2020 Democrat Presidential Candidate News...

KillerGopherFan

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 15, 2013
Messages
14,089
Reaction score
957
Points
113
he actually did, gotta give George credit.
I didn’t see the interview, but saw clips. I saw that GS asked him about the Jan 5th meeting. Then JB said, “I thought you were asking me about the Flynn prosecution”. 🤯

My point is that I doubt GS would say something like “why did you say you didn’t know anything about the Flynn investigation” and then say “I thought you were talking about the prosecution” when he specifically said “investigation”.

JB gives knee-jerk responses like “I didn’t know anything...”. It’s either a sign of hiding it or dementia. I‘d want GS to press him on that and I doubt he did. Did JB not listen to the question? Did he not hear the word “investigation”? GS didn’t say anything about the prosecution.
 

Section2

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 30, 2009
Messages
43,517
Reaction score
1,116
Points
113
I didn’t see the interview, but saw clips. I saw that GS asked him about the Jan 5th meeting. Then JB said, “I thought you were asking me about the Flynn prosecution”. 🤯

My point is that I doubt GS would say something like “why did you say you didn’t know anything about the Flynn investigation” and then say “I thought you were talking about the prosecution” when he specifically said “investigation”.

JB gives knee-jerk responses like “I didn’t know anything...”. It’s either a sign of hiding it or dementia. I‘d want GS to press him on that and I doubt he did.
oh of course. he's going to do the bare minimum, and then not ask any follow ups.
 

KillerGopherFan

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 15, 2013
Messages
14,089
Reaction score
957
Points
113
oh of course. he's going to do the bare minimum, and then not ask any follow ups.
That’s what I’m saying.

Trump says “ask China”. And the reporter of Asian decent goes off on him “why are you saying that to me?” Maybe b/c that’s the answer?

They don’t do that to Democrats.
 

KillerGopherFan

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 15, 2013
Messages
14,089
Reaction score
957
Points
113
Which part specifically? Source your work.
Oh, the playbook has all the answers.

Like on page 5:

45321382-9B64-4839-A2C8-CC4ECFA55C09.jpeg

Let’s see, what did the WHO do about coronavirus? (From The Atlantic)

The WHO should not have waited until January 22 to confirm human-to-human transmission, after China finally did. By that point, a deadly horse had mostly left the barn. The WHO should not have waited until the end of January to declare a Public Health Emergency of International Concern—a move that recognizes the severity of the crisis and calls for “a coordinated international response.” The WHO should not have let February and nearly half of March pass before finally declaring a pandemic. By that point, a staggering 114 countries had already reported cases, and more than 4,000known deaths had occurred. By then, the declaration did not matter in the same way an earlier one would have.

The best laid plans.
 

KillerGopherFan

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 15, 2013
Messages
14,089
Reaction score
957
Points
113
Seriously, howie, have you looked at this 69 page (only 30 some pages in reality) NSC Playbook. It looks like a grad school group project.

The CV-19 task force was so far advanced than this list and questionnaire, it’s not even funny.

But you and Joe Bumblefuck lean on that. I’m sure it will carry you to victory. 😂🤣
 

howeda7

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 22, 2008
Messages
41,900
Reaction score
1,709
Points
113
Seriously, howie, have you looked at this 69 page (only 30 some pages in reality) NSC Playbook. It looks like a grad school group project.

The CV-19 task force was so far advanced than this list and questionnaire, it’s not even funny.

But you and Joe Bumblefuck lean on that. I’m sure it will carry you to victory. 😂🤣
So Trump's strategy of having no plan, denying the problem for 2 months and then scrambling to catch up is a better plan?

Obama and Clinton would have had a task force too, that's not unique. And they wouldn't have them say one thing on Thursday and then totally contradict them on Friday. You're trying to give Don points for doing less than the bare minimum.
 

MplsGopher

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 4, 2017
Messages
12,319
Reaction score
1,477
Points
113
Less than the bare minimum implies that, at worst, he just did nothing.

In reality, Trump actively sabotaged this country's ability to respond to the pandemic.

That point needs to be hammered on every TV, radio, and internet web page in this country.
 
Last edited:

KillerGopherFan

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 15, 2013
Messages
14,089
Reaction score
957
Points
113
So Trump's strategy of having no plan, denying the problem for 2 months and then scrambling to catch up is a better plan?

Obama and Clinton would have had a task force too, that's not unique. And they wouldn't have them say one thing on Thursday and then totally contradict them on Friday. You're trying to give Don points for doing less than the bare minimum.
The task force was formed in January when China and the WHO were lying to the world. Trump closed the border to open travel between the US and China before we knew how bad the virus could be, much to the chagrin of the left. Trump was taking his cues from “the scientists” on the task force, including Dr. Fauci, but went farther with the travel restrictions.

Oh, if only they had used the pandemic grad school group project from the NSC. If only the countries of the world had consulted it. All of this could of been avoided. Obama was a pandemic genius. That’s why he didn’t replenish the PPE supplies and stockpile ventilators after they were depleted.

If people actually look at that “playbook”, they’ll see just how weak this claim is. Of course, Biden’s campaign is figuring they won’t. We know the media won’t bother. It just gives them a narrative that the Bumblefuck apologists and suckers can latch on to. You’re a sucker.
 

KillerGopherFan

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 15, 2013
Messages
14,089
Reaction score
957
Points
113
Hey howie, did you hear that AOC is on the Bumblefuck climate change Advisory team?
 

KillerGopherFan

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 15, 2013
Messages
14,089
Reaction score
957
Points
113

What a moron!

I guess that’s why Nancy included giving the SALT deduction back to the wealthy lefties from high state income tax states, like NY and California, in her $3 trillion ”relief” bill. Take care of the ”hourly workers”?

09A71DC3-972A-4EB1-8256-42BADA3A74CE.jpeg

 

Section2

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 30, 2009
Messages
43,517
Reaction score
1,116
Points
113
So Trump's strategy of having no plan, denying the problem for 2 months and then scrambling to catch up is a better plan?

Obama and Clinton would have had a task force too, that's not unique. And they wouldn't have them say one thing on Thursday and then totally contradict them on Friday. You're trying to give Don points for doing less than the bare minimum.
we don't need a national plan. the admin has done what they needed to do: help ramp up production of ventilators when it was perceived (incorrectly) that there was a shortage. Army corps built hospital capacity (not needed) and the ships. and they have worked with private businesses to ramp up production of testing (successfully). every individual business and person should have a plan. not the federal government. In fact, there's only one more thing I think the federal government should do, and that's sue the states to stop the emergency declarations and force states to open back up.
 

MplsGopher

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 4, 2017
Messages
12,319
Reaction score
1,477
Points
113
How pathetic is it that even a guy who hypothetically has moderate dementia would be a better leader for our country, than the guy there now??
 

LakevilleBro

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 3, 2020
Messages
409
Reaction score
308
Points
63
I feel sorry for Biden. There is something seriously wrong with him, and it feels like we are all making fun of a person in need. I would never think that Biden would be a better leader than Trump.
 

Section2

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 30, 2009
Messages
43,517
Reaction score
1,116
Points
113
given that biden, if he's the actual nominee, will be viewed as a placeholder and not up to the task, this is going to be a very different VP choice. Howie says it doesn't matter, but we've really never had someone run for president who had to assure voters they would only last one term because they are so old and senile. So for all intents and purposes, his vp choice is probably going to be the actual president for sure for the 2nd term, but probably most of the first. So someone like Warren makes more sense. She's my least favorite or the Dem field and she REALLY pissed off Bernie voters, but she's always been a likely choice for me.
 

howeda7

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 22, 2008
Messages
41,900
Reaction score
1,709
Points
113
I watched Biden for an hour on TV last night. He was fine. The only "gaffe" I noticed was calling PPE PPP which he immediately corrected.

It was certainly far more coherent than Trump's rambling callf-splatter press conferences that all meander back to the same 6 answers "we have great testing. I put the travel ban on". These little edited videos are just twitter troll BS.
 

Donovan

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 20, 2008
Messages
3,356
Reaction score
196
Points
63
I'd put the odds at 45% Harris, 35% Klobuchar, 10% Warren, 10% field
I'll put 80% on the field. I think Amy would be the most palatable to me and helps deliver Minnesota, but I don't think she excites the Dem's enough. Harris is a minority which helps, but her career as a prosecutor has negatives and California is already a lock, so no benefit there. And we all know Warren's negatives.
 

Ogee Oglethorpe

Over Macho Grande?
Joined
Nov 20, 2008
Messages
8,630
Reaction score
564
Points
113
I'll put 80% on the field. I think Amy would be the most palatable to me and helps deliver Minnesota, but I don't think she excites the Dem's enough. Harris is a minority which helps, but her career as a prosecutor has negatives and California is already a lock, so no benefit there. And we all know Warren's negatives.
I think there's a strong chance he goes with a woman of color, which narrows it down to Harris and Warren.
 
Top Bottom