Who will challenge Trump? Who you like?

[Blue Jays]

"...You should identify sources by name or provide a link to the article. Sounds like bullshit or baitfish..."

Media coverage of potential Bloomberg / Clinton ticket

[zachateseverything]

What media? You should identify sources by name or provide a link to the article.

Clinton and Bloomberg are not enamored of each other, and Clinton would not be Vice President and Bloomberg wouldn't either. Plus they are both from the same state and even the dumbest politician knows that concept is DOA, especially if both are from New York, the state Republicans love to visit and love to hate. Sounds like bullshit or baitfish.

It's a real report being floated out there, by Drudge of all sources. Clinton isn't going to be anyone's VP pick. Her role in this election is to help fundraise for and endorse the eventual nominee.

[Too Tall]

Media coverage of potential Bloomberg / Clinton ticket

Wow, now you owe me 30 more.

[j44ke]

Media coverage of potential Bloomberg / Clinton ticket

What is that link - a joke? Sorry I don’t understand what you are trying to communicate.

[HorsCat]

What is that link - a joke? Sorry I don’t understand what you are trying to communicate.

I think it is aspirational. Blue Jays would love for Clinton to be on the ticket. IMO, there is more chance of Lance winning an eighth maillot jaune.

[guido]

I think it is aspirational. Blue Jays would love for Clinton to be on the ticket. IMO, there is more chance of Lance winning an eighth maillot jaune.

And the Giro and the Vuelta that same year...

Having Clinton on the ticket is the only way that trump can win...

[j44ke]

I just shouldn't step into these threads. I am no good at them. If there are fruits of benefit here, they are too widely spaced in the orchard for any profit for me. I'd rather sit under the trees and talk about touring bikes from the 1980's.

If I said "Media is reporting that Donald Trump is ditching Pence for VP and selecting Sean Hannity to replace him" I think I would need to provide the source so others could evaluate the information based on the quality of the source - even if it was a paper of record like the NYTimes, Washington Post, Wall Street Journal or Los Angeles Times. I mean, that would represent a monumental change in the dynamics of the election, and a rational surface evaluation of the information without benefit of any substantiating information would be that it was a story invented for purposes other than reporting the news - just like an announcement of a possible Bloomberg-Clinton ticket.

It just doesn't make any sense. I am not shooting the messenger, but if it is out there, what are the sources of that claim?

[davids]

Jorn,

It's not you. It's Blue Jays.

[Too Tall]

Jorn,

It's not you. It's Blue Jays.

...who owes me 30. Come on buddy, take your lumps. We'll do them together.

[vertical_doug]

...who owes me 30. Come on buddy, take your lumps. We'll do them together.

Too Tall, this election cycle has hardly started and members of the forum already look like this...




I think the disinformation campaign which will make us all crazy. The WaPo and NYT will not be able to keep up. Besides, something like Drudge Report already has more readers than NYT.

[jclay]

Thanks Josh.

I've grown tired of defending and debating about every single word I submit here. Just read (or choose not to) my comments, and leave it.

I can say left, right up down, middle, banana - just let it go and post your opinions. Stop creating arguments for the sake of venting.

It was a legitimate question; of course you don't have to answer it.

The notion that Obama was way left or liberal, by any established definition of the term, is simply not accurate. He's a relatively conservative, Third-Way establishment fellow when it comes to the military, economics, foreign policy and that sort of thing. Support of the regulation of industry, the financial services sector, the environment et al. doesn't make him liberal either; it makes him recognize the need for guardrails.

Similarly the notion that the current crop of Democratic candidates for President constitute a gaggle of liberals only makes sense if the entire bracket of the political spectrum is moved way to the hyper nationalistic side, which is to say that that, too, is inaccurate.

[BBB]

Media coverage of potential Bloomberg / Clinton ticket

Really? Is that another fact free post?

[Matthew Strongin]

Really? Is that another fact free post?

There is some buzz around this, but it's most likely bs (the rumor, not the VSalon comment): bloomberg clinton - Google Search

Looks like Drudge report floated the idea based on comments from "sources close to Bloomberg" and it went from there.

If it's not BS, it'll be a good way for Bloomberg to torpedo his campaign.

[BBB]

Buzz is one thing, but actually being factual is a whole other thing.

There was buzz about arson and the recently round of devistating fires in Australia. This too was BS, but it gets posted.

Hospitals going bankrupt because of "deadbeat" illegals using their services and being unable to pay for them. Ditto.

There's a pattern here.

[Too Tall]

Did you hear about the moon rising last night and it was green? Wow, what's that all about?

Let's get this back on topic.

[thollandpe]

To paraphrase: Bernie Sanders is less radical than people think, he’s right on Several key issues, pro-worker monetary policy could make a real difference, he wins elections, and he’s the unifying choice.

Bernie Sanders can unify Democrats and beat Trump in 2020 - Matthew Yglesias

[Mabouya]

To paraphrase: Bernie Sanders is less radical than people think

Too late. He's been calling himself a "Socialist" (which we know he isn't) for far too long to suddenly change his tune, now that he senses that the nomination is within his grasp.

[Too Tall]

Too late. He's been calling himself a "Socialist" (which we know he isn't) for far too long to suddenly change his tune, now that he senses that the nomination is within his grasp.

Social Democrat perhaps yes. "Socialist" in all caps, I doubt it (you said that I'm just a little spun up today). For the he!! of it I'd offer that many fundamental elements of our great experiment identify as "Socialist".

Labeling Bernie as a radical gives short shrift to the conversation. He is, I believe, correctly labeled a Democratic Socialist with a platform that deserves very close scrutiny. Washing his platform with the moniker is taking a short cut.

I'm not waving my hand at any of the DEM contenders. They all get my hairy eyeball....twice today and three times Sunday.

This is my USA guttdangit, get it right.

[jclay]

All of the dems have positive, constructive and progressive attitudes and policies; Trump has amply demonstrated that he is incapable of that. His track record is that of a destroyer and divider. His behavior makes it crystal clear that that is who he is at his core. One need know nothing else.

Nobody who's running has proposed that we become a socialist nation and none of the proposed policies will make us one. What they will do is improve life for our citizens.

Vote Blue, No Matter Who.

[Corso]

"Way left with Obama" Really? How's that?

Rather than referencing the term "left" (which is a dull knife indeed, and doesn't exist in the US), I'll tell you what can ruin a country: An excessive concentration of power and wealth in a tiny percentage of the population coupled with an authoritarian ruler. History is chock a block full of examples.

Senator Obama's voting record stands for itself. Maybe he shifted right as President, but as we all know, perception is everything. My opinion is that he was was left,resulting in a shift to the right-Trump. Hell, yeah, I'm over simplifying, but there it is.

>>A new study suggests Obama had the most liberal voting record in 2007.

(CNN) - Barack Obama has demonstrated his appeal to independent voters and even some Republicans as he campaigns for president, though a just-released study from the National Journal indicates the Illinois Democrat was the most liberal senator in 2007.

Chief rival Hillary Clinton held the 16th most liberal voting record last year, the non-partisan survey of 99 major Senate votes found.

The study also shows both senators have moved to the left compared to previous years. In 2005 - Obama's first year in the Senate - he was ranked the 16th most liberal, and he came in at number 10 in 2006. Hillary Clinton has long held a moderate voting record: she debuted on the list at number 25 in 2001, and has been as high as 34. In 2006, the New York senator was ranked 32.<<

The rest of the country is ok with saying the Democratic Party can be generalized as Left, I have no problem in keeping things simple: Den-Left, GOP-Right.

Why The Democrats Have Shifted Left Over The Last 3 Years | FiveThirtyEight

Each took me about 10 seconds to find, about all the time I want to spend debating the point. Let's move on