Welcome to Thunderdome

Leisher wrote: Biden still leads, but Buttigieg is trending up.

Go Booty!

Am I the only person who.mentally shorthands that name as "Buttplug?"

GORDON wrote: Am I the only person who.mentally shorthands that name as "Buttplug?"

No.

Mayor Pete might win the Iowa caucus and New Hampshire primary. Right now he's looking strong in those two. On the other hand, those are very white states. South Carolina will be the first indicator of how much support he can pick up among the black and Hispanic community.

Is Pete the gay guy? That'll hurt him in the black community.

Leisher wrote: Is Pete the gay guy? That'll hurt him in the black community.

Yes.

Leisher wrote: Is Pete the gay guy? That'll hurt him in the black community.

Yes. It's been fun to watch liberal Democrat commentators talk about his soft support in the black communities without ever mentioning his being gay. It's just some mystery of life as to why he doesn't have black support.

Black people are extremely prejudiced against gays. Asians too. In prison they're always at war with Hispanics. Their rate of violent crime is a lot higher than vice versa. But "only whitey can be racist!"

Sorry, rant for a different thread. I get annoyed when people aren't treated like they're people. People can be great. People can suck. Their skin color, gender, political standing, etc. doesn't pre-determine that.

Unless they're SEC fans. They're the worst.

Trump campaign will not give Bloomberg reporters credentials.

At first glance it seems petty because Bloomberg has entered the race. However, I've got to say this shit is sketchy as hell:

President Trump's 2020 campaign announced Monday that it will no longer credential Bloomberg News reporters for its events after the outlet said it would not conduct investigations into the Democratic presidential candidates, but would continue to probe the Trump administration.

When you make the Trump campaign look ethical and "in the right", you're doing something very wrong.

Buttigieg suggests giving away free stuff might not be realistic. AOC attacks him.

Check out this bit from the article:

The mayor's critics have pounced on this line of attack. After all, some of the nation's most successful federal programs — such as Social Security, Medicare and K-12 public education — have been available to all Americans regardless of their income. Surely, he doesn't think that these programs are also misconceived?

How is that reporting facts and not expressing your own opinion?

Leisher wrote: When you make the Trump campaign look ethical and "in the right", you're doing something very wrong.

So if the do investigate other candidates, it looks like promoting Bloomberg. If they don't look into Trump, they aren't doing their job.

I'd argue they should look into everyone.

Leisher wrote: How is that reporting facts and not expressing your own opinion?

Did you read the URL you posted? https://www.cnn.com/2019/11/29/[b]opinions[/b]/aoc-warning-to-buttigieg-zelizer/index.html

TheCatt wrote:

Leisher wrote: When you make the Trump campaign look ethical and "in the right", you're doing something very wrong.

So if the do investigate other candidates, it looks like promoting Bloomberg. If they don't look into Trump, they aren't doing their job.

I'd argue they should look into everyone.

I think Ted Cruz is correct in that this should be considered an in kind contribution and treated as such. Bloomberg really put his news organization in a bad spot for this. Especially considering he probably has the slimmest shot of anyone still in the race. Just a stupid move on his part.

Harris is out.

Vince wrote: I think Ted Cruz is correct in that this should be considered an in kind contribution and treated as such. Bloomberg really put his news organization in a bad spot for this. Especially considering he probably has the slimmest shot of anyone still in the race. Just a stupid move on his part.

Agree with everything here.

You either investigate them all or none of them.

TheCatt wrote:

Leisher wrote: How is that reporting facts and not expressing your own opinion?

Did you read the URL you posted? https://www.cnn.com/2019/11/29/[b]opinions[/b]/aoc-warning-to-buttigieg-zelizer/index.html

No because it was under CNN's news section, not in opinion nor was it labeled as such.

Leisher wrote: No because it was under CNN's news section, not in opinion nor was it labeled as such.

OK, Malcolm.

Ha! It's in their news section. Presented as news on a site that puts "Opinion" and "Analysis" in front of their opinion pieces, but in this case I needed to see the tiny little "opinion" they left off everywhere else? Nah, that's their fuck up.

In other news, Bullock drops out.

Whoever he is...

Is it opinion that AOC warned Buttplug about something? The large font, at a glance, tells me someone got told, no opinion about it.

The election is over. Bloomberg just won the hearts and minds of everyone.
No wonder Bloomberg Media isn't allowed to report on him.

Leisher wrote: Bloomberg just won the hearts and minds of everyone.

You know he's only talking about a sugar tax right there, right?

TheCatt wrote:

Leisher wrote: Bloomberg just won the hearts and minds of everyone.

You know he's only talking about a sugar tax right there, right?

I do, and that tax will lead to taxes on fast food. Then taxes on fatty foods. Then raising taxes on "bad things" people are still doing. Tax gas higher until everyone drives electric. And so on.

Tax people to behave how you want them to behave.

I realize this can be used for good. However, this is the government we're talking about. Should they really be taxing things based on what they want us to do rather than it being about raising money to offset the cost of giving us services?