Sent from my SM-S916U using Tapatalk


We're thinking... uhh... it's like... uhh... Masterclass meets mid-80s MTV meets Max Headroom... it's gonna be...like... off the hook, right?

GrantDawg 06-07-2023 02:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lathum (Post 3403491)
haha

We just started watching this show. About 6 episodes in so far.

I'm so jealous. I would love to watch it again for the first time.

Lathum 06-07-2023 02:52 PM

It’s really good. Usually I multi task while we watch shows. Play a text sim or poker. I find myself really engaged though. We have an outdoor tv and watch while the kids are swimming. Should probably be careful.


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 09:29 AM.

Powered by vBulletin Version 3.6.0
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.