Elephants and Jackasses...

They arent tho. Yes, they voted D more, but saying all Hispanics vote D is incorrect.

 

Just because the left supported it doesn’t make it moral.

 

Or, and hear me out, there's a moral difference between border fencing that has been the subject of analysis and study by experts to prove its efficacy at a number of border security tasks, and a giant fuck-off wall that's a waste of money and only exists to serve as a giant "your kind is not welcome here" monument.

 

At this point he's just desperately trying to get a win of any kind. If he gets the $5 billion, he'll be back for more later.

 

And all he will have to do is shut down the government each time he doesn’t get what he wants.

Part of his sociopathy and narcissism is a complete and utter lack of empathy for the people currently missing mortgage payments, rent payments and waiting in bread lines. You can’t negotiate with someone when under duress.

 

I don't disagree with this statement at all, but if you think the same thing doesn't apply to Pelosi and most of the long-term congress people, you're delusional.

 

I agree with you that dems also act like complete shitheads. No ones hands are ever fully clean. However, I think most people in the country don’t want a wall. We aren’t taking about a normal negotiation. It’s not like we are arguing about the individual mandate on the ACA. Or appropriations for social security.

A wall he promised someone else would pay for. On a shutdown he preemptively took ownership of.

 

No shit. It's one thing to simply say "Hey, your demands aren't reasonable." But they're not negotiating at all. It's just "Yay, we're saying no to Trump!" Ok, well good for you, but by itself that's not exactly doing much.

Oh man. Gabbard said the other other day that both sides were partially to blame. A lot of leftists immediately lost their fucking shit. She's the worst person ever. FAR RIGHT WHITE SUPREMACIST OH MY FUCKING GOD.

It's for that reason I hope she wins. The fact that she's not just a mouth breathing pandering idiot.

Kamala Harris announced recently, and it's like the articles endorsing her don't even give a fuck what her positions are (for the record I kind of like her positions) but oh my god did you hear that she's a black woman??? If that's the most important part of someone's candidacy to anyone you need to reexamine your life.

 

I mean, the House passed a bill that passed the Senate by voice vote in December that the Senate is now refusing to vote on. I don't know what ground anyone possibly expects the Democrats to give at this point. Everyone in both parties in both chambers was in agreement about the bill until Ann Coulter called Trump a dickless little bitch and now suddenly we all have to pretend like a "negotiation" is needed. Pass the bill, wait for the veto, then override it.

 

Fair enough, but that ship has sailed. I don't see why they can't offer some like "You get $2B for border security, you have to extend DACA, we reopen the government, and sort the rest of this shit out later."

I don't know that it would work, but I would have to see them try it to know.

Someone needs to save us from the brown hindu lady white supremacists. Maybe a white dude can. We will see...

 

Democrats can't negotiate funding with Trump while the government is shutdown. Otherwise he'll shut the government down anytime he doesn't get what he wants. Regardless of what some might think of the government, it's still required for shit to work, like the fucking Coast Guard. A body that could, I don't know, help secure the fucking border.

 

I've heard this a lot, and it's so counterproductive I'm not even going to bother with it, but if the coastal dems want to get keep beating this drum indefinitely don't be surprised when the middle America dems get sick of it and just make a deal without them.

 

It’s true though. A baby needs to know where the boundaries are. He’s not a fucking king no matter what he thinks. The southern coastal dems don’t seem to want a wall either.

How is it counterproductive to want to negotiate in good faith and not by pulling the strings of a bunch of out of work people? Trying to see who will blink first on who feels bad enough for all the struggling people. It’s a fucked up way to get what you want.

 

They should make it a law where if congressmen do not vote to move forward with already agreed upon/legally settled budgets to keep the government open those that chose to let a shutdown happen lose their salary for that year. Or that entire fucking term for all I care. I know, it's kind of a ridiculous notion that would be hard to implement and has a 0.0001% chance of ever happening, but maybe it could spare us this bullshit.

On a slightly different topic - we've recently had a few democrats announce their candidacy for 2020 and should have more over the next couple months. It's going to be a large field and that's a good thing, I think. For all practical purposes the only candidates last election were Hillary (pure evil) and Bernie (likeable but kind of a nut).

Most of this board is leftish leaning. How do you guys like the field so far? Anyone else you are hoping announces? Early predictions? Know who you're voting for already?

For me it breaks down somewhat like this:

Spoiler: Spoilering to spare those who don't care

The good:
- Gabbard. I've already posted why. Far and away better than anyone else running. Can't think of any other candidate I've agreed with on almost everything. At least based on what her positions have been so far.

The ok, meaning who I don't necessarily want to win, but wouldn't feel bad about supporting:
- Warren. She has some baggage, but I'm only going to care so much about stuff like the Native American nonsense. She's okish as far as policies go. Most importantly, she's one of the very few democrats I legitimately trust to conduct herself with integrity and put the voters first. She will at least do what she sincerely believes to be the right thing. That said, I like her way better in a cabinet role. Having her head the department of treasury or labor would be perfect. I can't help but feel like she already missed her real opportunity, which was last election.
- Biden (not sure if he will run). I like him as far as character goes. I don't think he would actually accomplish much. It is really obvious that he's out of touch with the times. That's mainly why I think he's going to fall out of the lead once the real campaigning starts. Whatever his deficiencies, and he does have his share, I do think he would represent the country well; something we will desperately need in the immediate post Trump years. You know what would maybe be best about him? I can totally see him being a background president that people don't incessantly ramble about 24/7. He would be the least discussed president in decades. Holy shit that would be awesome. Especially after the way Trump, and to a slightly lesser extent Obama has completely dominated the news cycle. At least in Obama years the media seemed aware that other stories existed. With Trump there is no other news. In the event Trump hasn't done anything newsworthy they just make up something Trump related to avoid changing the topic. Anyway... that aside Biden is arguably the best candidate around for reducing the toxic partisanship. That is probably his greatest upside.
- Sanders. Totally out of his fucking mind, but you gotta love him.

The meh(better than Trump, but not really good):
- O'Rourke.
- Klobuchar.
To be fair, I don't know as much about those last two. Not all that enthused based on what I've seen.
- Harris. I sort of like her policy wise, but she's in the meh category for now because of a spotty campaign funding history and her adherence to the identity politics crap. I also have a hard time forgiving her for making up that birth control nonsense about Kavanaugh. I just feel like someone inventing identity politics conspiracy theories would be one of the worst things for our country right now. Also, she knew she was full of shit when she made that up and that says a lot about her character or lack thereof.

The terrible(might be even worse than Trump, possibly so fucking bad I would rather have Trump again):
- Hillary, if she even runs again. That it has even been discussed blows my mind. She has no chance though. Thank fucking god. The single greatest disaster for the democratic party since the civil war. No, I'm really not exagerrating. The party needs to tell her in no uncertain terms to go crawl under a rock. Watching everyone tip toe around it has been a bit funny and a bit awkward.
- Gillibrand. She is a complete joke. She did a 180 on issue after issue when she started representing all of NY instead of just one comparitively conservative district. Eg she had a 100% rating from the NRA that went to 0% after she switched seats. She's so devoid of any honestly held values it's comical. Basically Hillary Clinton part 2. She beat everyone to the punch in demanding Franken step down. I'm not sure the first (and only that at all should have mattered) accusation had even been completed before she pounced. No character, stands for nothing, wholly untrustworthy, irredemably corrupt, and an opportunist piece of shit to round it all out. She fucking sucks. No thanks.
- Booker. I'm sorry, but he's just awful. He has wall street and the pharma companies so far up his ass it's abundantly clear he's never going to represent the voters. He was one the few dems who voted against open trade with countries like Canada for prescription drugs. By itself that disqualifies him. Is he fairly well spoken and charasmatic? Sure, but he's about as corrupt as it gets and is going to do this country no favors on majorly important issues like healthcare and finance reform. What really makes me hate him is how he reminds me, more than anyone after Hillary, just how many clueless people there are in this country who just can't acknowledge who a politician really is because every bad thing about team A is false and every bad thing about team B, no matter how absurd, is true. Saying the right thing is important. Actually doing the right thing is far more important. As for his saying things though, he made up a whole slew of bullshit during the Kavanaugh hearings, and as a result is largely responsible for the idiocy I still hear with regards to him sitting the bench. Please, please do not vote for this sack of shit.

And I want to say something about Kavanaugh because people are still going on like he's the second coming of Lucifer. In the only women's healthcare case Kavanaugh has decided on since taking a seat on the supreme court he sided with the liberal justices in preventing the court from deliberating on a case that would have potentially resulted in states further defunding planned parenthood. Yes, he did the left a fucking favor on the exact issue they claim to hate him so much over. It's no surprise, perfectly in line with his actual judicial record,(his REAL record, not the fairy tale one imagined during his hearings) which demonstrates that he has been much more fair in his rulings and more centrist than the made up eager to kill all nonwhite nonpenis having things boogey man that has been invented. People would know that if they looked into the pertinent details themselves instead of listening to shameless liars like Booker. Yes, he could have done better at the hearing, but are you really going to hate him just because he didn't react to an all out smear campaign perfectly? As far as conservative judges go he's about the best liberals could have hoped for. If you want to whine about a Trump nominee you might as well at least bitch about Gorsuch instead, who, by the way, was all for defunding PP. I don't mean to make Kavanaugh out to be some magnificient saint you should adore, but he isn't going to bring forth the end of civil rights. Shut the fuck up about it already. Save your griping about evil conservatives for the real asshats on the right side of the spectrum. It's not like there's any shortage of those more deserving.

 

I'm all on the Sheldon Whitehouse train, even if he isn't.