Jump to content
Carolina Huddle
  • Hey There!

    Please register to see fewer ads and a better viewing experience:100_Emoji_42x42:

Sign in to follow this  
rodeo

democratic primary candidates thread

Recommended Posts

21 hours ago, LinvilleGorge said:

The Dems are going to eat each other again and we're going to get 8 years of Trump. Anything else would honestly shock me.

I'm no fan of Trump, but the Dems have to get outside of their urban/academia bubbles and understand that they still have to find a way to court rural America. Trying to circumvent the Electoral College is the opposite of that 

Trump has tapped into the lizard brain of the so-called "forgotten America".  I mean if some Democrat finds a way to break the spell then my hat is off to him/her, but there is something deeply instinctual that draws them to Trump.

I grew up in Catawba County which is red as a baboon's ass and Trump's streams of bullshit about furnurs takin arr jobs and how the mexkins brang crime is like heroin to them.  Even though NAFTA, which was originally negotiated and signed on to by a Republican President, destroyed manufacturing in Hickory and their reps and senators have done nothing other than try to kick them off their insurance and slash their benefits, they still believe.

Edited by The NFL Shield At Midfield
  • Pie 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


1 hour ago, The NFL Shield At Midfield said:

Trump has tapped into the lizard brain of the so-called "forgotten America".  I mean if some Democrat finds a way to break the spell then my hat is off to him/her, but there is something deeply instinctual that draws them to Trump.

I grew up in Catawba County which is red as a baboon's ass and Trump's streams of bullshit about furnurs takin arr jobs and how the mexkins brang crime is like heroin to them.  Even though NAFTA, which was originally negotiated and signed on to by a Republican President, destroyed manufacturing in Hickory and their reps and senators have done nothing other than try to kick them off their insurance and slash their benefits, they still believe.

He basically just acknowledged them. He lied through his teeth and hasn't done poo for them, but he acknowledged them. By and large, blue collar rural America feels completely ignored in modern society. There's a ton of focus (well not focus, but at least talk and acknowledgement) of urban issues but virtually none for the significant issues rural America faces.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, The NFL Shield At Midfield said:

Even though NAFTA, which was originally negotiated and signed on to by a Republican President

Bill Clinton "Third Way/New Dem" signed NAFTA into law.

Biden voted for NAFTA as well.

Edited by NanuqoftheNorth
  • Pie 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, NanuqoftheNorth said:

Bill Clinton "Third Way/New Dem" signed NAFTA into law.

Biden voted for NAFTA as well.

It was negotiated during the HW Bush administration, agreed to in principal, and then it went in front of Congress to be ratified.  And yes, by then a neoliberal Democrat was in office and he signed it.

I mean yeah, "free trade" is conservative by nature.  NAFTA was the crown jewel of neoliberal economic policy and Republicans have been ardent virtually my entire life that the US is a service economy now and if you didn't go to college and get a business degree then tough titties.  This stuff with Trump sucking up to organized labor and Republicans suddenly being in with love tariffs and protectionism and wanting to pull out of trade agreements and poo is a very recent, abrupt about-face.

 

Edited by The NFL Shield At Midfield

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, The NFL Shield At Midfield said:

It was negotiated during the HW Bush administration, agreed to in principal, and then it went in front of Congress to be ratified.  And yes, by then a neoliberal Democrat was in office and he signed it.

I mean yeah, "free trade" is conservative by nature.  NAFTA was the crown jewel of neoliberal economic policy and Republicans have been ardent virtually my entire life that the US is a service economy now and if you didn't go to college and get a business degree then tough titties. 

Point being, the leadership of the democratic party today shares the same core beliefs that Bill Clinton and Joe Biden did almost 30 years ago.

Bill Clinton's record as POTUS looks worse as the years go by with deregulation of Wall Street and mass media, destruction of the social safety net and an explosion of the US prison population due to the Crime Bill.  All this legislation was right wing inspired but signed into law by a president who identifies as a New/Third Way Democrat.  Biden is cut from the same cloth.  Establishment dems like these are why the party has lost a substancial number of working class voters to Trump.  And why not?  The Democratic party no longer represents these people's interests.

Consider what occurred in 2016. The Democrats ran a candidate who spent most of her career as a figurehead for groups like Third Way and the DLC. Clinton was a prominent member of the New Democratic Caucus in the Senate and spoke at DLC conferences on multiple occasions as recently as 2008. She was also awash in corporate money, dominating every other candidate in donations from Wall Street, Big Pharma, Big Media and most other centers of private capital, while her primary opponent relied almost entirely on grassroots support. Meanwhile, she was given strategic support from the Democratic National Committee, which collaborated in efforts to discredit Bernie Sanders (which it vehemently denied before being exposed) and leaked debate questions to Clinton. The campaign, with the support of almost every powerful Democrat, went on to smear ideas that appeal to the base, such as Medicare for All and tuition-free higher education, saying they were unrealistic.

Working-class voters, especially in states hurt by the very same trade deals Hillary Clinton has defended and Third Way promoted vigorously, viewed her as part of “the establishment.” They were turned off by her relationship with Wall Street figures, who donated to her campaign in record numbers, and gave her grotesque sums of money to give speeches at Goldman Sachs (the contents of which were eventually leaked). Thus, Third Way got the candidate it wanted, she had the full support of the establishment, and she still lost. Third Way, however, continues to claim the party has been insufficiently establishment-oriented in recent years.

https://truthout.org/articles/third-way-democrats-are-trying-to-push-the-party-rightward/

Edited by NanuqoftheNorth

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, The NFL Shield At Midfield said:

It was negotiated during the HW Bush administration, agreed to in principal, and then it went in front of Congress to be ratified.  And yes, by then a neoliberal Democrat was in office and he signed it.

I mean yeah, "free trade" is conservative by nature.  NAFTA was the crown jewel of neoliberal economic policy and Republicans have been ardent virtually my entire life that the US is a service economy now and if you didn't go to college and get a business degree then tough titties.  This stuff with Trump sucking up to organized labor and Republicans suddenly being in with love tariffs and protectionism and wanting to pull out of trade agreements and poo is a very recent, abrupt about-face.

 

Tariffs are the one thing I disagree with Trump on....said today a new round of 25% going in place next Friday...I’m all for sticking it to the Chinese, but consumers lose big time with these tariffs 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, bull123 said:

That Abrams gal from Georgia would be a good candidate for the dems

i imagined a person saying this sentence out loud and now i know exactly what you look like

  • Pie 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, NanuqoftheNorth said:

Point being, the leadership of the democratic party today shares the same core beliefs that Bill Clinton and Joe Biden did almost 30 years ago.

 

No argument from me

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

https://lithub.com/rebecca-solnit-unconscious-bias-is-running-for-president/

"Meanwhile, the New York Times in all its august unbearability just published this prize sentence in a piece about Joe Biden’s failure to offer Anita Hill an apology she found adequate: “Many former Judiciary Committee aides and other people who participated did not want to talk on the record because they feared that scrutiny of Mr. Biden’s past conduct would undermine the campaign of the candidate some think could be best positioned to defeat President Trump, whose treatment of women is a huge issue for Democrats.” That translates as, let’s run a guy whose treatment of women is an issue, and let’s ignore that treatment because even so we think that he’s best positioned to defeat the guy whose treatment of women is an issue, and also fug treatment of women, especially this black woman, as an issue, really.

Sometimes these guys with outsized platforms say poo like James Comey did when he complained that his erstwhile classmate Amy Klobuchar was “annoyingly smart,” perhaps because women are not supposed to be like that in his worldview. The framework that intelligence is an asset in a man and a defect in a woman is nastily familiar. Another white man had the temerity to explain to me that “The really smart wonks don’t end up being the media stars needed to win the presidency, i.e., Hillary Clinton—super smart, knows the facts, but comes off as smug and all knowing. I get this from Kamala Harris too.” In other words, he assumes that they are women who know too much and the character defect is theirs, not his."

  • Pie 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i'd about rather cut my dick off than vote for biden.     but trump's base will like it if he espouses his thoughts about segregation again.  and i'm getting sick of fellow libs saying we have to support him to beat trump.  no, no i don't because i don't.  this isn't football.  this is about the future of the human race and the planet and it'll just be more of the same bs with him.   ugh!    

  • Pie 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/7/2019 at 6:47 AM, GOOGLE JIM BOB COOTER said:

 

Different democratic primary, same old poo from the MSM.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  



  • Member Statistics

    • Total Members
      20,553
    • Most Online
      3,693

    Newest Member
    CharlesClime
    Joined
  • Topics

  • Forum Statistics

    • Total Topics
      149,250
    • Total Posts
      4,976,377
  • Posts

    • Teddy was good in college, so much so that I remember a few Huddlers mentioning "tanking for Teddy" the season before he came out. And, it's not like his winning ways haven't translated to the NFL, regardless of whether someone believes he only did it because he had a good team surrounding him. At some point, one really has to concede that you're not going to take a trash team to the playoffs, regardless of who you are. Unlike Trent Dilfer who simply didn't have to do much, Bridgewater actually had to win a few games. His defenses were very good, but they weren't historical. But, I can understand why you'd think of Teddy as a game manager. That's not necessarily a bad thing in all cases. We almost one a Super Bowl with a glorified game manager (and Delhomme was one in my opinion), but this brings me to the next point, which is sometimes that has a lot to do with the HC's and OC's philosophy as well.  I have questions about Teddy, believe me. But I have less questions about his ability to get some wins than whether or not his decidedly small frame can hold up to the rigors of the NFL. I mean, he really had a catastrophic injury. If he hadn't his career just might be on full showcase as opposed to a reclamation project. I'm not going to count it against him because he played on decent defensive teams, including one as a rookie, but then got hurt in the third year when many QBs show marked improvement and start putting it all together. If anything, he didn't have to be as proficient or efficient as he was, particularly in his sophomore season, considering the relatively little experience that he had. The other two seasons were pretty much throwaways where he didn't get any credible playing time and rehabbing both physically and mentally, and people not really believing that he could resume any semblance of success (which probably had to do moreso with his injury than anything else). Bottom line: He took the reigns and stayed the course for one of the best in NFL history. So, yeah, I'm not sure he can get us to where we want to ultimately go, but if he stays healthy, I wouldn't bet against him. His career is the epitome of disjointed, but injuries do that to even the Cam Newtons and Andrew Lucks of the league who had considerably more time at the helm.  This year (or next) will tell us a lot.  
    • The thought is that the upper end QB's in this upcoming class are "safer" bets. Even after Lawrence and Fields it does actually look like a strong QB class, depending on who declares.
    • Not sure if you mean Trubisky, Darnell, Mayfield or Murray here?  Point being even if we manage a tanking, it is a coin flip at best. 
  • Masters of PIE !

×
×
  • Create New...