[!@#$%!]

Originally Posted by The Soup Nazi

Right now I doubt this will happen. But a Landrieu/Warren ticket could.

doesn’t landrieu want biden?

then biden/warren it is

then he abdicates and she rules

[The Soup Nazi]

Originally Posted by Skuj

My readings keep telling me that Warren is a real possibility. Why do you doubt it will happen?

Because even though she takes no shit she's a) a relatively easy target for Donaldo and Hannity & Co. as they will label her the left of the left of the left (only in America...) and b) she's a SHE and the Democratic party will wimp the fuck out due to the fact that the last and only time they picked a woman misogyny —internalized misogyny, no less— fucking won.

[Skuj]

But her emails.

[!@#$%!]

Originally Posted by Skuj

But her emails.

lmao

Originally Posted by The Soup Nazi

Because even though she takes no shit she's a) a relatively easy target for Donaldo and Hannity & Co. as they will label her the left of the left of the left (only in America...) and b) she's a SHE and the Democratic party will wimp the fuck out due to the fact that the last and only time they picked a woman misogyny —internalized misogyny, no less— fucking won.

i don’t think so many women rejected hilary only on the basis that she was a woman

that happened, sure

just like im sure some people rejected obama because he was black

but she was also rejected because she was hilary clinton

hilary was too much a complicated figure, with too much baggage, from her days as first lady of arkansas all the way to the dnc favoring her over bernie sanders. she was more hawkish than obama, she was cozy with wall street, she spoke lika a lawyer, and she has anticharisma. good politician, shitty candidate.

the main thrust of her campaign was “i’m not trump”. all publicity is good publicity after all. well then.

there was a populist wave last election cycle, trump rode it and the democrats tried to play it safe instead and shut down bernie.

to ignore these things and say it was just misogyny is sheer cognitive closure and wishful thinking.

but for the next election women will be all up in arms after president pussygrabber.

there will be record numbers of women running for office in coming election cycles

and unlike hilary, warren does not have decades of scandal behind her, nor a history of protecting an alleged sexual predator, and she could ride a populist movement if there is still one. not sure.

i also think she understands economics better than pie-in-the-sky bernie sanders, so she can appeal to both the left and the center, which is how one wins these things.

don’t know if you know this, but warren used to be a republican.

[evollove]

Originally Posted by !@#$%!

she could ride a populist movement if there is still one. not sure.

Huh? That's pretty much all there is. There are a few strong party supporters out there, but populism is alive and well on both sides. Did I miss something?

Originally Posted by !@#$%!

don’t know if you know this, but warren used to be a republican.

I had no idea!


I swear to fucking god, the Native American thing will sink her.

"But Trump said/did..."

Yes, but she LIED about her HERITAGE! How can we ever trust her? If she lied once, what's to say she won't lie again?

"But Trump..."

Two wrongs don't make a right. Burn the witch.

And watch for the word "hysterical" to pop up a hell of a lot.

---

Amy Klobuchar. I hope. Been hoping for a year and a half. Don't know if she'd run, but she'd kick electoral ass if she did.

But yes. It will be a woman. Just not positive which one. Primary should be fun. Catfight! Am I right bros? High five!

[!@#$%!]

Originally Posted by evollove

Huh? That's pretty much all there is. There are a few strong party supporters out there, but populism is alive and well. Did I miss something?

well in 2020 after the economy goes to fucking hell people might be looking for a more reasonable and sober leader instead of grandiose promises

but we’ll see, we’ll see

Originally Posted by evollove

I had no idea!

yep. was so because in her words republicans liked markets and democrats didn’t.

(which makes perfect sense to me, as a grownup who one day decided to learn about markets and economics and so forth even though it wasn’t part of my education)

she quit the repukes when they became unprincipled and started destroying the middle class and favoring wall street. started in the 80s she said but stuck till the mid 90s.

Originally Posted by evollove

I swear to fucking god, the Native American thing will sink her.

"But Trump said/did..."

Yes, but she LIED about her HERITAGE! How can we ever trust her? If she lied once, what's to say she won't lie again?

"But Trump..."

Two wrongs don't make a right. Burn the witch.

And watch for the word "hysterical" to pop up a hell of a lot.

---

nah. i don’t think so. seriously. if that’s the worst they can get against her she’s home free

Originally Posted by evollove

Amy Klobuchar. Been saying it for a year and a half. Don't know if she'd run, but she'd kick electoral ass if she did.

honestly i don’t know anything about her and have never seen her (i mostly don’t watch tv) but i’ll investigate

[The Soup Nazi]

Originally Posted by !@#$%!

to ignore these things and say it was just misogyny is sheer cognitive closure and wishful thinking.

See, you just had to be a dick. In my previous post I did NOT discard all the fuckedupness that came with "being Hillary Clinton", her public persona/perception anyway. I was alluding to precisely what you mentioned in passing — that for the most part Democrats play it safe, and Warren, former Republican and all (just as HRC, whaddayaknow) can be too easily sold to the brain-fucking-dead masses as the new Hanoi Jane.

By the way, it's HILLARY Clinton, not "Hilary". "Hilary" is Hilary Swank.

 

[!@#$%!]

Originally Posted by The Soup Nazi

See, you just had to be a dick. In my previous post

i dont know your previous post. i replied to your comment in reply to me about misoginy dooming warren

but you come here to yell at everyone and dish out insults like a deranged hormonal case— and then call me a dick?

lolololololol

and i should be keeping track of everything you say?

hillllllllllllarious

[Skuj]

By the way, it's HILARIOUS, not "hilllllllllllarious".

 

[Skuj]

(I'm having a laugh. Let's all laugh. Because if we don't laugh, we'll cry.)

[The Soup Nazi]

Originally Posted by !@#$%!

i dont know your previous post. i replied to your comment in reply to me.

Hooo, fake news: you replied to my reply to Skuj.

http://www.sonicyouth.com/gossip/sho...postcount=4563

Originally Posted by !@#$%!

you come here to yell at everyone like a deranged hormonal case and then call me a dick?

I do yell sometimes. Fuckers deserve it. But dude, "a deranged hormonal case"? Now that's misogynous — WELL, it would be if I were a woman. Next thing I know you're gonna tell me I'm "on the rag".

[The Soup Nazi]

Originally Posted by Skuj

By the way, it's HILARIOUS, not "hilllllllllllarious".

 

Or hughlaurieous.

 

[!@#$%!]

Originally Posted by The Soup Nazi

I do yell sometimes. Fuckers deserve it. But dude, "a deranged hormonal case"? Now that's misogynous — WELL, it would be if I were a woman. Next thing I know you're gonna tell me I'm "on the rag".

https://www.everydayhealth.com/mens-...en-grumpy.aspx

have a nice weekend!

see a doctor

[The Soup Nazi]

True but unbelievable: this is from a Fox News contributor!

Republicans beware -- Strong GDP growth isn't sustainable and that's bad news for the GOP in November

[Skuj]

I keep wondering about something......

All these wonderful numbers and stock market things......what does it mean to the average American? Is it different this time because of that tax cut?

Obama had good "numbers" after he saved the planet from the 2008/9 meltdown, but that didn't mean dick to the average voter.

[!@#$%!]

Originally Posted by Skuj

I keep wondering about something......

All these wonderful numbers and stock market things......what does it mean to the average American? Is it different this time because of that tax cut?

well: nothing unless you drink the kool aid

-we supposedly have minimal unemployment, but there has been no wage growth, and labor force participation is lower now than it was in 2000. this is was already the case under obama, republicans made a big stink of it, now they boast about their “success”. that’s the kool-aid i’m talking about. same facts, different interpretations.

-but: we also have inflation now, and inflation is eating the tax cuts

-plus, the business cycle is nearing its end, sped up by trump’s dumb trade war and other shenanigans. the tax cuts extended it for a little while though. the orange lord giveth and the orange lord taketh away ha ha ha. the narcissist!

-stock market highs are good for investors—until there’s a correction and everyone panics. nobody ever learns. but yeah— say a firefighter or a teacher care more about their current paychecks than about the state of their pension fund.

-but when the market is on the rise, companies hire people, make capital purchases, etc.

-the news i’ve been reading say businesses are already preparing for the down cycle. the latest spike in purchasing has more to do with rushing ahead of tariffs taking effect.

so: when the inevitable correction comes, the indexes go down, investment follows in a spiral for a while, unemployment goes up accordingly, the people rage and demand human sacrifices, and they vote out the old and elect a new set of promises.

when will that be i am not sure. the big question is: before or after november?

it will be before 2020 for sure.

the other question is how deep will things go. will it just be a small correction or series of corrections? will it be a recession? a depression? a cataclysm?

ask nostradamus...

Originally Posted by Skuj

Obama had good "numbers" after he saved the planet from the 2008/9 meltdown, but that didn't mean dick to the average voter.

well... no.... sort of.

read the link i posted for rob in response to his comment about both parties being the same. it’s like six pages long.

obama got a lot of recognition for saving the economy. but the rise of the tea party and the loss of both houses of congress weakened him. he had a decent approval rating till the end though.

[tw2113]

Anyone heard of any asteroids or something similar that should take out humanity as we know it? We could use it.

[Skuj]

I know I've said this before, but, whatever......

Trump should be impeached for this evening's tweetstorm alone. It's full of bullshit, which of course he will not explain or answer to. Just getting these lies out is enough for this asshole. This fucking moron who is clearly unfit for the job, and is destroying the country.

Additionally, he is clearly in panic mode now. He knows what Cohen and Mueller has. This next two weeks is going to be very ugly, and very enlightening.

This is the real turning point, folks.

[The Soup Nazi]

If Cohen tells/has already told Mueller that Trump OK'd the meeting with the Russians at Drumpf Tower, it should be game over IF THE UNITED STATES WEREN'T CHOCK-FULL OF IDIOTS. Too big of an if, Skuj.

[The Soup Nazi]

Zakaria's latest:

THE TRUMP TWO-STEP STRIKES AGAIN

Listen closely. That sound you heard at Wednesday's joint news conference between the presidents of the European Commission and the United States was Donald Trump backtracking once again. This has become a familiar routine. It goes something like this: Begin by hurling insults at the other side, some of which have a basis in reality but are mostly wild exaggerations. Threaten extreme consequences. Then meet with the other side, backpedal and triumphantly announce that you have saved the world from a crisis that your rhetoric and actions caused in the first place. Call it the Trump two-step.

Think about Trump's actions with regard to North Korea. He began by calling Kim Jong Un "a madman who doesn't mind starving or killing his people" and threatening "fire and fury . . . the likes of which this world has never seen before." He solved his own crisis by making unilateral concessions to Kim and gushing about how the North Korean people "love" their absolute dictator and how he, Trump, trusts him. The same pattern applies with the European Union, which he only recently described as "worse than our enemies." Now, he tells us, after meeting with European Commission President Jean-Claude Juncker, that the E.U. and America truly "love each other." Expect to hear a similar climb-down on China one of these days.

For Trump, there is no cost to this strategy, because his words are weightless. He starts with what he described in "The Art of the Deal" as "truthful hyperbole" (as opposed to the many outright falsehoods that he also tells) and then, when confronted, adjusts to something closer to reality.

There are those who assert that Trump's seemingly bizarre and unpredictable behavior is actually all part of a canny and wise strategy, that he is playing a kind of four-dimensional chess, operating in space-time. Well, if so, he is getting beaten badly here on Earth. In none of these situations has he actually been able to extract real concessions. His usual approach is to announce something vague, as with North Korea and the trade talks with Europe, or something already in place, such as NATO members' promise to spend 2 percent of their gross domestic product on defense by 2024, and claim it as a victory.

But there is a cost to this bluster and flip-flopping. Trump is creating a reputation for the United States as erratic, unpredictable, unreliable and fundamentally hostile to the global order. Leader after leader in Europe has made this clear. George Osborne told me that when he was Britain's finance minister, you knew "the United States president had your back." Neither Britain nor any other country can be sure of this anymore. As Donald Tusk, president of the European Council, put it, "With friends like that who needs enemies[?] . . . We [realize] that if you need a helping hand, you will find one at the end of your arm."

Economist Adam S. Posen argues that countries are now bypassing the United States and constructing a "post-American world economy." You can see this in the flurry of trade agreements that don't include the United States, from the Trans-Pacific Partnership, which was signed minus America, to the trade deal the E.U. just struck with Japan. Many others are in the works.

The most dramatic indication of the world sidestepping the United States, Posen says, is the decline in foreign investment. "It's fallen off a cliff," he told me. On average, net foreign investment into the United States has dropped by half since 2016. "The decline is all the more worrying," Posen writes in Foreign Affairs, "since many factors should have been pushing direct investment in the United States up this year. The massive fiscal stimulus passed by Congress should have increased [foreign investment] in three ways: by boosting spending, which increases U.S. growth prospects; by making the tax code more favorable to production in the United States; and by cutting the corporate tax rate."

Perhaps some of the decline in investment is part of a longer-term trend — other countries are growing faster than the United States. But for decades, that reality has been countered by another reality — that among the world's rich nations, the United States was unique in having good growth prospects coupled with stable, predictable, pro-market policies. Trump's attacks on trade and allies, his willingness to punish and reward individual companies, and his general unreliability all add up to a picture of policymaking that looks more like that of an erratic developing country run by a strongman. The difference is, America's strongman has the power to disrupt the entire global economy.

(c) 2018, Washington Post Writers Group

https://fareedzakaria.com/columns/20...-strikes-again