2019-2020 US Elections Megathread I- It Begins

[Pope Joan]

I would support Bernie Sanders, especially now that I see the Dem elites are publically threatening to shackle him

Last time they hired actors to pretend to be violent rioting Bernie supporters, and only fooled the mainstream media

My second choice, as last time is Trump.

The political problem in the US centers around entrenched elites. These two guys shake those foundations, and we need more of that

[Hediacrana]

The political problem in the US centers around entrenched elites. These two guys shake those foundations, and we need more of that

How are a real estate multi-millionaire and his family not part of the elite?

[Telconi]

The political problem in the US centers around entrenched elites. These two guys shake those foundations, and we need more of that

How are a real estate multi-millionaire and his family not part of the elite?

Because real estate multi-millionaires don't posess political power?

[Page]

I would support Bernie Sanders, especially now that I see the Dem elites are publically threatening to shackle him

Last time they hired actors to pretend to be violent rioting Bernie supporters, and only fooled the mainstream media

My second choice, as last time is Trump.

The political problem in the US centers around entrenched elites. These two guys shake those foundations, and we need more of that

Yeah, it's not as if Trump's White House is filled with more people from Goldman Sachs than ever before... oh wait, it totally is. He isn't shaking any foundations. Before he was even inaugurated, he learned who the President's bosses are and he's been a good boy serving their interests.

Just because he's too stupid to realize that he is a pawn of the elites doesn't mean he's not one.

[Shrillland]

How are a real estate multi-millionaire and his family not part of the elite?

Because real estate multi-millionaires don't posess political power?

I wouldn't say that. You live right next to Nevada, and Sheldon Adelson is the power behind the GOP throne out there. Hell, the Corcorans are getting more of it in Cali itself.

[Ism]

How are a real estate multi-millionaire and his family not part of the elite?

Because real estate multi-millionaires don't posess political power?

They absolutely do. Money is important in politics, therefore having money gives one power in politics. Multi-millionaires, by definition, have a lot of money.

[Major-Tom]

I would support Bernie Sanders, especially now that I see the Dem elites are publically threatening to shackle him

Last time they hired actors to pretend to be violent rioting Bernie supporters, and only fooled the mainstream media

My second choice, as last time is Trump.

The political problem in the US centers around entrenched elites. These two guys shake those foundations, and we need more of that

I am a supporter of Sanders and what he has done in his political career, but your first point about "hired actors" is simply false, a little unsubstantiated.

Second, Trump doesn't shake foundations. He is part of "the swamp," as he calls it, his cabinet, administration, policies, etc etc, it's very standard, right-wing establishment GOP to the core, with a myriad, almost uncountable number of figures from prior administrations and from Wall Street. He is an "entrenched elite," as you called it.

The only thing that distinguishes him from the GOP establishment, the sort of strongly right-wing core of the GOP is his rhetoric, his diction & style. Nothing else. Well, except perhaps his rampant corruption and unprecedented temper/inability to be truthful. But on paper, his temperament aside, he is no different.

[Kowani]

Its a very difficult choice, not just between Warren and Trump but between Democrats and Republicans. That being said I would probably support either Trump or a third party for 3 main reasons:

Antisemitism is more mainstream among Democrats than Republicans (Rashida Tlaib and Omar)
Democrat majority will be much more radical and authoritarian than Republican majority
New wave of Democrats will promote socialist agendas (AoC who's economically ignorant)

You say AOC wants socialism, yet don’t see the irony in calling her economically ignorant.

Also, I’d like to see proof of those Democrats being anti-Semitic.

Authoritarian? How?

[Major-Tom]

Its a very difficult choice, not just between Warren and Trump but between Democrats and Republicans. That being said I would probably support either Trump or a third party for 3 main reasons:

Antisemitism is more mainstream among Democrats than Republicans (Rashida Tlaib and Omar)
Democrat majority will be much more radical and authoritarian than Republican majority
New wave of Democrats will promote socialist agendas (AoC who's economically ignorant)

Tlaib lost the endorsement of JStreet for making statements against Zionism. While I myself am a relative supporter of Israel, I don't think her statements on the topic make her an anti-semite, not even close.

Second, we've seen a Republican Majority who on a federal level, and in a variety of states, have taken unprecedented amounts of power-grabs, who have been so overtly partisan and who have shown a degree of animosity towards democracy that your statement about the Dems being "authoritarian" is nothing short of ridiculous.

Third, the vast majority of elected Democrats are relatively pro-business and tend to work with a variety of corporations and companies to promote economist investment and innovation in the private sector. Even a cursory glance at the campaign donations of the vast, vast majority of Dems in office indicates this. Figures like AOC, my personal mixed opinion of her notwithstanding, are a rare breed. She's a newly elected House member who currently wields a very small degree of influence, it's negligible at best. Her passionate speeches and public persona has shot her into the spotlight, and she has received negative and positive coverage for it. But even if she is rather left-wing, she really isn't the embodiment of the Dems.

[Bahktar]

Its a very difficult choice, not just between Warren and Trump but between Democrats and Republicans. That being said I would probably support either Trump or a third party for 3 main reasons:

Antisemitism is more mainstream among Democrats than Republicans (Rashida Tlaib and Omar)
Democrat majority will be much more radical and authoritarian than Republican majority
New wave of Democrats will promote socialist agendas (AoC who's economically ignorant)

Yeah, because it's the Democratic Party which passed the PATRIOT Act years ago and instituted it and has invested interests with working with Russia and also it was horrible, socialist Obama who took Putin's word over his own intelligence agencies and is under investigation, and has had multiple members of his administration get indicted!

EDIT: Oh yeah, it's also the evil Democratic Party which immediately began stripping the powers of Winsconsin's elected Republican governor during the lame duck period after the Democratic candidate lost to the Republican candidate during the elections, this is extremely undemocratic and violates separation of powers, a threat to democracy? Oh, wait, the Republicans did it..

Oh, wait.. nevermind, uhm.. lock her up, lock her up, lock her up!

Yeah, evil AOC wants to make sure the poor don't die on the streets, wants to give education to the USA's future and wants to pass green-friendly policies to slow down or halt global warming, damn her!

[Eglaecia]

I hope Richard Ojeda performs well. Him and Tulsi Gabbard are my two favourite Democrats.

[Shrillland]

Its a very difficult choice, not just between Warren and Trump but between Democrats and Republicans. That being said I would probably support either Trump or a third party for 3 main reasons:

Antisemitism is more mainstream among Democrats than Republicans (Rashida Tlaib and Omar)
Democrat majority will be much more radical and authoritarian than Republican majority
New wave of Democrats will promote socialist agendas (AoC who's economically ignorant)

Yeah, because it's the Democratic Party which passed the PATRIOT Act years ago and instituted it and has invested interests with working with Russia and also it was horrible, socialist Obama who took Putin's word over his own intelligence agencies and is under investigation, and has had multiple members of his administration get indicted!

EDIT: Oh yeah, it's also the evil Democratic Party which immediately began stripping the powers of Winsconsin's elected Republican governor during the lame duck period after the Democratic candidate lost to the Republican candidate during the elections, this is extremely undemocratic and violates separation of powers, a threat to democracy? Oh, wait, the Republicans did it..

Oh, wait.. nevermind, uhm.. lock her up, lock her up, lock her up!

Yeah, evil AOC wants to make sure the poor don't die on the streets, wants to give education to the USA's future and wants to pass green-friendly policies to slow down or halt global warming, damn her!

Technically, yes. The Dems did play a role in passing and continuing the Patriot Act to this day. The initial vote was 357-66 in the House and 98-1 in the Senate. Subsequent renewal votes have been more even, but it still gets a lot of Democratic votes every time.

[Major-Tom]

Yeah, because it's the Democratic Party which passed the PATRIOT Act years ago and instituted it and has invested interests with working with Russia and also it was horrible, socialist Obama who took Putin's word over his own intelligence agencies and is under investigation, and has had multiple members of his administration get indicted!

EDIT: Oh yeah, it's also the evil Democratic Party which immediately began stripping the powers of Winsconsin's elected Republican governor during the lame duck period after the Democratic candidate lost to the Republican candidate during the elections, this is extremely undemocratic and violates separation of powers, a threat to democracy? Oh, wait, the Republicans did it..

Oh, wait.. nevermind, uhm.. lock her up, lock her up, lock her up!

Yeah, evil AOC wants to make sure the poor don't die on the streets, wants to give education to the USA's future and wants to pass green-friendly policies to slow down or halt global warming, damn her!

Technically, yes. The Dems did play a role in passing and continuing the Patriot Act to this day. The initial vote was 357-66 in the House and 98-1 in the Senate. Subsequent renewal votes have been more even, but it still gets a lot of Democratic votes every time.

Only Feingold voted against it in the Senate, IIRC. Shame he lost re-election in 2010 to a dimwit.

[Shrillland]

Technically, yes. The Dems did play a role in passing and continuing the Patriot Act to this day. The initial vote was 357-66 in the House and 98-1 in the Senate. Subsequent renewal votes have been more even, but it still gets a lot of Democratic votes every time.

Only Feingold voted against it in the Senate, IIRC. Shame he lost re-election in 2010 to a dimwit.

To be fair, it was October, and everybody was still panicking and had lost their heads, which is what Bush the Younger had depended on...

[Bahktar]

Yeah, because it's the Democratic Party which passed the PATRIOT Act years ago and instituted it and has invested interests with working with Russia and also it was horrible, socialist Obama who took Putin's word over his own intelligence agencies and is under investigation, and has had multiple members of his administration get indicted!

EDIT: Oh yeah, it's also the evil Democratic Party which immediately began stripping the powers of Winsconsin's elected Republican governor during the lame duck period after the Democratic candidate lost to the Republican candidate during the elections, this is extremely undemocratic and violates separation of powers, a threat to democracy? Oh, wait, the Republicans did it..

Oh, wait.. nevermind, uhm.. lock her up, lock her up, lock her up!

Yeah, evil AOC wants to make sure the poor don't die on the streets, wants to give education to the USA's future and wants to pass green-friendly policies to slow down or halt global warming, damn her!

Technically, yes. The Dems did play a role in passing and continuing the Patriot Act to this day. The initial vote was 357-66 in the House and 98-1 in the Senate. Subsequent renewal votes have been more even, but it still gets a lot of Democratic votes every time.

Technically you're right about that, however, it was the Democrats who were the only ones to really oppose it when it was suggested, there were only 3 Republicans voting against it. I concede. At least the Democratic Party didn't go marauding through the Middle East and talk about fiscal responsibility, and then blow up the debt.
But I believe I'm right on everything else I said.

[Shrillland]

Technically, yes. The Dems did play a role in passing and continuing the Patriot Act to this day. The initial vote was 357-66 in the House and 98-1 in the Senate. Subsequent renewal votes have been more even, but it still gets a lot of Democratic votes every time.

Technically you're right about that, however, it was the Democrats who were the only ones to really oppose it when it was suggested, there were only 3 Republicans voting against it. I concede. At least the Democratic Party didn't go marauding through the Middle East and talk about fiscal responsibility, and then blow up the debt.
But I believe I'm right on everything else I said.

Oh, certainly. I wasn't accusing you or anything.

[Major-Tom]

Only Feingold voted against it in the Senate, IIRC. Shame he lost re-election in 2010 to a dimwit.

To be fair, it was October, and everybody was still panicking and had lost their heads, which is what Bush the Younger had depended on...

No kidding, but on a somewhat off-topic note, it shows that there were some people in Congress (Feingold + 66 House reps) who were able to keep a cool head in an immediate post-911 world.

[Shrillland]

Anyway, back to the matter at hand.

Its a very difficult choice, not just between Warren and Trump but between Democrats and Republicans. That being said I would probably support either Trump or a third party for 3 main reasons:

Antisemitism is more mainstream among Democrats than Republicans (Rashida Tlaib and Omar)
Democrat majority will be much more radical and authoritarian than Republican majority
New wave of Democrats will promote socialist agendas (AoC who's economically ignorant)

I wouldn't say that having three Muslims in Congress or justified criticism against Israel's increasingly authoritarian leadership and actions under Netanyahu can be considered Anti-Semitism. There's plenty to criticise about what's being done there right now, that doesn't mean we all want to see Israel destroyed.

As for the other two points...more radical perhaps, the For The People Act is quite a sweeping piece of legislation for instance, but the most that most of us want is European-style social democracy, not Venezuelan Communism.

[Knockturn Alley]

Anyway, back to the matter at hand.

Its a very difficult choice, not just between Warren and Trump but between Democrats and Republicans. That being said I would probably support either Trump or a third party for 3 main reasons:

Antisemitism is more mainstream among Democrats than Republicans (Rashida Tlaib and Omar)
Democrat majority will be much more radical and authoritarian than Republican majority
New wave of Democrats will promote socialist agendas (AoC who's economically ignorant)

I wouldn't say that having three Muslims in Congress or justified criticism against Israel's increasingly authoritarian leadership and actions under Netanyahu can be considered Anti-Semitism. There's plenty to criticise about what's being done there right now, that doesn't mean we all want to see Israel destroyed.

As for the other two points...more radical perhaps, the For The People Act is quite a sweeping piece of legislation for instance, but the most that most of us want is European-style social democracy, not Venezuelan Communism.

I dont actually care if they are muslim or not. Facts are that Tlaib is a good friend of Linda Sarsour and has called for the destruction of Israel. Omar has also tweeted against Israelis several times.

[Shrillland]

Anyway, back to the matter at hand.



I wouldn't say that having three Muslims in Congress or justified criticism against Israel's increasingly authoritarian leadership and actions under Netanyahu can be considered Anti-Semitism. There's plenty to criticise about what's being done there right now, that doesn't mean we all want to see Israel destroyed.

As for the other two points...more radical perhaps, the For The People Act is quite a sweeping piece of legislation for instance, but the most that most of us want is European-style social democracy, not Venezuelan Communism.

I dont actually care if they are muslim or not. Facts are that Tlaib is a good friend of Linda Sarsour and has called for the destruction of Israel. Omar has also tweeted against Israelis several times.

Yeah, Linda Sarsour is a bit over the edge, I grant you, but tweeting against Israelis(or at least Israeli actions) isn't the same thing as tweeting against Jews in general. Lots of people hate what the Saudis do, but we don't want to see all Muslims utterly destroyed.

[Knockturn Alley]

I dont actually care if they are muslim or not. Facts are that Tlaib is a good friend of Linda Sarsour and has called for the destruction of Israel. Omar has also tweeted against Israelis several times.

Yeah, Linda Sarsour is a bit over the edge, I grant you, but tweeting against Israelis(or at least Israeli actions) isn't the same thing as tweeting against Jews in general. Lots of people hate what the Saudis do, but we don't want to see all Muslims utterly destroyed.

If calling for Sharia Law, siding with the Muslim Brotherhood and being a fan of Louis Farrakhan (who called Hitler a great man) and saying that American muslims shouldn't "humanize" Israelis is being "over the edge" then yeah

[Shrillland]

Yeah, Linda Sarsour is a bit over the edge, I grant you, but tweeting against Israelis(or at least Israeli actions) isn't the same thing as tweeting against Jews in general. Lots of people hate what the Saudis do, but we don't want to see all Muslims utterly destroyed.

If calling for Sharia Law, siding with the Muslim Brotherhood and being a fan of Louis Farrakhan (who called Hitler a great man) and saying that American muslims shouldn't "humanize" Israelis is being "over the edge" then yeah

I was trying to be diplomatic about how extreme she is...but yes.

[Knockturn Alley]

If calling for Sharia Law, siding with the Muslim Brotherhood and being a fan of Louis Farrakhan (who called Hitler a great man) and saying that American muslims shouldn't "humanize" Israelis is being "over the edge" then yeah

I was trying to be diplomatic about how extreme she is...but yes.

Dont be diplomatic about extremists on your side. Im not diplomatic about white supremacists or alt right either

[An Alan Smithee Nation]

Is Trump automatically the Republican candidate in 2020. or can they choose someone else?

[Shrillland]

Is Trump automatically the Republican candidate in 2020. or can they choose someone else?

Well, they can choose someone else if someone else runs, but I don't think he has any real competition on his own side to worry about. The '18 Primaries showed us that, among the rank-and-file, opposition will not be tolerated.