Welcome to Thunderdome

WATCH: Elizabeth Warren Lied to Van Jones About Disabled Constituent on CNN’s Debate Show

Tommy Christopher, HOW DARE YOU!

But... Was the disabled constituent part-Cherokee?

Heard Pete B. did pretty well at the debate. He checks a bunch of boxes for elect-ability except that he's gay. Not sure if certain parts of the country are ready for that, even if he is a combat vet.

Warren has always turned me off for reasons like this.

GORDON wrote: But... Was the disabled constituent part-Cherokee?

And pregnant.

Troy wrote: Heard Pete B. did pretty well at the debate. He checks a bunch of boxes for elect-ability except that he's gay. Not sure if certain parts of the country are ready for that, even if he is a combat vet.

Warren has always turned me off for reasons like this.

Pete + Yang would probably be my favorites. But, no chance in hell they'll make it in this world.

Troy wrote: Heard Pete B. did pretty well at the debate. He checks a bunch of boxes for elect-ability except that he's gay. Not sure if certain parts of the country are ready for that, even if he is a combat vet.

Warren has always turned me off for reasons like this.

I don't think it's so much certain parts of the country as much as blocs of Democrat voters. Black and Hispanic communities are less likely to support a gay candidate as well. Many suspect that's why Cory Booker is doing so poorly with black voters. He's kind of in the same "questionable" area as Lindsey Graham, I'm told.

There are times I like Pete, and then he feels like he has to jump into this hard tack to the left with everyone else and he loses me.

I suspect it will be Warren will be the nominee. I haven't seen CNN pressing for a candidate this hard in a primary since Trump in '16. And she looks really good on paper. It's when she goes to give her canned answers when some finesse is needed, she looks really bad. Look at the montage of her being asked if her MFA plan would require a middle class tax hike. She does a really bad job of avoiding answering. So much so that now some reporters are suggesting that asking her that question makes you a bad reporter.

TheCatt wrote: Pete + Yang would probably be my favorites. But, no chance in hell they'll make it in this world.

I like Yang and Gabbard the most out of their field. Both are too sane to win the nomination.

RE: Graham. The heavy southern male effeminate thing is tough to figure out.

I personally knew guys in college who were just like that. Especially up in the mountains at App State. They got picked on a lot for it. Didn't hurt them in the pursuit of women, it just made them the butt of stupid jokes during bro hang outs. Turned out, they were all totally straight. All happily married now.

Pete sounds way less gay than any of them. You just can't really know what's going on in people's brains.*

* I take that back, actually you can. It's the ones that are most vociferous anti-homosexual, loudly anti gay. Those are the closeted ones.

Vince wrote:

Troy wrote:
I suspect it will be Warren will be the nominee. I haven't seen CNN pressing for a candidate this hard in a primary since Trump in '16. And she looks really good on paper. It's when she goes to give her canned answers when some finesse is needed, she looks really bad. Look at the montage of her being asked if her MFA plan would require a middle class tax hike. She does a really bad job of avoiding answering. So much so that now some reporters are suggesting that asking her that question makes you a bad reporter.

I think you want Warren to be the nominee the same reason I don't want her to. She'll lose.

Vince wrote: Black and Hispanic communities are less likely to support a gay candidate as well.

This cannot be understated, and for some reason (Hint: it's not hatred from white males, so it doesn't count), it goes pretty much unreported, but black people have not accepted gay people in their community. (Probably also a reason for higher suicide rates among black teens...) Black culture still is very heavy on men beings alphas and whatnot. Being gay or even having feelings is seen as being weak.

Also, I thought Hispanics were more accepting of gay culture?

I've dug Yang since he spoke out against Cancel Culture.

Troy wrote: I think you want Warren to be the nominee the same reason I don't want her to. She'll lose.

Honestly, I just don't know. After seeing her respond to the question of whether or not she'd raise taxes on the middle class, I'm less confident she could beat Trump. All the Trump supporters say she's custom built to lose to him. I just keep thinking about all the Hillary supporters saying the same about Trump four years ago.

Warren was smart to go to the "I have a plan for that" campaign. It's a great contrast to Trump's chaotic style. However she apparently didn't have a plan for answering the question about the middle class tax hike.

Trump has very high negatives in likability. So then you have to ask how much a good economy is worth at the voting booth? And will that good economy still be good in a year? If the economy turns, he's absolutely toast. If he negotiates a gun control deal, he's absolutely toast.

Basically they model based on the economy, and not based on ANYTHING else, right?

Seems very shortsighted. Not impossible, but nobody is hating Trump because of the economy, to my knowledge. I don't know enough about the tariff issues to weight in on that front.

Hopefully this is the same as all those AAA ratings Moody was giving the credit backed securities in 2008.

Troy wrote: I don't know enough about the tariff issues to weight in on that front.

It was, literally, the only thing I was on board with because SOMEONE needs to stand up to China, but he pretty much fucked that all up.

Troy wrote: Basically they model based on the economy, and not based on ANYTHING else, right?

Yes. If Trump were not re-elected, based on this economy, it would be relatively unprecedented.

Troy wrote: Hopefully this is the same as all those AAA ratings Moody was giving the credit backed securities in 2008.

lol

Trump's base still solid.

Also, the poors are becoming Republicans, or Republicans are becoming poors, or something.

Ahhhh....

Impeachment Could Mean Most Presidential Candidates Can’t Leave Washington, Or Talk. Sorry, Those Are (Really) The Rules.

An impeachment trial would consume every senator’s schedule. Under the Senate’s current rules, all senators must be in session Monday through Saturday, starting at around noon each day. The trial may last several weeks — Bill Clinton’s impeachment trial lasted five — thus taking several candidates off the campaign trail the month before the primaries start.

That’s a major problem for the six senators running to be the Democratic nominee for president — Cory Booker, Michael Bennet, Kamala Harris, Amy Klobuchar, Bernie Sanders, and Elizabeth Warren.

So unless they come up with some much more substantial than we've seen so far, I'm calling it. Not going to happen.

The laughs never fucking stop.

Hillary is accusing the Russians of grooming Gabbard to run as a third party candidate.

If this was a TV show I would have stopped watching it because it was so unrealistic.

Leisher wrote: Hillary is accusing the Russians of grooming Gabbard to run as a third party candidate.

If this was a TV show I would have stopped watching it because it was so unrealistic.

I told you I liked Gabbard. Trump was asking Hillary to join back in the race because she's his best foil. Her doing this is the next best thing she can do for Trump.

Gabbard's reply was a work of art.