2020 Democratic presidential nomination thread

Discuss everything else: politics, society, culture, science, philosophy, ideas, etc.
User avatar
Afro_Vacancy
Hair Loss Guru
Hair Loss Guru
Posts: 1642
Joined: 1 year ago
Reputation: 4034
Norwood: NW2
Regimen: 1 ml of 5% liquid minoxidil, includes ~20 mg of RU58841 58841; nizoral 3x/week, dermarolling (1.5 mm) 1x/week

2020 Democratic presidential nomination thread

Post by Afro_Vacancy » 3 months ago

I really hope that Biden does not win the nomination. He's an awful candidate and more and more people should stop supporting him as his issues become more and more discussed, but he might still make it through in a crowded field.

I think that Biden would not just lose in the general, but his loss would be a historic one. It would also be a black mark on the country.

Biden is a comprised candidate for reasons that are independent of and complementary to his creepiness. He has a problematic record on foreign policy, on wall street, etc.
PhD in Internalized Incelism.

User avatar
JLBB
Hair Loss Expert
Hair Loss Expert
Posts: 630
Joined: 1 year ago
Reputation: 1290
Norwood: NW1
Regimen: 0.25mg Finasteride

Re: 2020 Democratic presidential nomination thread

Post by JLBB » 3 months ago

Afro_Vacancy wrote:
3 months ago
I really hope that Biden does not win the nomination. He's an awful candidate and more and more people should stop supporting him as his issues become more and more discussed, but he might still make it through in a crowded field.

I think that Biden would not just lose in the general, but his loss would be a historic one. It would also be a black mark on the country.

Biden is a comprised candidate for reasons that are independent of and complementary to his creepiness. He has a problematic record on foreign policy, on wall street, etc.
I hope he does win, because he'd be the easiest slam dunk in the field of possible candidates. I almost felt bad for him in his debate performance he genuinely seemed out of it, his strategy being either looking like a deer in the headlights, stumbling through his words or loudly proclaiming "I'm the MOST progressive, I have the BEST civil rights record of anyone here!" etc in a way that's nothing but cartoonish. The mainstream media and older Democrats appear to be doubling down on any issues and pretending they don't exist, all but guaranteeing a clash in the general election between the Bernie wing who are often unlikely to vote for him and Bidens corporate, 1970s Democrats.

Biden is as compromised as Clinton, potentially worse and there are endless "get off my lawn"isms in policy suggestions and rhetoric which look plain ugly and sad in 2019. The amount of videos of him saying and doing completely unacceptable things is unbelievable (BAN RAVES AND LOCK UP ANYONE INVOLVED, THERES NOT SUCH THING AS REFORM FOR DRUG CRIMINALS THROW AWAY THE KEY, WE NEED A WALL, I WOULD HAVE PROSTITUTED MYSELF FOR BIG DONORS, BUT NONE OF THEM WERE WILLING TO BACK ME). Not to mention the paedophile tapes, the finger wagging at women, the back-flipping on abortion issue etc. Exploding the prison population through the 90s crime bill which was his baby, supporting gutting welfare in the 90s, plagiarism issues at law school and in previous presidential campaigns,

Of course in the debates he offered another jaw dropping moment when admitting, "BRO, I DIDN'T PRAISE SEGREGATIONISTS OR OPPOSE DEGSEGREGATION BUSING, I JUST OPPOSED IT FROM THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT". Fucking LOL. I felt like I was watching a primary school oral presentation where one of the students forgot to study up what they were supposed to say beforehand.

User avatar
Afro_Vacancy
Hair Loss Guru
Hair Loss Guru
Posts: 1642
Joined: 1 year ago
Reputation: 4034
Norwood: NW2
Regimen: 1 ml of 5% liquid minoxidil, includes ~20 mg of RU58841 58841; nizoral 3x/week, dermarolling (1.5 mm) 1x/week

Re: 2020 Democratic presidential nomination thread

Post by Afro_Vacancy » 3 months ago

JLBB wrote:
3 months ago
I hope he does win, because he'd be the easiest slam dunk in the field of possible candidates. I almost felt bad for him in his debate performance he genuinely seemed out of it, his strategy being either looking like a deer in the headlights, stumbling through his words or loudly proclaiming "I'm the MOST progressive, I have the BEST civil rights record of anyone here!" etc in a way that's nothing but cartoonish. The mainstream media and older Democrats appear to be doubling down on any issues and pretending they don't exist, all but guaranteeing a clash in the general election between the Bernie wing who are often unlikely to vote for him and Bidens corporate, 1970s Democrats.

Biden is as compromised as Clinton, potentially worse and there are endless "get off my lawn"isms in policy suggestions and rhetoric which look plain ugly and sad in 2019. The amount of videos of him saying and doing completely unacceptable things is unbelievable (BAN RAVES AND LOCK UP ANYONE INVOLVED, THERES NOT SUCH THING AS REFORM FOR DRUG CRIMINALS THROW AWAY THE KEY, WE NEED A WALL, I WOULD HAVE PROSTITUTED MYSELF FOR BIG DONORS, BUT NONE OF THEM WERE WILLING TO BACK ME). Not to mention the paedophile tapes, the finger wagging at women, the back-flipping on abortion issue etc. Exploding the prison population through the 90s crime bill which was his baby, supporting gutting welfare in the 90s, plagiarism issues at law school and in previous presidential campaigns,

Of course in the debates he offered another jaw dropping moment when admitting, "BRO, I DIDN'T PRAISE SEGREGATIONISTS OR OPPOSE DEGSEGREGATION BUSING, I JUST OPPOSED IT FROM THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT". Fucking LOL. I felt like I was watching a primary school oral presentation where one of the students forgot to study up what they were supposed to say beforehand.
He's comparably compromised to Hillary Clinton, without having her intelligence. As you recall I didn't actually like Clinton, but there's no denying that she was one sharp woman. Biden might have been sharp too, maybe twenty five years ago or something, but at this point he's not.

The following candidates seemed sharp:
Harris
Warren
Castro
Buttigieg
Klobuchar
Maybe Gabbard

I would, however, love a video feed into the parallel universe where Maryanne Williamson wins the nomination. She'd be the most entertaining. I'd also like to have sex with her.
PhD in Internalized Incelism.

User avatar
JLBB
Hair Loss Expert
Hair Loss Expert
Posts: 630
Joined: 1 year ago
Reputation: 1290
Norwood: NW1
Regimen: 0.25mg Finasteride

Re: 2020 Democratic presidential nomination thread

Post by JLBB » 3 months ago

Afro_Vacancy wrote:
3 months ago
He's comparably compromised to Hillary Clinton, without having her intelligence. As you recall I didn't actually like Clinton, but there's no denying that she was one sharp woman. Biden might have been sharp too, maybe twenty five years ago or something, but at this point he's not.

The following candidates seemed sharp:
Harris
Warren
Castro
Buttigieg
Klobuchar
Maybe Gabbard

I would, however, love a video feed into the parallel universe where Maryanne Williamson wins the nomination. She'd be the most entertaining. I'd also like to have sex with her.
I literally had to turn the volume off whenever Williamson was speaking, it was so painful.

During 2016 people on the Trump camp constantly brought up Hillary's health issues etc and although some of them seemed potentially serious, she at least came across like she had her wits about her in the debate even if Trump easily matched that in addition to raw animal magnetism and cutting the "I'm a politican" bullshit. Biden genuinely sounded like he belonged in the old folks home, also unlike Hillary he also came across totally unaware of the party he was supposed to represent and era he was in, completely out of touch. Still can't get over his response of "I didn't oppose busing, I only opposed it by the deparment of education".

I think its between Warren, Bernie, Harris and Biden at this point. Virtually all of the others didn't sound like they wanted or even felt they deserved to be there and were pushing singular issues, aside from maybe Buttigieg who has only gained traction to begin with as the most pushed outsider candidate by the mainstream media. He looks and sounds ridiculous, he can't answer questions directly and lacks policy substance on top of that. Kamala does the wide reaching "presidential" shtick far better, is more intelligent, better prepared and has more impressive debate timing and verbal prowess. Even Harris has significant political and career baggage however.

nameless
Hair Loss Expert
Hair Loss Expert
Posts: 545
Joined: 11 months ago
Reputation: 262
Norwood: NW4
Regimen: None at this time.

Re: 2020 Democratic presidential nomination thread

Post by nameless » 3 months ago

Kamala Harris played the race card:

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2020-e ... l-n1025656

Harris used busing to appeal to black people's sense of grievance.

User avatar
JLBB
Hair Loss Expert
Hair Loss Expert
Posts: 630
Joined: 1 year ago
Reputation: 1290
Norwood: NW1
Regimen: 0.25mg Finasteride

Re: 2020 Democratic presidential nomination thread

Post by JLBB » 3 months ago

nameless wrote:
3 months ago
https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2020-e ... l-n1025656

Harris used busing to appeal to black people's sense of grievance.
He didn’t support desegregation and in the last debate said again that he didn’t support the federal government desegregating schools. He also was friends with and spoke highly of prominent segregationists.

It had nothing to do with her appealing to grievances, it has to do with Biden being out of touch and judging by his prior comments on race in many different contexts, a racist. More disgustingly, a racist who virtue signals and pretends he gives a shit about civil rights. A racist who has the nerve to call Donald Trump a racist and feign moral superiority when his track record on the issue is horrific. The 90s crime bill he architected was 50x more detrimental to the black community than anything Trump has ever done.

Big difference between “playing the race card” and pointing out that a DEMOCRAT candidate in 2019 didn’t support desegregation in schools and still won’t acknowledge that was a mistake in the present day.

User avatar
That Guy
Hair Loss Guru
Hair Loss Guru
Posts: 1172
Joined: 1 year ago
Reputation: 2156
Norwood: NW2.5

Re: 2020 Democratic presidential nomination thread

Post by That Guy » 3 months ago

Image

User avatar
C4L
Hair Loss Rookie
Hair Loss Rookie
Posts: 208
Joined: 1 year ago
Reputation: 318
Norwood: NW3.5
Regimen: none

Re: 2020 Democratic presidential nomination thread

Post by C4L » 3 months ago

nameless wrote:
3 months ago
https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2020-e ... l-n1025656

Harris used busing to appeal to black people's sense of grievance.
She isn’t black enough.
Russians must save Europe from the racist liberal elite.

nameless
Hair Loss Expert
Hair Loss Expert
Posts: 545
Joined: 11 months ago
Reputation: 262
Norwood: NW4
Regimen: None at this time.

Re: 2020 Democratic presidential nomination thread

Post by nameless » 3 months ago

JLBB wrote:
3 months ago
He didn’t support desegregation and in the last debate said again that he didn’t support the federal government desegregating schools. He also was friends with and spoke highly of prominent segregationists.

It had nothing to do with her appealing to grievances, it has to do with Biden being out of touch and judging by his prior comments on race in many different contexts, a racist. More disgustingly, a racist who virtue signals and pretends he gives a shit about civil rights. A racist who has the nerve to call Donald Trump a racist and feign moral superiority when his track record on the issue is horrific. The 90s crime bill he architected was 50x more detrimental to the black community than anything Trump has ever done.

Big difference between “playing the race card” and pointing out that a DEMOCRAT candidate in 2019 didn’t support desegregation in schools and still won’t acknowledge that was a mistake in the present day.
You are a total moron. She was trying to appeal to black people's sense of grievance AND she succeeded you fool. You don''t even know what happens when it happens right out in plain view.

And why are you bringing up the crime bill when Harris said nothing about the crime bill? All she whined about was busing and Biden's admitted negotiations with segregationists. That is the subject I brought up. You can veer off subject if you want but if you do then the shit you say won't apply to my original post because y original post was about her use of busing as a strategy and black people's sense of grievance to peel black votes away from Biden and put those black votes in her column. She did not say anything about the crime bill at the debate so the crime bill was not part of the original issue I raised. Try to keep your eye on the ball, idiot.

Back to my original point now...Harris got black people to turn against Biden, which was what she was trying to do, by reminding them of their sense of grievance against whites. BUT at the time busing was actually happening black people were opposed to busing. They wanted it to stop too. That's right, idiot. Her entire argument is a false argument. It wasn't just white people who were opposed to busing. It was majorities of white AND BLACK PEOPLE who were opposed to busing when it was happening. She used a phony argument to bring black people's feelings of grievance to the surface.

SHE PLAYED THE RACE CARD. IT WORKED. AND IT WAS THE RACE CARD.

Added in 1 minute 5 seconds:
C4L wrote:
3 months ago
She isn’t black enough.
That's your opinion, not mine. My opinion is that she played the race card and she appealed the black people's sense of grievance.
Last edited by nameless 3 months ago, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Rudiger
Hair Loss Guru
Hair Loss Guru
Posts: 1045
Joined: 1 year ago
Reputation: 2701
Norwood: NW2.5
Regimen: Finasteride, Dutasteride, minoxidil, Biotin, Dermarolling, Nizoral

Re: 2020 Democratic presidential nomination thread

Post by Rudiger » 3 months ago

Nameless is clearly a bigot, or do you just defend your fellow pedos even if it means revealing what a racist you truly are?
~get 1k likes and party~ 8-)

I'm embarrassed to have not realized this on such elegantly succinct terms.

User avatar
Afro_Vacancy
Hair Loss Guru
Hair Loss Guru
Posts: 1642
Joined: 1 year ago
Reputation: 4034
Norwood: NW2
Regimen: 1 ml of 5% liquid minoxidil, includes ~20 mg of RU58841 58841; nizoral 3x/week, dermarolling (1.5 mm) 1x/week

Re: 2020 Democratic presidential nomination thread

Post by Afro_Vacancy » 3 months ago

Did this really deserve its own thread? A single thread for the 2020 Democratic presidential nomination might be ideal.

For @JLBB, here is a counterargument, I'm not endorsing it but it's competent:
https://www.theamericanconservative.com ... l-history/
PhD in Internalized Incelism.

User avatar
Admin
Site Admin
Site Admin
Posts: 1829
Joined: 1 year ago
Reputation: 4050
Norwood: NW2.5
Regimen: - 5% Minoxidil once a day and Head & Shoulders caffeine shampoo
- Discontinued due to lack of results: Stemoxydine and dermarolling
Location: Belgium
Age: 29
Contact:

Re: 2020 Democratic presidential nomination thread

Post by Admin » 3 months ago

Afro_Vacancy wrote:
3 months ago
A single thread for the 2020 Democratic presidential nomination might be ideal.
Done ;).

User avatar
Afro_Vacancy
Hair Loss Guru
Hair Loss Guru
Posts: 1642
Joined: 1 year ago
Reputation: 4034
Norwood: NW2
Regimen: 1 ml of 5% liquid minoxidil, includes ~20 mg of RU58841 58841; nizoral 3x/week, dermarolling (1.5 mm) 1x/week

Re: 2020 Democratic presidential nomination thread

Post by Afro_Vacancy » 3 months ago

Hairblues wrote:
3 months ago
I know you listed it someplace but can’t find.

Who do you like if Dems? Or who can you tolerate? Lol

After debates my perspective shifted
I like after debates.


Warren
Harris (mostly for her ability to fight)
Amy Klobuchar (an old fav of mine)
I’ve got a fondness for
Tulsie Ganbard also but she doesn’t seem possible.

I feel very sexist in writing this, but the women killed the debate. It may change over the next few months.
I thought more or less the same. I don't find it sexist -- should we not feel comfortable pointing it out in situations where the men are the most impressive?

I thought that O'Rourke and Castro were ok, but neither of them has achieved anything.

Buttigieg and Yang pushed the boundaries of fashion for male politicians, but I have kind of a loathing for golden boy, and Yang looks like he needs a nap.

Biden, 0/10. I don't get why anybody wants this guy.

Sanders' time has come and gone.

I thought that Klobuchar showed significant natural charisma, I like her. I think that her campaign sank when it came out that she's a bitch boss. I find that to be ridiculous -- she's running for President, she's not applying to be a babysitter. Being a bitch is not an impediment to being a good President. Obama, for example, was and is clearly a real nice guy, and that undermined him.

Gillibrand got five words in, and i thought that she delivered them well.

Gabbard has a very flattering white streak of hair, but she seemed one-note and low energy.

Warren and Harris won their respective nights. Both of them came off as both being human beings with empathy and being very competent. They're both smooth and eloquent. I think that I prefer Warren from a policy standpoint, but Harris is younger and likely has more energy.
PhD in Internalized Incelism.

User avatar
SmootheSailing
Hair Loss Newbie
Hair Loss Newbie
Posts: 21
Joined: 1 year ago
Reputation: 50
Norwood: NW2.5
Regimen: minoxidil + Nizoral
Location: Ireland
Age: 27

Re: 2020 Democratic presidential nomination thread

Post by SmootheSailing » 3 months ago

Andrew Yang is by far my number one choice.

Watch his Joe Rogan if you haven’t.

User avatar
That Guy
Hair Loss Guru
Hair Loss Guru
Posts: 1172
Joined: 1 year ago
Reputation: 2156
Norwood: NW2.5

Re: 2020 Democratic presidential nomination thread

Post by That Guy » 3 months ago

All of these people are bad. They're all hellbent on completely obliterating America.

Tucker, as usual, summed it up eloquently



Tucker needs to be president.

But that's not even an option, so Trump needs to win again, but not because he's a drastically better option (he's an Israeli puppet, hasn't built the wall, is giving jobs to foreigners, etc) but he isn't looking to take everyone's guns, he keeps the issues in the mainstream, and he's the only thing that isn't giving AntiFa a complete free pass to attack the public or arrest people for thought crime.

All that is going to change once a democrat takes office.

The Americans (and by extension Canadians) need another 4 years of Trump fucking around so that they can get ready for the coming civil conflict and/or to try and get someone who will actually do what Trump promised in power instead.

Democracy is what got America (and everyone else) into this situation. It needs to be done away with at the soonest possible convenience.

Post Reply
  • Similar Topics
    Replies
    Views
    Last post

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google Adsense [Bot], Majestic-12 [Bot] and 3 guests