Post New

for Joe, to do the right thing. https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/with-vivek...

"" Slate is an online magazine that has a Left media bias1234. It consistently presents news with a pro-liberal, anti-conservative bias, and often criticizes or mocks conservatives/rightists2. It rarely includes a Right-leaning perspective on its website, making it unbalanced1. Slate's media bias rating is based on various sources, such as Ad Fontes Media, Media Bias/Fact Check, All Sides, and Biasly134. Slate's accuracy score is 54% Trustworthy, according to Biasly4.
Learn more:"" I wonder if the, usual suspects, love Slate ??

hclasvegas: ...for Joe, to do the right thing.

Jeebus, did you actually read that article?

From your link: But for all Phillips’ insistence that Biden can’t beat Trump again, it’s unclear whence his own confidence arises. He only raised $1 million last quarter and has already had to lend twice that amount to his campaign from his own pockets. So far, he’s only broken through in right-leaning conservative media markets that love his border stance, his Biden-mocking ads, [no wonder you love him] and the false equivalency he’s made between his state-ballot troubles and the Jan. 6 insurrection. The audience for his New Hampshire debate with Marianne Williamson consisted of seventh graders.

The tech-bro billionaire set might be deluded enough to think that their money and influence can make a contender out of an unknown, uninspiring, Midwestern congressman whose primary message is “Biden is old.” But it’s weird for Phillips to think he can make it in the Democratic primary and beat Trump by kowtowing with people like Musk, who’s been parroting racist pseudoscience and boosting Stephen Miller’s “America First Legal” firm. Then again, Phillips isn’t really here because he thinks he can become president. He’s here to mingle with exactly these types—just like Vivek Ramaswamy was.

Phillips isn't even on the primary ballot in multiple states. Yeah, he's exactly what America needs: another billionaire with a pathological need for attention.

good morning common, I thought you might like Slates fair and balanced take. Patience. Just so you know you can currently bet Biden and get 2 to 1 on your money. Trump is bet 1 to win 1.30, how would you like to be an underdog to trump ? Come on man, why risk humiliating himself, stop the abuse, encourage him to retire. Thank you.

hclv,

For a succinct and accessible explanation of why there's no plausible mechanism for Biden to be replaced as the nominee (except if he chooses at this late date not to run), you might want to read this:

https://www.slowboring.com/p/why-the-parties-cant-...

TL;DR - everyone in the Democratic party knows that Biden has weaknesses as a candidate, but unless a prominent Democratic incumbent decides to actually enter the race against him he will be the nominee. And no prominent Democratic politician will do that in 2024, rather than just waiting until 2028 when the Presidential race will be an open seat no matter what happens this year.

"" no plausible mechanism for Biden to be replaced as the nominee (except if he chooses at this late date not to run), you might want to read this:"" Bro, Biden, doing the right thing, and retiring, doesn't mean he will lose the nomination via a fair primary process. It's very obvious one of you is posting with at least three IDs. This isn't that complicated. Carry on.

Bro, Biden, doing the right thing, and retiring, doesn't mean he will lose the nomination via a fair primary process.

He's not going to retire. If he were going to retire, he would have done it at least several months ago - he wouldn't have waited until the filing period for presidential nominations had closed in about a third of the states. He's not going to voluntarily decide not to run, at this point. He made his choice, to seek re-election.

You're just engaging in wishcasting here. You would prefer a different Democratic nominee than Biden...but Biden's running and the convention is only seven months away.

Jeebus, did you actually read that article?

Reading and critical thinking...not the MAGA way. Regurgitating lies? Yes.

"" You're just engaging in wishcasting here. "" You young kids may not know how quickly health can change for us old guys, good luck to them both, we shall see. If Joe had a super strong VP great, unfortunately, he doesn't.

...2028 when the Presidential race will be an open seat no matter what happens this year.

You're assuming that Trump will not try to stay on as our dictator. He's already said he would like to. Not likely I suppose, but then I never thought we'd see the political madness we are witnessing now on the political right.

You're wasting your valuable time. He's been prattling on for months about Biden not running. Barring incapacitation, he will be the nominee. Like it or not. No question.

He may as well be speculating about the Vulcan vote. Equally nonsensical.

I predict he will not stop until after election day on November.

You young kids may not know how quickly health can change for us old guys, good luck to them both, we shall see. If Joe had a super strong VP great, unfortunately, he doesn't.

I'm flattered to be called a "young kid." My late-in-life teenage daughter would be quite amused at that.

Anyone in their senior years can succumb to an adverse health event. But Biden's got access to literally the best health care that almost any individual in the world can have, and it's less than seven months to the convention (and only ten to the election). The most likely outcome is that Biden's health will be roughly the same when the Democratic nominee is chosen as it is today. And since he's a candidate today, he's almost certainly going to be the candidate come August. Not absolutely certainly - again, either Trump or Biden could have a health event - but that's the most likely outcome by a long way.

You're assuming that Trump will not try to stay on as our dictator.

No, I'm assuming that even if he tried he'd fail. Though I don't think there's any likelihood at all that he'd try. He's far too risk averse - he's never made a big gamble with his own money (and certainly not with his own life) on the line. He knows he doesn't have what it takes to seize and hold power without the benefit of the rule of law. Even in extremis, all he did was try to get other people to take all the risks and do all the work give him the power he wanted. He knows full well that if he tried to seize power openly outside of the law, rather than trying to weasel around inside the law, someone would "usurp" him within the year. Weak dictators never last - they invariably end up put against the wall by someone who is genuinely adept at ruthlessly seizing power and willing to risk everything to get it.

He's already said he would like to. = ges

----------------

The lefts general lack of a sense of humor is why you can't recognize let alone appreciate Trump's sense of humor. Or maybe you do and just react to him literally to score points. Either way, as the great orange leader might say, "Sad".

No, I'm assuming that even if he tried he'd fail. Though I don't think there's any likelihood at all that he'd try. He's far too risk averse - he's never made a big gamble with his own money (and certainly not with his own life) on the line. He knows he doesn't have what it takes to seize and hold power without the benefit of the rule of law. Even in extremis, all he did was try to get other people to take all the risks and do all the work give him the power he wanted. He knows full well that if he tried to seize power openly outside of the law, rather than trying to weasel around inside the law, someone would "usurp" him within the year. Weak dictators never last - they invariably end up put against the wall by someone who is genuinely adept at ruthlessly seizing power and willing to risk everything to get it. - Albaby

--------------

At last, some common sense perspective on the threat to democracy posed by Trump. Unfortunately, the dems will campaign heavily on this issue since that is all they have.

Let's just state it.

Trump isn't a dictator. He never was. We can state this categorically and factually.

How, libs will howl, HOW CAN ANYBODY STATE THAT?????!!. Easy.

If Trump were going to be a dictator, he would have abused his power bigly during COVID. But he didn't.

It's very simple. All this fascism whining is more projection from liberals who were in fact the ones that abused their power during that time.

you can't recognize let alone appreciate Trump's sense of humor

Yah, denigrating one's victim's of sexual assault and rape is hilarious. Whatta guy.

<<OPG: You're wasting your valuable time. He's been prattling on for months about Biden not running. Barring incapacitation, he will be the nominee. Like it or not. No question.>>

If I were in contact with a reputable bookie that covered their bets, I'd put down some serious money saying Joe will NOT be on the ballot.

As much as we disparage Joe's DIMM friends, they can NOT be that dense. They can't.

Perhaps a few? Those who need to be hand-fed, and helped when going to the loo?

>>you can't recognize let alone appreciate Trump's sense of humor<<

Yah, denigrating one's victim's of sexual assault and rape is hilarious. Whatta guy. - sano

----------------

You were talking about Trump the dictator when I posted. nothing to do with assault so??

"Trump isn't a dictator. He never was. We can state this categorically and factually.'

The dictatorial use of mandates to govern is on the Dems:

Appliances
Car choices.
Masakingmup

As much as we disparage Joe's DIMM friends, they can NOT be that dense. They can't.

As noted in the article I cited upthread:

The implication is that there is some group of people — “Democrats” — who were warned and who failed to take timely action.

But the truth is that influential actors in the Democratic Party not only were warned that Biden’s age was an electoral liability, they believed the warnings. The issue is that the warnings weren’t actionable.

It's not that Biden's friends in the Democratic party aren't aware that Biden may have some significant political liabilities. Or that they don't believe it. It's just that there's nothing that they can do with that information, any more than Republicans who know that Trump's carrying some negatives into the election can do anything about it, either.

Biden is the incumbent President. It takes enormous political resources for a challenger to defeat an incumbent President in a nominating contest. No one with that kind of political resources decided to enter the race, and now it's too late. So Biden will be the nominee, no matter what his friends think.

albaby1: Though I don't think there's any likelihood at all that he'd try.

And if the Supreme Court rules that the President is absolutely immune from federal prosecution for crimes committed while in office?

"You were talking about Trump the dictator when I posted. nothing to do with assault so??

..and then you, BHM, broadened the thread with a generalized gaslighting of what you perceive to be the lefts inability to appreciate the sense of humor of a rapist/serial sexual assaulter.... a quality that you apparently embrace.

The lefts general lack of a sense of humor is why you can't recognize let alone appreciate Trump's sense of humor.

The Nazi's also cracked jokes as they perpetrated heinous, torturous murders on prisoners.

Werner Klemperer stipulated that he would only accept the comedic role of Col Klinck if, and only if, the 'Hogan's Heroes' series depicted Nazi stupidity, pettiness, and incompetence, and that all episodes resulted in Nazi failures.

The orange rapist, otoh, knows his cult is inclined to internalize his 'humor', and embrace the implied intent.

..and then you, BHM, broadened the thread with a generalized gaslighting ... - sano

---------------------------

And these threads sometimes benefit from broadening, taking on a flight of their own so to speak, if they are to fully provide the stimulation and amusement we expect from the polite pitter-patter, as we gather each day to pass the time and straighten each other out....

No need to say thank you.

And if the Supreme Court rules that the President is absolutely immune from federal prosecution for crimes committed while in office?

If that were to happen, ostensibly a POTUS could order a hit on an opposition candidate for wearing the wrong color tie and still enjoy immunity in his retirement years.

And if the Supreme Court rules that the President is absolutely immune from federal prosecution for crimes committed while in office?

I don't think there's any likelihood that SCOTUS would ever rule that way.

No need to say thank you.

Of course there is no need.

My response to your goof, were I to make one, would be 'you're forgiven.'

If that were to happen, ostensibly a POTUS could order a hit on an opposition candidate for wearing the wrong color tie and still enjoy immunity in his retirement years. - sano

------------

Nope. Read carefully, the immunity extends to Potus and only POTUS. He may be immune from conspiracy but if someone acts on his illegal order to murder then that person is subject to all the sanctions the law allows.

POTUS would have to personally strangle the opposition candidate for immunity to be factor and I trust voters to not elect someone that degree of seething dementia.

you can't recognize let alone appreciate Trump's sense of humor

His sense of 'humor' sucks. He's a narcissist who thinks anything that comes out of his ugly pie hole is golden. So, he says idiotic and cruel things constantly. Disgusting.

Wasn't it hilarious when he mocked a handicapped person? He's a pig-hearted jerk.

"He may be immune from conspiracy <to commit murder>. "

but only the triggerman, if identified, would be at risk of prosecution.

Gee, that makes me feel much better.... and what a relief to the families and friends of the assassinated person.

A POTUS could issue all kinds of 'marching orders' with impunity and only his brownshirts will be at risk of prosecution.

If the insurrectionsists had succeeded in hanging Pence on January 6, Trump goes golfin'? Swell.

Make America Grieve Anew

The dictatorial use of mandates to govern is on the Dems:

Appliances
Car choices.
Masakingmup

Say - remind me which political party is trying to get the opposition candidate kicked off of ballots in multiple states?

You know who used to do that? Confederate democrats.

"Say - remind me which political party is trying to get the opposition candidate kicked off of ballots in multiple states?"

The same ones that blather on about how they just L o o o ve Democracy and let the voters decide.

Say - remind me which political party is CITING The US Constitution to hold accountable a candidate facing 91 criminal charges.

(Hint: It's the same party that is not inciting invasions of the Capitol Building in an effort to thwart the lawful election process.)

BHM: Nope. Read carefully, the immunity extends to Potus and only POTUS.

Perhaps you've heard of the wide-ranging power of the presidential pardon.

BHM: Nope. Read carefully, the immunity extends to Potus and only POTUS.

Perhaps you've heard of the wide-ranging power of the presidential pardon. = CO

Good point, obvious now that you point it out. I am humbled...

I still will rely on voters winnowing out such a sociopath.

Despite what Trump said, he was merely using hyperbole to extol on how popular he was. He isn't going to assassinate anyone with or without immunity. geez chill out.

BHM: Nope. Read carefully, the immunity extends to Potus and only POTUS.

Perhaps you've heard of the wide-ranging power of the presidential pardon. = CO

>>Good point, obvious now that you point it out. I am humbled...

I still will rely on voters winnowing out such a sociopath.

Despite what Trump said, he was merely using hyperbole to extol on how popular he was. He isn't going to assassinate anyone with or without immunity. geez chill out = bhm

Upon further reflection, the Grant of Immunity could be structured to say, "POTUS only and only for acts and decisions connected to discharge of official duties."

I don't think there's any likelihood that SCOTUS would ever rule that way.

That would be the end of the Republic. Hits ordered on any opponents, cancelling elections... He would have unlimited power.

Sort of like when the Chancellor of Germany was granted dictatorial powers, only checked by the president, whom a short time later died.

A pardon wouldn't do it. Murder is not a federal crime. But he could cover his assassins by using diplomatic passports, then they would have diplomatic immunity.

BHM: Upon further reflection, the Grant of Immunity could be structured to say, "POTUS only and only for acts and decisions connected to discharge of official duties."

You do realize that Trump has already argued that his tampering with the election results in Georgia was "connected to the discharge of his official duties" as president, right?

And not to put too fine a point on it, but honestly what could Trump not argue was "connected to the discharge of his official duties" as president? Literally anything.

Sorry, but Trump is evil, Trump is corrupt, and there's nothing he would not do to feed his megalomania. He has turned the republican party into a personality cult that idolizes a man who echoes Hitler, took dozens of top secret documents when he left the White House, refused to ensure a peaceful transfer of power, incited an insurrection, stood by as his own vice president was being hunted down to be hanged, called insurrectionists patriots, publicly pressured his justice department to investigate his enemies, pardoned co-conspirators, defamed, defrauded, and has been declared a rapist in court.

But you want to tell us he will abide by the findings of the highest court because, you know, he follows the rules.

Puhleeze.

And if the Supreme Court rules that the President is absolutely immune from federal prosecution for crimes committed while in office?

If that were to happen, ostensibly a POTUS could order a hit on an opposition candidate for wearing the wrong color tie and still enjoy immunity in his retirement years.

And then, Biden would be duty-bound to order a hit on Donald J. Trump "for the good of democracy"!

.....ah, for the good old days when a POTUS knew how to maintain plausible deniability when pondering how to, for example, prevent a tabloid exec from spilling the beans on a “catch and kill” story....

TRUMP: Give it to me and get me a [UNINTELLIGIBLE].

COHEN: And, I’ve spoken to Allen Weisselberg about how to set the whole thing up with…

<Allen Weisselberg is the CFO of the Trump Organization, which implies that Trump’s company was involved in Cohen’s hush money efforts.>

TRUMP: So, what do we got to pay for this? One-fifty?

<AMI paid McDougal $150,000 for her story, a fact Trump appears to remember without prompting. Here Trump seems to be discussing paying AMI back for it.>

COHEN: … Funding ... Yes. Um, and it’s all the stuff.

TRUMP: Yeah, I was thinking about that.

COHEN: All the stuff. Because — here, you never know where that company — you never know what he’s —

TRUMP: Maybe he gets hit by a truck.

COHEN: Correct.

More locker room talk? Yeah, that's the ticket.

Post New

US Policy FAQ

---

Contact Shrewd'm
Contact the developer of these message boards.