2020 Presidential Election

[TheLeviathan]

 

There's a lot not to love about Biden, age being #1 in my book. But I believe he will crush Trump in PA and MI. Probably re-take WI too. At the end of the day, that's what matters. He's not the only Dem that can do that, but he's the most likely, IMO. Heck, there polls showing him leading Trump in NC and Texas. No, I don't think he will win Texas, but Trump is vulnerable to the voters who voted for him holding their nose because they hated Hillary more and thought "$%^ it whats the worst that could happen?"

 

That kind of plays into the disapproval ratings.  Yeah, people don't like Trump, but if they don't like the other person even more (see: Hillary) then they vote for the lesser of two dislikable hacks.

 

By anecdote, I know quite a few farmers who did exactly that in 2016.

[PseudoSABR]

 

We don't want politicians to change wrong views?  I'm cynical he did this for good reasons, but I sorta want people in office willing to listen.

 

I like a lot of what AOC stands for, but I also hope she listens that some of her policies are not well designed.  Ditto Warren.  Ditto Mayor Pete.  

 

One of my biggest issues with the guy in office is that he doesn't listen to good reason.  I can't fault Biden for doing so, even if it was nothing more than saving political face.

I'm all about politicians changing their views, but Biden caved pretty quickly to the point that I'm not sure he authentically held the previous view in the first place.  I want politicians to change their views because they are convinced they were wrong to hold them, not because of the prevailing political winds.  Biden's choice seems like the latter even if he couches in access to healthcare rhetoric.

[TheLeviathan]

I certainly can understand questioning the authenticity of it.

[ashbury]

As long as he eventually does the right things if elected, I'm not surei care about the path to get there. Within reason....

FWIW, this sounds an awful lot like the rationalizations I've heard single-issue Republicans use to justify supporting Trump through thick and thin.

[Mike Sixel]

Other than I wasn't talking about one issue, and I said within reason, and was clearly responding to a candidate changing his mind, no. Not the same at all.

[ashbury]

Other than I wasn't talking about one issue, and I said within reason, and was clearly responding to a candidate changing his mind, no. Not the same at all.

Soft supporters of Trump also console themselves with phrases like "within reason", and then allow the line in the sand to be moved again and again, always within reason I'm sure.

 

I'm not drawing any other parallel than that.

[Mike Sixel]

 

Soft supporters of Trump also console themselves with phrases like "within reason", and then allow the line in the sand to be moved again and again, always within reason I'm sure.

 

I'm not drawing any other parallel than that.

 

I'm baffled by this entire string, which seems like an attack, frankly.

[LaBombo]

Either the up or down stance on Hyde was already an unavoidable flip/flop for Biden, since he's previously held positions on the amendment at one time or another.

 

Trump would try to leverage that foregone switch into a "flip flop" issue no matter which side Biden landed on, so it was more important to get it right than make a futile gesture toward looking resolute.

 

But compared to where Biden has landed on Hyde, the act of position change will probably hold little or no sway with most independents. Flipping probably matters to mostly just the ideological purity police within his own party, but nowhere near enough for them not to give him their votes or, for the most part, even their contributions.

 

[ashbury]

I'm baffled by this entire string, which seems like an attack, frankly.

It's certainly not meant as an attack on you or anyone, merely a parallel drawn.

 

As with anyone, you can consult a(nother) moderator via PM if you feel like there's an actual problem.

[ewen21]

 

Soft supporters of Trump also console themselves with phrases like "within reason", and then allow the line in the sand to be moved again and again, always within reason I'm sure.

 

I'm not drawing any other parallel than that.

As a soft supporter of Trump I detect a very condescending tone.

 

It's not like I find it hurtful, though.

 

Continue, I would like for you to expand on it

[ewen21]

 

Either the up or down stance on Hyde was already an unavoidable flip/flop for Biden, since he's previously held positions on the amendment at one time or another.

 

Trump would try to leverage that foregone switch into a "flip flop" issue no matter which side Biden landed on, so it was more important to get it right than make a futile gesture toward looking resolute.

 

But compared to where Biden has landed on Hyde, the act of position change will probably hold little or no sway with most independents. Flipping probably matters to mostly just the ideological purity police within his own party, but nowhere near enough for them not to give him their votes or, for the most part, even their contributions.

 

We have much greater concerns as a country than where candidates stand on the Hyde amendment and other socio-cultural issues.  What I find obnoxious is that the Hyde Amendment is viewed as racially oppressive legislation.  Overturning this would basically make it a lot easier for people of color to have unprotected sex, transmit STDs to one another and exterminate more black babies.  I would give Corey Booker or Elizabeth Warren or Kamala Harris five minutes each to explain this to me and allow me a five minute retort where they cannot interrupt.  

 

I really could care less if Biden "flip-flopped" here.  He is a seedy character and a complete space cadet who would be a horrendous president.  This is nothing more than Biden trying to appeal to a broader base and it only goes to show what a political whore he is.  We need to just ignore him and maybe he will go away.  Some goes for mayor Pete

[PseudoSABR]

 

He is a seedy character and a complete space cadet who would be a horrendous president.  

Well this description does fit someone we all know running for President in 2020.

[Badsmerf]

I agree we have bigger issues to deal with, but the Hyde amendment perpetuates poverty by only allowing access to abortions to the ones that can afford it. Since black people have a higher poverty rate, they are affected more as a group.

 

Here is my problem with it... Allowing federal funds to go to abortion would dramatically decrease the amount of unwanted pregnancies.... Babies that are going to be born to the poorest people in our country. Babies that will undoubtedly be born to mothers on many forms of government assistance. Born into places that have bad schools, crime, lack of opportunities (because... poor moms).

 

Paying for abortions is much cheaper than tax payers raising these babies, or eventually paying for them to be in prison. For some reason the right has more sympathy for undeveloped black babies than they do for the actual people walking beside them. Class warfare, racism, elitism, power... the arguments against abortion in many cases are rooted in places facts can't dislodge.

[ewen21]

 

I agree we have bigger issues to deal with, but the Hyde amendment perpetuates poverty by only allowing access to abortions to the ones that can afford it. Since black people have a higher poverty rate, they are affected more as a group.

Here is my problem with it... Allowing federal funds to go to abortion would dramatically decrease the amount of unwanted pregnancies.... Babies that are going to be born to the poorest people in our country. Babies that will undoubtedly be born to mothers on many forms of government assistance. Born into places that have bad schools, crime, lack of opportunities (because... poor moms).

Paying for abortions is much cheaper than tax payers raising these babies, or eventually paying for them to be in prison. For some reason the right has more sympathy for undeveloped black babies than they do for the actual people walking beside them. Class warfare, racism, elitism, power... the arguments against abortion in many cases are rooted in places facts can't dislodge.

I give you Clarence Thomas:

https://www.firstthings.com/web-exclusives/2019/05/abortion-and-eugenics

From the beginning, birth control and abortion were promoted as means of effectuating eugenics. Planned Parenthood founder Margaret Sanger was particularly open about the fact that birth control could be used for eugenic purposes. These arguments about the eugenic potential for birth control apply with even greater force to abortion, which can be used to target specific children with unwanted characteristics.

 

I think Thomas would say your logic is racist.

 

[ashbury]

As a soft supporter of Trump I detect a very condescending tone.

It was indeed pretty bad and I'm going to cease commenting on it.

[PseudoSABR]

 

I give you Clarence Thomas:

https://www.firstthings.com/web-exclusives/2019/05/abortion-and-eugenics

From the beginning, birth control and abortion were promoted as means of effectuating eugenics. Planned Parenthood founder Margaret Sanger was particularly open about the fact that birth control could be used for eugenic purposes. These arguments about the eugenic potential for birth control apply with even greater force to abortion, which can be used to target specific children with unwanted characteristics.

 

I think Thomas would say your logic is racist.

Give me a break.  Granting access to birth control and abortion, is completely different from compelling birth control and abortion, the latter would be only eugenics. That's some really strained logic.

[TheLeviathan]

Biden 24%

Sanders 16%

Warren 15%

Buttigieg 15%

 

Front runners are starting to create separation in Iowa.

[Badsmerf]

I give you Clarence Thomas:

 

Sorry, threw up in my mouth a little bit. I could give a **** less what that man thinks about anything. Bringing up Nazi principles when discussing access to abortion is disgusting and deserving to be slapped across the face by all the women who are forced against their will to carry a baby for 9+ months, then given little support and constantly told how they their bad decision caused all the hardships she and her baby are facing. **** that.

[PseudoSABR]

 

Biden 24%

Sanders 16%

Warren 15%

Buttigieg 15%

 

Front runners are starting to create separation in Iowa.

Biden's lead isn't insurmountable either.  I like Sanders, but it would be interesting to see where his current votes go; the obvious guess is Warren. 

[ewen21]

 

Sorry, threw up in my mouth a little bit. I could give a **** less what that man thinks about anything. Bringing up Nazi principles when discussing access to abortion is disgusting and deserving to be slapped across the face by all the women who are forced against their will to carry a baby for 9+ months, then given little support and constantly told how they their bad decision caused all the hardships she and her baby are facing. **** that.

Was only pointing out that a certain black person would have viewed your comments as racist. You say you "could give a **** less what that man thinks".  The man is a Supreme court justice and he's black yet you couldn't care less what he feels about race.

 

Pause and imagine me for a moment and extrapolate how I might feel about any one of the white boys here making accusations of racism.  Just stop it.  We can go on and on and in circles with it.  The word is thrown around so much these days it ceases to have meaning.

[ewen21]

 

Give me a break.  Granting access to birth control and abortion, is completely different from compelling birth control and abortion, the latter would be only eugenics. That's some really strained logic.

 

Write a letter to Thomas.  That's his quote and his idea, not mine.

[Mr. Brooks]

Write a letter to Thomas. That's his quote and his idea, not mine.

I read the article you linked, and Thomas was explicitly arguing against "Enshrining a constitutional right to an abortion based solely on the race, sex, or disability of an unborn child" (his words).

 

It's disingenuous to take his opinion from a very specific case, and apply it to the very general issue of access to contraception and abortion.

[ewen21]

 

I read the article you linked, and Thomas was explicitly arguing against "Enshrining a constitutional right to an abortion based solely on the race, sex, or disability of an unborn child" (his words).

It's disingenuous to take his opinion from a very specific case, and apply it to the very general issue of access to contraception and abortion.

Forget Thomas.  I've moved on.

 

As I said earlier I couldn't care less about the Hyde Amendment and the fact that a guy like Biden makes this part of his platform further illustrates how out of touch democrats are with the American people.  This is a guy who opened up his campaign with the word "dignity" 

 

Abortions are a result of irresponsible behavior.  Use contraception and if you don't then get a freaking abortion. It shouldn't be up to the government to pay for this stuff.  Maybe you think it should, but I don't (unless we are talking about rape or incest).  Imagine if a democrat actually spoke about a shift toward more traditional moral values. Or is that a problem?

 

Just trying to feel where you are coming from

[ewen21]

If Trump is so unpopular and is down in notable polls....and he's a racist, misogynist, xenophobic monster he's professed to be by so many here why are the democrats so hysterical about 2020?

 

The desperation is fascinating to watch, actually

[biggentleben]

 

Was only pointing out that a certain black person would have viewed your comments as racist. You say you "could give a **** less what that man thinks".  The man is a Supreme court justice and he's black yet you couldn't care less what he feels about race.

 

Pause and imagine me for a moment and extrapolate how I might feel about any one of the white boys here making accusations of racism.  Just stop it.  We can go on and on and in circles with it.  The word is thrown around so much these days it ceases to have meaning.

 

The same "certain black person" that thought bringing out accusations of sexual harassment was a sign of "keeping a black man in his place".  Terrible choice of an example to cite on racism.

[biggentleben]

 

Forget Thomas.  I've moved on.

 

As I said earlier I couldn't care less about the Hyde Amendment and the fact that a guy like Biden makes this part of his platform further illustrates how out of touch democrats are with the American people.  This is a guy who opened up his campaign with the word "dignity" 

 

Abortions are a result of irresponsible behavior.  Use contraception and if you don't then get a freaking abortion. It shouldn't be up to the government to pay for this stuff.  Maybe you think it should, but I don't (unless we are talking about rape or incest).  Imagine if a democrat actually spoke about a shift toward more traditional moral values. Or is that a problem?

 

Just trying to feel where you are coming from

 

The same American people who were found through two different polling services to rank abortion as their top issue of voting influence in the 2020 election. Recent Republican-led actions on abortion at the state level have pushed the issue to a top issue on both sides of the aisle. Perhaps it is not Democrats who are unaware of the sway of the country at present.

 

On "traditional moral values", I am quite certain traditional moral values include allowing the judgment of ultimate moral superiority to rest outside of oneself, so judging others' behaviors without knowing each individual case would certainly not fit with that. It's been a discussion point that has stymied hard-line anti-abortionists for decades. If you'd like to have a discussion on the actual Biblical implications on it, that's something I've studied in depth, but it's also not applicable to the argument at point.

[ewen21]

 

The same American people who were found through two different polling services to rank abortion as their top issue of voting influence in the 2020 election. Recent Republican-led actions on abortion at the state level have pushed the issue to a top issue on both sides of the aisle. Perhaps it is not Democrats who are unaware of the sway of the country at present.

 

On "traditional moral values", I am quite certain traditional moral values include allowing the judgment of ultimate moral superiority to rest outside of oneself, so judging others' behaviors without knowing each individual case would certainly not fit with that. It's been a discussion point that has stymied hard-line anti-abortionists for decades. If you'd like to have a discussion on the actual Biblical implications on it, that's something I've studied in depth, but it's also not applicable to the argument at point.

First, I couldn't less about people who rank abortion as their top issue for voting.  Who are these people?  College girls?  Who cares!

Second, I haven't actually come out as being for or against abortion.  I am not in favor of overturning Rowe vs Wade so you are barking up the wrong tree if you want me to make the case for people who want to overturn it

 

 

[biggentleben]

 

First, I couldn't less about people who rank abortion as their top issue for voting.  Who are these people?  College girls?  Who cares!

Second, I haven't actually come out as being for or against abortion.  I am not in favor of overturning Rowe vs Wade so you are barking up the wrong tree if you want me to make the case for people who want to overturn it

 

1. You just said "that a guy like Biden makes this part of his platform further illustrates how out of touch democrats are with the American people". I responded that the American people are very focused on abortion, responding to your comment directly. No reason to take umbrage with someone responding directly to your comments.

 

2. You discussed traditional moral values in a post regarding abortion. No assumption was made on your personal view, just the conflict of "traditional moral values" and typical stances of those who espouse those values. No redirect, no dodging, simply directly addressing what was directly stated in the post being replied to...

[ewen21]

 

1. You just said "that a guy like Biden makes this part of his platform further illustrates how out of touch democrats are with the American people". I responded that the American people are very focused on abortion, responding to your comment directly. No reason to take umbrage with someone responding directly to your comments.

 

2. You discussed traditional moral values in a post regarding abortion. No assumption was made on your personal view, just the conflict of "traditional moral values" and typical stances of those who espouse those values. No redirect, no dodging, simply directly addressing what was directly stated in the post being replied to...

1.  And I said it only goes to show how out of touch the democrats are.  They are playing a stupid game of chicken with each other right now and Biden has fallen prey to it.  Who can go the furthest left?  Biden doesn't want to appear to be too moderate.  Once again, as it has been discussed for months in this forum now, the democrats won't win this way.  They need a more moderate candidate.  You don't have to believe that if you don't want to, but when reparations and stuff like the Hyde Amendment become front and center it's a whole lot of white noise.

 

2. Traditional moral values would not include embrace the federal government paying for abortions that aren't the result of rape.  Seems to me as though sex and sexual proclivities should be free, open, unrestricted and even celebrated by the far left.  That has nothing to do with any kind of traditional morality

 

I ain't even mad at you, Ben.

It's just 9 times out of 10 your opinions in this forum don't make any sense to me.

[diehardtwinsfan]

I don't post in these threads for a reason... and if I were to apply a lesson to this, it's that no one... and I mean no one listens to anyone. That is both on the right and on the left, so all of you get off your f***ing high towers on this one... BOTH SIDES... The left isn't a bunch of murderers who just want to kill babies when it's convenient and the right isn't a bunch of crotchety old white men who want nothing more than to suppress women and their right to choose. They both recognize real things that need to be addressed, and no one is even attempting to listen and find the common ground between where a parent(s) should be allowed to terminate a pregnancy versus recognizing that we have a society completely dehumanizing the unborn...who are very much defenseless and have no choice in the matter... and strangely enough, each side claims to want less abortions... think about that. 

 

Both sides are clearly interested in creating a perception of the other. Neither side is interested in actually listening to the other or trying to answer their actual concerns... and for those of us who want to find solutions, it's maddenly frustrating, especially when we see that each side has some valid points and would like to see this society come to a compromise on an issue that leads to a ton less abortions but still allows for them within reason. 

 

So... back on topic. There have been multiple reports on this one tonight. We can have some great conversations in the baseball forums about some things that we vehemently disagree on... So please... all of us... recognize that the same skills that are required in other forums can be very beneficial to all of us here. 

 

So all of you... stop... listen... and ask questions to understand. And yes.. this is a mod warning.