Octopus Overlords

Rush is absolutely a Trump sychophant at this point.

Holman wrote:But the fact is that you don't have to be infantry to face danger in our current wars. Pete was on Afghanistan roads a lot, and those roads featured IEDs and every other threat.

I have a Navy buddy who went to Afghanistan for a year to assist in engineering for rebuilding villages, etc. Anyone who thinks even that was a "safe" job is clueless. I heard his stories when he got back. Every day they walked into a village they had no clue if some hidden Taliban member was part of the crowd waiting to take someone out with a suicide bomb. IEDs were a constant threat, and in fact my buddy left Afghanistan just a week before his unit got hit by one. While he had a lot of armed front-line infantry around him, he was in constant danger every day he was over there.

This complete willful ignorance just infuriates me.

Archinerd wrote: Thu Feb 13, 2020 12:31 pm I don't think Mayor Pete being Gay is really a factor.
Most of the people that think this is a real issue are already voting for Trump.

I don't know. I've seen homophobia crop up from several of Sanders' supporters as well (calling him homophobic slurs, for example). Though I think it's less that they wouldn't vote for someone who's gay than that they're going to attack him and other candidates any way they can.

Also, you do have polls showing that a small minority of Democrats won't vote for a gay man (of course, polls also show a significant percentage say they won't vote for someone over 70, etc, and yet four of the five frontrunners are over 70, etc). And you have some socially conservative views in the African American community.

But I think it's an issue he'd be able to overcome.

Defiant wrote: Thu Feb 13, 2020 3:21 pm

Archinerd wrote: Thu Feb 13, 2020 12:31 pm I don't think Mayor Pete being Gay is really a factor.
Most of the people that think this is a real issue are already voting for Trump.

I don't know. I've seen homophobia crop up from several of Sanders' supporters as well (calling him homophobic slurs, for example). Though I think it's less that they wouldn't vote for someone who's gay than that they're going to attack him and other candidates any way they can.

Also, you do have polls showing that a small minority of Democrats won't vote for a gay man (of course, polls also show a significant percentage say they won't vote for someone over 70, etc, and yet four of the five frontrunners are over 70, etc). And you have some socially conservative views in the African American community.

But I think it's an issue he'd be able to overcome.

It has to be hurting him in the Democratic primary. If nothing else, there are people (honestly including me, to some extent) who worry about the electability of a gay man in the general election. In both the primary and the general there are going to be some voters who are inclined to support his positions but who have homophobic beliefs that would hold them back - there was a well publicized story of a woman in the Iowa caucus trying to take back her caucus vote after the fact when she learned that Buttigieg is gay.

I think it can be overcome as well, but it has to be a net minus of some amount, i suspect.

We got our ballots in the mail yesterday (all vote in Colorado is by mail-in ballot). I found it strange that they still have Cory Booker on the ballot, even though he dropped out of the presidential race a month ago.

El Guapo wrote: Thu Feb 13, 2020 3:43 pm

Defiant wrote: Thu Feb 13, 2020 3:21 pm

Archinerd wrote: Thu Feb 13, 2020 12:31 pm I don't think Mayor Pete being Gay is really a factor.
Most of the people that think this is a real issue are already voting for Trump.

I don't know. I've seen homophobia crop up from several of Sanders' supporters as well (calling him homophobic slurs, for example). Though I think it's less that they wouldn't vote for someone who's gay than that they're going to attack him and other candidates any way they can.

Also, you do have polls showing that a small minority of Democrats won't vote for a gay man (of course, polls also show a significant percentage say they won't vote for someone over 70, etc, and yet four of the five frontrunners are over 70, etc). And you have some socially conservative views in the African American community.

But I think it's an issue he'd be able to overcome.

It has to be hurting him in the Democratic primary. If nothing else, there are people (honestly including me, to some extent) who worry about the electability of a gay man in the general election. In both the primary and the general there are going to be some voters who are inclined to support his positions but who have homophobic beliefs that would hold them back - there was a well publicized story of a woman in the Iowa caucus trying to take back her caucus vote after the fact when she learned that Buttigieg is gay.

I think it can be overcome as well, but it has to be a net minus of some amount, i suspect.

If he gets the nomination and Trump is re-elected *because* Buttigieg is gay, we will have gotten exactly what we deserve.

coopasonic wrote: Thu Feb 13, 2020 4:52 pm

El Guapo wrote: Thu Feb 13, 2020 3:43 pm

Defiant wrote: Thu Feb 13, 2020 3:21 pm

Archinerd wrote: Thu Feb 13, 2020 12:31 pm I don't think Mayor Pete being Gay is really a factor.
Most of the people that think this is a real issue are already voting for Trump.

I don't know. I've seen homophobia crop up from several of Sanders' supporters as well (calling him homophobic slurs, for example). Though I think it's less that they wouldn't vote for someone who's gay than that they're going to attack him and other candidates any way they can.

Also, you do have polls showing that a small minority of Democrats won't vote for a gay man (of course, polls also show a significant percentage say they won't vote for someone over 70, etc, and yet four of the five frontrunners are over 70, etc). And you have some socially conservative views in the African American community.

But I think it's an issue he'd be able to overcome.

It has to be hurting him in the Democratic primary. If nothing else, there are people (honestly including me, to some extent) who worry about the electability of a gay man in the general election. In both the primary and the general there are going to be some voters who are inclined to support his positions but who have homophobic beliefs that would hold them back - there was a well publicized story of a woman in the Iowa caucus trying to take back her caucus vote after the fact when she learned that Buttigieg is gay.

I think it can be overcome as well, but it has to be a net minus of some amount, i suspect.

If he gets the nomination and Trump is re-elected *because* Buttigieg is gay, we will have gotten exactly what we deserve.

Ultimately I don't care about whether we get what we deserve, I care about getting the best and just outcome.

News now is that the Bloomberg campaign is literally offering payouts to social media types for pro-Mike coverage.

Money talks. Media needs money--lots of it. (This is why Citizens United and everything after has been bad.)

https://twitter.com/michaelharriot/stat ... 20576?s=20

Who's on... uh, I mean in first?

https://twitter.com/DKThomp/status/1228130548390014976

Meanwhile, Drudge is now alleging that Bloomberg is considering Hillary as the VP on his potential ticket. FWIW Bloomberg + anyone is the only Democratic ticket where I throw up my hands and say we're fucked no matter what. And Hillary will get the party behind him. It comes down to a devil's deal. Do I go with the "former" NY autocratic plutocrat or the NY technocratic plutocrat? What's the goddamn difference anymore with wealth inequality a likely major driver behind the end of democracy in the west.

malchior wrote: Sun Feb 16, 2020 8:04 am Meanwhile, Drudge is now alleging that Bloomberg is considering Hillary as the VP on his potential ticket. FWIW Bloomberg + anyone is the only Democratic ticket where I throw up my hands and say we're fucked no matter what. And Hillary will get the party behind him. It comes down to a devil's deal. Do I go with the "former" NY autocratic plutocrat or the NY technocratic plutocrat? What's the goddamn difference anymore with wealth inequality a likely major driver behind the end of democracy in the west.

Don’t believe it. The “Hillary for VP” rumor was almost certainly leaked just to shift attention away from the the terrible accounts of B’s racism and misogyny that have been coming out late this week.

Yeah the HIllary thing is just a rumor; it isn't clear if this is the right agitating the base or like you said a way to cut into Bloomberg's issues. That said, I still despise the idea of a Bloomberg run. That he is gaining in the polls by air bombing tv with massive ad spends is disgusting. That the extremely wealthy have gone from buying candidates to being the candidates is not a welcome change in my mind.

A lot of terrible stuff is coming out, and other candidates have every incentive to tear him up on the debate stage.

IIRC there are two debates before SuperTuesday. He could be severely wounded by then.

malchior wrote: Sun Feb 16, 2020 8:04 am Meanwhile, Drudge is now alleging that Bloomberg is considering Hillary as the VP on his potential ticket. FWIW Bloomberg + anyone is the only Democratic ticket where I throw up my hands and say we're fucked no matter what. And Hillary will get the party behind him. It comes down to a devil's deal. Do I go with the "former" NY autocratic plutocrat or the NY technocratic plutocrat? What's the goddamn difference anymore with wealth inequality a likely major driver behind the end of democracy in the west.

Bloomburg/Clinton would be the one Duo that would get me to cast a protest vote. I won't back either, not even if they were running against Satan himself.

A protest vote is a vote for Trump. I'd still vote for them. However, it is a vote for the plutocrats to finish their civ wealth victory by draining the public body dry just a bit slower.

Holman wrote: Sun Feb 16, 2020 9:46 am A lot of terrible stuff is coming out, and other candidates have every incentive to tear him up on the debate stage.

IIRC there are two debates before SuperTuesday. He could be severely wounded by then.

One hopes. If it comes down to "Our oligarch is better than your dictator," that's a lose/lose proposition. I will not vote for Bloomberg, period.

malchior wrote: Sun Feb 16, 2020 11:52 am A protest vote is a vote for Trump. I'd still vote for them. However, it is a vote for the plutocrats to finish their civ wealth victory by draining the public body dry just a bit slower.

I know but that would be a also be a point in which I would emigrate somewhere else and cease to think of the US as "my country"; even if it never was.

Kraken wrote: Sun Feb 16, 2020 11:54 am

Holman wrote: Sun Feb 16, 2020 9:46 am A lot of terrible stuff is coming out, and other candidates have every incentive to tear him up on the debate stage.

IIRC there are two debates before SuperTuesday. He could be severely wounded by then.

One hopes. If it comes down to "Our oligarch is better than your dictator," that's a lose/lose proposition. I will not vote for Bloomberg, period.

The way I look at it is its better that brown people and non-straight people don't get abused by the government. However, if it was Trump/Bloomberg/Guillotine - it'd be a really tough choice. Just kidding. Sort of.

I could take a few courses in spanish and move to a quiet part of Mexico for a while, maybe finally use my marketing degree. I could try to do the same for Germany. Maybe qualify for a free masters degree; work as a caregiver or a truck driver, they always need those.

I was *SHOCKED* at how easy it was for me to move a thousand miles away from the home I lived in for 36 years. Whats four thousand more?

Wow. Actually if Trump wins again I just might do the same. Funny to think about that. I seem to do well in hell or high water situations. Its the average situations I seem to have trouble with.

Drazzil wrote: Sun Feb 16, 2020 12:02 pm
I know but that would be a also be a point in which I would emigrate somewhere else and cease to think of the US as "my country"; even if it never was.

So you do your part to set the house on fire on your way out the door? Classy move.

Blackhawk wrote: Sun Feb 16, 2020 12:57 pm

Drazzil wrote: Sun Feb 16, 2020 12:02 pm
I know but that would be a also be a point in which I would emigrate somewhere else and cease to think of the US as "my country"; even if it never was.

So you do your part to set the house on fire on your way out the door? Classy move.

I'm not saying your wrong but... Thanks for the hardest laugh I had in days Blackhawk. I needed that.

Besides Bloomburg already has like 10% of the Democratic vote. The house is already on fire. This would be more like me pausing at the door to light a cigarette on the way out.

Drazzil wrote: Sun Feb 16, 2020 1:34 pm Besides Bloomburg already has like 10% of the Democratic vote. The house is already on fire. This would be more like me pausing at the door to light a cigarette on the way out.

Bloomberg has not won a single Democratic vote (apart from, I guess, possible write-ins). He has not been on any of the primary ballots and won't be until Super Tuesday.

Slow down.

Some embarrassment for Pete's campaign: his comms adviser has been caught running a sock-puppet account intended to demonstrate black support. Thread:

https://twitter.com/YesYoureRacist/stat ... 66337?s=20

The classy move would be to fire her.

Drazzil wrote:I was *SHOCKED* at how easy it was for me to move a thousand miles away from the home I lived in for 36 years. Whats four thousand more?

Your history of drug use and lack of professional experience interfering with a visa application.

Holman wrote: Sun Feb 16, 2020 1:43 pm Some embarrassment for Pete's campaign: his comms adviser has been caught running a sock-puppet account intended to demonstrate black support. Thread:

https://twitter.com/YesYoureRacist/stat ... 66337?s=20

The classy move would be to fire her.

Hmmm. I’m thinking the classy move might be to pause and ask ourselves whether we should take at face value a Twitter post targeting Pete Buttigieg’s campaign advisor made by an account by the name of “Yes, Mayor Pete, You’re Racist.” Has this been fact-checked at all? I can’t find any mention of it outside of Twitter, and I did see that Liz Smith issued an outright denial:

Yea guys I totally have the time to be running a sock puppet account from Nigeria. Find better conspiracies!

Is there anything out there that proves her wrong? Just wondering before I call Mayor Pete and demand he fire her.

Edited to add: I also love the classy way this account poses his accusation as a question. “Is Buttigieg's comms adviser running a sock puppet account claiming to be from Nigeria?” I mean, it’s not like he’s saying she is, right? He’s just asking questions.

I wonder if the next post comes out with a “Some people are saying . . .”

Isgrimnur wrote: Sun Feb 16, 2020 2:25 pm

Drazzil wrote:I was *SHOCKED* at how easy it was for me to move a thousand miles away from the home I lived in for 36 years. Whats four thousand more?

Your history of drug use and lack of professional experience interfering with a visa application.

Yes. It might. But then I hear on the news that it is extremely easy to get a student visa for a masters degree. Classes are in english through a few major universities though and if I can pick up even a middling German.

Spoilered for off topic Drazzil stuff:
Speaking of. This is what I am going to do in ALL future threads to avoid derailing them. Thanks all!

Holman wrote: Sun Feb 16, 2020 1:39 pm

Drazzil wrote: Sun Feb 16, 2020 1:34 pm Besides Bloomburg already has like 10% of the Democratic vote. The house is already on fire. This would be more like me pausing at the door to light a cigarette on the way out.

Bloomberg has not won a single Democratic vote (apart from, I guess, possible write-ins). He has not been on any of the primary ballots and won't be until Super Tuesday.

Slow down.

NY Times has him polling at #4.

Kurth wrote: Sun Feb 16, 2020 2:25 pm

Holman wrote: Sun Feb 16, 2020 1:43 pm Some embarrassment for Pete's campaign: his comms adviser has been caught running a sock-puppet account intended to demonstrate black support. Thread:

https://twitter.com/YesYoureRacist/stat ... 66337?s=20

The classy move would be to fire her.

Hmmm. I’m thinking the classy move might be to pause and ask ourselves whether we should take at face value a Twitter post targeting Pete Buttigieg’s campaign advisor made by an account by the name of “Yes, Mayor Pete, You’re Racist.” Has this been fact-checked at all? I can’t find any mention of it outside of Twitter, and I did see that Liz Smith issued an outright denial:

Yea guys I totally have the time to be running a sock puppet account from Nigeria. Find better conspiracies!

Is there anything out there that proves her wrong? Just wondering before I call Mayor Pete and demand he fire her.

Edited to add: I also love the classy way this account poses his accusation as a question. “Is Buttigieg's comms adviser running a sock puppet account claiming to be from Nigeria?” I mean, it’s not like he’s saying she is, right? He’s just asking questions.

I wonder if the next post comes out with a “Some people are saying . . .”

I haven't followed it closely, but my linked tweet is far from the only source. It looks like lots of people were talking about this before the "Nigerian" account got nuked today. And it's really very odd that a staff-boss-to-campaign-staffers message went out on that account signed by her name. Various techy sleuth types have noted that the Nigerian account posted only during hours when smith was also posting, and that it never seemed to be on West African time.

Lis Smith has denied any connection, so there's that.

More recently, Buzzfeed claims to have communicated with the Nigerian account holder and say that he is not Lis Smith, although they haven't ruled out a connection to the campaign.

EDIT AND RECONSIDERATION:

In retrospect, I wish I hadn't touch this story. It's too icky, and reflects badly on the whole culture of the primary. I linked it because it was blowing up Twitter all morning, but it would have been better to step aside a while.

The upshot is either that this is (a) Lis Smith getting caught with some fakery or (b) some other campaign or other actors doing ratfuckery. If it's the latter, it means they started in August 2019, and it likely means other campaigns will be targeted in this or similar ways.

Ugly.

Kraken wrote: Sun Feb 16, 2020 11:54 am

Holman wrote: Sun Feb 16, 2020 9:46 am A lot of terrible stuff is coming out, and other candidates have every incentive to tear him up on the debate stage.

IIRC there are two debates before SuperTuesday. He could be severely wounded by then.

One hopes. If it comes down to "Our oligarch is better than your dictator," that's a lose/lose proposition. I will not vote for Bloomberg, period.

Neither will I. I won't "pick my poison" boiled slower or boiled faster is no choice.

Longish Drazzil tangent:
.

Drazzil wrote: Sun Feb 16, 2020 12:09 pm work as a caregiver or a truck driver, they always need those.

Alefroth wrote: Sun Feb 16, 2020 6:36 pm

Drazzil wrote: Sun Feb 16, 2020 12:09 pm work as a caregiver or a truck driver, they always need those.

Spoiler:

Too bad Portland doesn't.

Oregon is not a swing state, but if Bloomberg gets the nod I'll vote for him... But I'll be that rat looking for a way off the boat that is both sinking and burning. I thought the last plutocrat I voted for would be looking for legacy... Turns out he's just looking to grab all he can as our republic circles the drain... The more fool me.

And how many Trump voters do you think will double down on stupid just because they don't want to admit; to themselves, or others how stupid they were the first time?

To change a horse mid stream requires recognizing and acknowledging how deep the water is...

and that maybe you shoulda brought an ox instead of that mustang.

*shrug*

Drazzil wrote: Sun Feb 16, 2020 9:20 pm To change a horse mid stream requires recognizing and acknowledging how deep the water is...

and that maybe you shoulda brought an ox instead of that mustang.

WE HAVE DIED OF DYSENTERY

Holman wrote: Sun Feb 16, 2020 9:47 pm

Drazzil wrote: Sun Feb 16, 2020 9:20 pm To change a horse mid stream requires recognizing and acknowledging how deep the water is...

and that maybe you shoulda brought an ox instead of that mustang.

WE HAVE DIED OF DYSENTERY

Hey this is fun!

Defiant wrote: Sun Feb 16, 2020 10:49 pm https://twitter.com/ashleyfeinberg/stat ... 6077641728

Shee-yit. Any chance this is a cover up? Any at all?

Just stop.