-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
-
We have made minor adjustments to how the search bar works on ResetEra. You can read about the changes here.
US PoliEra 2019 |OT7| It's happening
- Thread starter Ogodei
- Start date
- Status
And you also said that she was "a dyed-in-the-wool Reaganite" despite her saying Ford is the only R she voted for.
It Begins
I'm late, but this is right on the money. It's why she's a much more dangerous candidate against the GOP than Bernie is. She can easily weaponize her backstory against the charges of socialism and disarm that like of attack.
User Banned (5 Days): Inflammatory accusations, Antagonizing other users
I've encountered plenty of Trump supporters who didn't bother to vote in 2016. Warren's published writings from the time speak to her political/economic position in 1980.
You and Kirblar are really all aboard the "being called a racist is worse than being a racist" train, aren't you?
How in the fuck you're taking that away from what I said, I have no idea.
The political parties prior to the 90s were not ideologically polarized yet. The Southern Strategy had not yet metastasized in the GOP and you had both (actual) conservative Dems and liberal Republicans due to regional variations. One of those conservative Dems still represents Alabama as a Senator. For the GOP. Applying today's framing of the parties in a period when the realignment hadn't fully kicked in yet is a big mistake to make.
Just like the mob, all doing their kickbacks up to the boss. The USAF, Barr, Pence, all doing it, McCarthy even joking about it this week.
If new or enough of a mountain of shit came to their attention, they might not need McGahn now and can save him for the formal impeachment hearings.
Did she follow her heart, her intuition? Did it lead her in the right direction?
So he did something good for once and immediately walked it back. Why am I not surprised?
I wonder if whatever this is ties in with Dan Coats' ouster. He was basically fired late July but left mid August...
Regardless of what this is, Dan Coats is definitely a guy the Dems should subpoena during their impeachment investigation. They were stopped last time but that was back when Repubs held the chamber...
Hey, but that bizarre quip about race and racism was totally warranted and not at all antagonistic or inflammatory. God forbid people are asked to defend their word choice.
They know they have nothing to run on, so they're sticking with the hits. It's going to be fun watching the flailing this election.
Last edited:
Elizabeth Warren's change is less from Republican to Democrat as it is from mostly apolitical academic to liberal progressive champion based on actual evidence of how terrible the GOP was/is
Which a lot of people can probably relate to in the age of Trump.
Which a lot of people can probably relate to in the age of Trump.
Okay so, I watched the full debate from last night finally, and I should add I was tuned out of a lot of the pre and post debate discussion, expectations, etc. I just didn't care and wanted to watch it for what it was.
I honestly thought that overall it was quite a good debate, sure there was some sparring but a healthy amount. I think it made the candidates look good and can definitely give people a better idea about how they should form their opinions on them.
The energy they spent arguing their disagreements was mild enough that it didn't ruin the debate, with the exception of Castro maybe getting a little triggered early on in regard to Pete's commentary and Biden's memory, but whatever. It was a good debate.
I don't think Bernie looked "too old" or whatever last night, I think it was a combination of the lighting and his voice going out for some reason. Other than that, same old Bernie.
Not sure why donors are wanting to leave Harris, she did a really nice job.
I don't really have a favorite from the debate, but I guess I'd say Warren, Beto, Booker, Harris, Pete, and Castro were best.
I honestly thought that overall it was quite a good debate, sure there was some sparring but a healthy amount. I think it made the candidates look good and can definitely give people a better idea about how they should form their opinions on them.
The energy they spent arguing their disagreements was mild enough that it didn't ruin the debate, with the exception of Castro maybe getting a little triggered early on in regard to Pete's commentary and Biden's memory, but whatever. It was a good debate.
I don't think Bernie looked "too old" or whatever last night, I think it was a combination of the lighting and his voice going out for some reason. Other than that, same old Bernie.
Not sure why donors are wanting to leave Harris, she did a really nice job.
I don't really have a favorite from the debate, but I guess I'd say Warren, Beto, Booker, Harris, Pete, and Castro were best.
Last edited:
OK this is gonna go places. We talkin like a wool sock? Standard-ass athletic sock? You gonna boil it, or just eat it raw? Maybe season it up a bit idk.
Really I don't know if Ossoff wins or not I just wanna see someone eat a sock
The timeline appears to be this:
July 28: Trump announces DNI Coats departure
August 8: Deputy DNI Sue Gordon resigns effective August 15
August 12: Whistleblower files complaint
August 15: Coats and Gordon depart
Seen this story pointed out on Twitter that might take on more meaning yet...:
of the House also-rans running for Senate, he probably has the best chance
A GA-06 double feature with Ossoff and McBath running for both seats is probably too much to hope for, but I think that would be a great ticket.
So does this chart mean people stop saying that the top Biden second choice is Sanders based entirely off the single Morning Consult poll? Lol.
B or Bust.
Get the strongest, whitest daddy you can find, and hold on to him for dear life.
What does this mean though? Are they trying to make a case challenging Dems impeachment proceedings in court because they feel their inconsistencies = purely political grounds for impeachment and thus unconstitutional as it should not be considered legitimate?
They're arguing against the Democratic rationale for enforcing the subpoena of McGahn being that they need the testimony to consider impeachment.
I think the "only considering Biden" is probably mostly soft support. He has high name recognition, polls well against Trump, and favourable associations. I.e. I don't think his floor is 24%.
I think the "only considering Sanders" support is probably hard support. They're ride or die. So I think he has a high floor. But also a lower ceiling when you look at the also support from anyone but Warren, Castro and Yanglol. Especially compared to Warren and Biden.
If it's a legitimate vape, the body has ways to try to shut the whole thing down.
But he has high black voter support so it doesn't matter right
- Status