US Presidential Election 2020

[Remius]

Endorsements coming in from unlikely sources.

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/in-first-ever-endorsement-scientific-american-backs-joe-biden

 

[QV]

Endorsements coming in from unlikely sources.

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/in-first-ever-endorsement-scientific-american-backs-joe-biden

No.  I’d say that’s fairly likely and unsurprising.  A magazine that endorses a Democrat.  It would be unlikely if they endorsed Trump.

 

[Remius]

No.  I’d say that’s fairly likely and unsurprising.  A magazine that endorses a Democrat.  It would be unlikely if they endorsed Trump.

Huh?

Edit.  Oh lol, right, because of that whole science thing that Trump thinks is some sort of fake magic thing.

A magazine that has never once endorsed a candidate in 175years comes out in favour of one.  Completely normal and likely...

 

[QV]

What does that have to do with a statement Trump made about a war hero in 2015?

It would mean Trump’s instincts on McCain’s political positions were right.  His words were bad, as often quoted. 

 

[QV]

Huh?

Scientific American, the magazine.  Are you missing something or am I?

 

[mariomike]

It would mean Trump’s instincts on McCain’s political positions were right. 

He was talking about a man's war record. What does that have to do with politics?

"He was a war hero because he was captured. I like people who weren't captured."

 

[Remius]

Scientific American, the magazine.  Are you missing something or am I?

Sorry edited. 

Yeah, science.  Silly magic stuff that Trump denies.  Like I said, it has never once endorsed a candidate ever in 175 years.  So yeah, unlikely source.

 

[QV]

Sorry edited. 

Yeah, science.  Silly magic stuff that Trump denies.  Like I said, it has never once endorsed a candidate ever in 175 years.  So yeah, unlikely source.

We both know that’s not true, Trump denying science.  But if he does, maybe we’ll see an executive order making science a federal crime.

Journalists at a magazine endorsing a Dem.  Not shocking. 

See there are two sides to this story: Trump denies science so scientific American endorsed Biden, or journalists at a magazine endorse Biden over fake news Trump.  How you take it all depends on which you think is more likely. 

 

[QV]

He was talking about a man's war record. What does that have to do with politics?

"He was a war hero because he was captured. I like people who weren't captured."

No.  He was trying to disparage McCain in an infantile way and we all know Trump is often terrible with his words.  Trump’s record on his support for the military speaks for itself which is why the pathetic Atlantic article has died. 

 

[Remius]

You are correct.  The Woodward tapes clearly showed he accepted the science.  His words and his actions however show otherwise. 

 

[mariomike]

He was trying to disparage McCain in an infantile way and we all know Trump is often terrible with his words. 

I won't disagree with the highlighted word.

But, he knew exactly what he was saying.

 

[Remius]

I won't disagree with the highlighted word.

But, he knew exactly what he was saying.

Yep.  And using the military as props does not mean he supports them.  They are a means to an end for him.

Nobody should kid themselves about that.

 

[QV]

What ever floats your boat.

You can pay attention to the record, actions and results, or you can pick fly shit out of pepper on Trump and continue to be heavily swayed by his opposition’s statements.

 

[tomahawk6]

I don't think McCain was a hero, but rather a survivor. He did what he had too to survive . The North Vietnamese were not kind hearted jailors. McCain and Trump were bitter enemies never to be reconciled.

 

[mariomike]

I don't think McCain was a hero, but rather a survivor.

I think it took great courage to fly 23 bombing missions over North Vietnam.

He knew if he wasn't killed on the mission, that he faced years as a POW.

His numerous military decorations and awards include the Silver Star, two Legion of Merits, Distinguished Flying Cross, three Bronze Star Medals, two Purple Hearts, two Navy and Marine Corps Commendation Medals, and the Prisoner of War Medal.

 

[Remius]

What ever floats your boat.

You can pay attention to the record, actions and results, or you can pick fly crap out of pepper on Trump and continue to be heavily swayed by his opposition’s statements.

Or being swayed by his apologists.

All I can do is hear what he actually says and the actions he takes (or doesn’t).  The last 7-8 months has shown me enough to see his results and actions and his record.  It’s not all bad but it does not outweigh the catastrophe that is the US right now under his watch. 

 

[QV]

Curious, what has he done or not done exactly that makes you against?  Assume you’d vote for Biden if you were eligible to vote?

 

[QV]

https://justthenews.com/politics-policy/elections/model-predicted-5-last-6-presidential-elections-says-trump-will-win-2020

And there is this.  Landslide.

 

[Good2Golf]

Thank you for your insightful contributions to these discussions.

As opposed to your avoidance of contributing any insight, to wit:

Figure it out.

Wherein you previously stated that "actual indicators" showed that 'polls and pundits' were wrong, as in... 

No.  Lots and lots of polls and pundits said Hillary would win.  Actual indicators showed another result.

Then go on to refer to a pundit (Prof. Norpoth) opining about how the NH Primary proves Trump will win in a landslide, when you dismissed pundits (and polls) earlier.

https://justthenews.com/politics-policy/elections/model-predicted-5-last-6-presidential-elections-says-trump-will-win-2020

And there is this.  Landslide.

So does Norpoth's punditting count, or doesn't it? ???

 

[shawn5o]

For you. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8SOQduoLgRw
If any conservatives watch it, just don't ask me for 18 minutes of your life back.

Hey Don

That was a great video. Of course, I prefer the ying/yang approach compared to the "divisions" (my take) he showed.

Thanks

:cheers: