Author Topic: Predictions and thoughts on the Biden Presidency  (Read 11509 times)

TheDrake

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Predictions and thoughts on the Biden Presidency
« Reply #200 on: December 23, 2020, 03:18:55 PM »
Actually there are no details about combating illegal fishing, just a lot of flowery language.

" encourage public-private partnerships and promote interagency, intergovernmental, and international cooperation in order to improve global maritime domain awareness"

Give me a break.

He's got more recent stuff also.

Trump Removes Atlantic Ocean Protections to Expand Commercial Fishing

Opening up 5000 square miles to commercial fishing isn't removing a complex or confusing regulation. It's purely designed to turn as many fish into dollars as possible, and damn the consequences! Who cares if dozens of species have to disappear, as long as we can pump out more cans of tunafish and more lobster baskets! It's dreamy because it creates jobs! Never mind whether those jobs can be sustained 15 years from now. It's all about today, baby!

Seriati

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Predictions and thoughts on the Biden Presidency
« Reply #201 on: December 23, 2020, 05:03:40 PM »
Actually there are no details about combating illegal fishing, just a lot of flowery language.

I mean a bunch in there, but directly contradicting your claim:

Quote
Sec. 2.  Policy.  It is the policy of the Federal Government to:

(b)  combat illegal, unreported, and unregulated fishing;

 Sec. 5.  Combating Illegal, Unreported, and Unregulated Fishing.  (a)  Within 90 days of the date of this order, the Secretary of Commerce, acting through the Administrator of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), shall issue, as appropriate and consistent with applicable law, a notice of proposed rulemaking further implementing the United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization Agreement on Port State Measures to Prevent, Deter, and Eliminate Illegal, Unreported, and Unregulated Fishing, which entered into force on June 5, 2016 (the Port State Measures Agreement).

(b)  The Secretary of State, the Secretary of Commerce, the Secretary of Homeland Security, and the heads of other appropriate executive departments and agencies (agencies) shall, to the extent permitted by law, encourage public-private partnerships and promote interagency, intergovernmental, and international cooperation in order to improve global maritime domain awareness, cooperation concerning at-sea transshipment activities, and the effectiveness of fisheries law enforcement.

(c)  The Secretary of State, the Secretary of Commerce, the Secretary of Health and Human Services, and the Secretary of Homeland Security shall, consistent with applicable law and available appropriations, prioritize training and technical assistance in key geographic areas to promote sustainable fisheries management; to strengthen and enhance existing enforcement capabilities to combat illegal, unreported, and unregulated fishing; and to promote implementation of the Port State Measures Agreement.

Quote
Give me a break.

Quit posting false information.

TheDrake

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Predictions and thoughts on the Biden Presidency
« Reply #202 on: December 23, 2020, 06:25:13 PM »
Show me one concrete thing in there? He orders a bunch of people to talk to a bunch of other people. How does that translate into a reduction of illegal fishing? Not to mention that PSMA predates Trump in the first place, and has already been well under way. This really strikes me as similar to Trump yelling at the FDA to approve vaccines.

cherrypoptart

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Predictions and thoughts on the Biden Presidency
« Reply #203 on: December 29, 2020, 10:33:24 AM »
Prediction on the Biden Presidency: The vast majority of the mainstream media will roll over and play dead or sit up and beg as commanded like the good little dogs they are. There will be a few exceptions, those in the media who were extremely critical of Trump and may choose to display such a high level of criticism and skepticism toward the Biden administration and it will be interesting to see what happens to them, if they are applauded by the resistance or canceled instead.

https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2020/12/media-after-trump/617503/

"Nuzzi can already tell that the dynamic will be different in the incoming administration. “On a purely social level, I don’t know that reporting critically on Joe Biden will feel as safe for reporters,” she told me..."

"... One cable-news anchor told me that praise from anti-Trump celebrities on Twitter has become like a “narcotic” for some of his colleagues. “It’s important to people that George Takei likes their monologue,” the anchor said, requesting anonymity to speak candidly about his peers (and presumably to avoid alienating George Takei)."

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

We see this already though, the media rolling over for Biden. It's hilarious how many questions they lead off with an insult to Trump as the preface, just to make sure Biden knows they are on his side. And it's even funnier how often Biden gives them the back of the hand anyway and they just smile and say thank you sir may I please have another?

I guess one consistent thing to be said for them though is that they lied about Trump and now they will also lie about Biden. The only difference is that their lies before were against and now they will be in favor, and I'm counting lies by omission in this more than other lies but there are enough of those to go around as well.

yossarian22c

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Predictions and thoughts on the Biden Presidency
« Reply #204 on: December 29, 2020, 10:43:40 AM »
Cherry, Trump from before the time he took office consistently called the media the enemy of the people. Given that Biden isn't calling the media the enemy I'm sure they'll be a little less inclined to go negative immediately.

Trump was fawned over by Fox news, Hannity had a direct line to the white house. Fox and Friends let Trump say whatever he wanted. I'm sure we'll see the Fox position relative to the president change more than any other major news agency.

Aris Katsaris

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Predictions and thoughts on the Biden Presidency
« Reply #205 on: December 29, 2020, 03:55:00 PM »
cherry, strange how you keep whining about media supposedly "lying" about Trump, and yet I never see you give the slightest damn about all of Trump's lies or his own fawning media, even when they've spent the last month and a half lying about election fraud in order to do a coup and overthrow American democracy.

Seriati

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Predictions and thoughts on the Biden Presidency
« Reply #206 on: December 29, 2020, 09:10:38 PM »
There you have it Cherry, the media lying for Biden and lying against Trump was all perfectly good.  The important thing is that the media continue to "report" in ways that give cover for politically palatable fallacies so that cognitive dissonance doesn't set in for the mislead.

And Aris please, please keep repeating the canard about all Trump's lies, which overwhelming are nothing more than statements the left disagrees with as a political matter and can't actual disprove.  Of course, there are enough one off statements to play the motte and bailey game, while ignoring the open lies from your own team.

The left is literally all about propaganda and misinformation.  I mean, Kamala Harris will never take a vaccine made under the Trump admin right?  She said that repeatedly, yet she took it today.  Of course she did, so did AOC with all her "socialist" beliefs she jumped straight to the front of the line (of course that's always how it works in socialism).  I mean AOC is literally from NYC, Cuomo is threatening to put people in jail for "jumping" the line at a Brooklyn clinic - the "line jumpers" in question?  Apparently people with co-morbidities and high risk conditions, but Cuomo has only authorized first responders and the few remaining elderly people living in nursing homes that he didn't kill.  Totally hate white privilege right, we all have to take it seriously, except of course for the President's son Hunter who is the literal poster boy of white privilege and abuse of connections, he of course must be protected at all costs no matter how abusive the situation has to be. 

Can't argue with conservatives talking facts?  Why bother, so much easier to deplatform them so that only the "good facts" remain to be consumed by the market.  No reason to demonstrate correctness or true, just label your opponents racists and never let them defend themselves.

Aris Katsaris

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Predictions and thoughts on the Biden Presidency
« Reply #207 on: December 29, 2020, 11:31:13 PM »
The left is literally all about propaganda and misinformation.  I mean, Kamala Harris will never take a vaccine made under the Trump admin right?  She said that repeatedly, yet she took it today. 

What a lovely example. Do please provide a citation, because I just tried to google it and found out she'd said something significantly different (https://youtu.be/p7WD8l0Dc1I), which gee, actually makes you the liar and not her. She'd said she'd take the word of medical professionals, and not of Trump. And that she'd be first in line to take it if the medical establishment said it was okay. She'd just not trust Trump on it,

So, why don't you try again with an actual lie by her, rather than prove my words with a lie by you?

As for lies by Trump, gee let's start with today: "“Breaking News: In Pennsylvania there were 205,000 more votes than there were voters. This alone flips the state to President Trump.”

And then let's proceed with his entire life history. Let me quote from wikipedia:
Quote
Trump has promoted a number of conspiracy theories that have lacked substance. These have included Barack Obama citizenship conspiracy theories from 2011. Known as "birther" theories, these allege that Barack Obama was not born in the United States.[64][65][66] In 2011, Trump took credit for pushing the White House to release Obama's "long-form" birth certificate, while raising doubt about its legitimacy,[67] and in 2016 admitted Obama was a natural-born citizen from Hawaii.[68] He later falsely stated that Hillary Clinton started the conspiracy theories.[68][69][70]

Within six months of Trump's announcement of his presidential campaign, FactCheck.org declared Trump the "King of Whoppers" stating, "In the 12 years of FactCheck.org's existence, we've never seen his match. He stands out not only for the sheer number of his factually false claims, but also for his brazen refusals to admit error when proven wrong."[71]

In 2016, Trump suggested that Ted Cruz's father was involved in the assassination of John F. Kennedy. He also claimed that he lost the popular vote in the 2016 election only because of "millions" of illegal voters.[72][73]

During his campaign, Trump claimed that his father, Fred Trump, had given him "a small loan of a million dollars," which he used to build "a company that's worth more than $10 billion,"[74] denying Marco Rubio's allegation that he had inherited $200 million from his father.[75] An October 2018 New York Times exposé on Fred and Donald Trump's finances concludes that Donald "was a millionaire by age 8," and that he had received $413 million (adjusted for inflation) from his father's business empire over his lifetime, including over $60 million ($140 million in 2018 currency) in loans, which were largely unreimbursed.[76]

Was Ted Cruz's father involved in the assassination of JFK, Seriati? But I guess according to you that lie is just perfectly, same as all other Trump lies and same as your own lies - as long as they serve Trump.
« Last Edit: December 29, 2020, 11:36:46 PM by Aris Katsaris »

cherrypoptart

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Predictions and thoughts on the Biden Presidency
« Reply #208 on: December 30, 2020, 12:25:01 AM »
Probably most of the media's lies are when they are lying about Trump lying.

Looking up the birther thing again, not that I want to get sucked back down that rabbit hole, but it's another fine example of the media lying by calling Trump a liar when he's the one actually telling the truth. A bunch of stories say that Trump is lying when he says that Hillary started it.

https://observer.com/2016/09/media-fact-checkers-erase-sidney-blumenthal-key-role-in-obama-birther-muck/

"Actually, he did not expressly say Clinton and her campaign started it; he merely noted how they allegedly pushed it. The misleading summation linked to a Politifact round-up of the issue. It noted that a Clinton campaign volunteer, later fired, circulated an email claiming Obama was born in Kenya.

But the Poltifact story completely omitted new claims by former McClatchy Washington Bureau chief James Asher that in 2008, Hillary Clinton’s top advisor Sidney Blumenthal convinced him to send a reporter to Kenya to investigate the possibility that Obama was born there.

In sum, the NBCNews.com item was an incomplete account of Trump’s own words linked to a misleading and separate fact-check of the issue in order to discredit something he didn’t really say."

----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Key words there: incomplete account. That pretty much sums up our media in two telling words.

By the way, it may have actually been Obama's literary agent who started it all anyway.

In 1990 as the president of the Harvard Law Review, the student yearbook includes a biography of Obama saying that he was “born in Kenya, raised in Indonesia and Hawaii.”

And in 1991 Obama's literary agency, Acton & Dystel, while promoting sales of “Dreams of My Father” published a promotional booklet with Obama's biography stating he was “born in Kenya, raised in Indonesia and Hawaii.”

And as for Biden being more respectful toward the media, that's hardly the case either.

https://www.marijuanamoment.net/joe-biden-mocks-drug-testing-in-response-to-reporters-cognitive-assessment-question/

Presumptive Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden seemed to mock the concept of drug testing in an interview published on Wednesday, despite his role in advancing drug testing expansion legislation during his time in the Senate.

Pressed on whether he’s taken a cognitive test like President Trump has, Biden scoffed at the question and made the drug testing comparison.

“No I haven’t taken a test. Why the hell would I take a test? C’mon man,” he said.

“That’s like saying, ‘You—before you got on this program did you take a test whether you’re taking cocaine or not, what do you think? Huh? Are you a junkie?'” he added, directing the hypothetical question to interviewer Errol Barnett of CBS News.

---------------------------------------------------------------------

Biden slaps them around and triggers drug policy reform advocates and they all just lap it up and ask for more please.

Aris Katsaris

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Predictions and thoughts on the Biden Presidency
« Reply #209 on: December 30, 2020, 12:56:09 AM »
Probably most of the media's lies are when they are lying about Trump lying.

Looking up the birther thing again, not that I want to get sucked back down that rabbit hole, but it's another fine example of the media lying by calling Trump a liar when he's the one actually telling the truth. A bunch of stories say that Trump is lying when he says that Hillary started it.

https://observer.com/2016/09/media-fact-checkers-erase-sidney-blumenthal-key-role-in-obama-birther-muck/

"Actually, he did not expressly say Clinton and her campaign started it; he merely noted how they allegedly pushed it.

Go to the video in https://www.c-span.org/video/?415375-1/donald-trump-president-obama-born-us
Near the end, time 33:54

Video & audio of Donald Trump, word for word saying: "Hillary Clinton and her campaign of 2008 started the birther controversy."

So, where does that leave your claims, cherry? Again a claim that the media lied and paraphrased Trump. In fact it turns out that the media quoted him exactly, they didn't even use any exaggeration, and what's in fact a lie is... that the media supposedly lied.

Gee, first Seriati, and then you, proving my words. Will you realize that it's actually your side that are the liars?

Or will you actually find an actual lie next time? I mean, I have to assume that the media must have lied about him *some time*, it'd be strange if he was the one celebrity that never a lie was spoken about, but you guys are having a very big trouble actually finding such a one.
« Last Edit: December 30, 2020, 01:01:16 AM by Aris Katsaris »

cherrypoptart

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Predictions and thoughts on the Biden Presidency
« Reply #210 on: December 30, 2020, 01:11:59 AM »
"But the Poltifact story completely omitted new claims by former McClatchy Washington Bureau chief James Asher that in 2008, Hillary Clinton’s top advisor Sidney Blumenthal convinced him to send a reporter to Kenya to investigate the possibility that Obama was born there."

How is getting a reporter sent to investigate Obama's possible Kenyan birth not starting it?

Aris Katsaris

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Predictions and thoughts on the Biden Presidency
« Reply #211 on: December 30, 2020, 01:47:57 AM »
"But the Poltifact story completely omitted new claims by former McClatchy Washington Bureau chief James Asher that in 2008, Hillary Clinton’s top advisor Sidney Blumenthal convinced him to send a reporter to Kenya to investigate the possibility that Obama was born there."

How is getting a reporter sent to investigate Obama's possible Kenyan birth not starting it?

Wtf?

Are you changing your claim, cherry? Previously you quoted claims that Trump had never said Hillary's campaign started it, and that it was a lie when the media said he did: now you're instead saying that he did say it but it was true?

Can you get your own story straight?

And btw, in response to your question, someone secretly investigating a possibility isn't "starting" a controversy, if they don't go public about it or try to convince others about it. That's not what the word "controversy" means. If e.g. Hillary's campaign actually secretly investigated the claims, and decided they weren't true and so didn't make any such false claims in public, then how did they start a controversy?

Now, there did exist individual Hillary supporters back in 2008 who made the claim, but you yourself just argued a post back that "By the way, it may have actually been Obama's literary agent who started it all anyway."? Are you walking back on that idea? So, why are you now instead assuming Hillary and her campaign herself started it, and that her supporters got it from her, just when you needed to concede that Trump did actually say Hillary's campaign started it -- while previously you said that perhaps people (including Trump himself?) got the idea from Obama's literary agent?

You would call it a "lie" if the media said that Trump & his campaign are the one who did anything that individual supporters of him (unconnected to his campaign) did. And you'd actually might have a point.

But you don't hold the same standards for Trump's statements, do you? He's allowed to say whatever, accuse everyone of everything, and it doesn't need to be true or have any evidence backing it.

Seriati

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Predictions and thoughts on the Biden Presidency
« Reply #212 on: December 30, 2020, 03:10:14 PM »
The left is literally all about propaganda and misinformation.  I mean, Kamala Harris will never take a vaccine made under the Trump admin right?  She said that repeatedly, yet she took it today. 

What a lovely example. Do please provide a citation, because I just tried to google it and found out she'd said something significantly different (https://youtu.be/p7WD8l0Dc1I), which gee, actually makes you the liar and not her. She'd said she'd take the word of medical professionals, and not of Trump. And that she'd be first in line to take it if the medical establishment said it was okay. She'd just not trust Trump on it,

Which is exactly the essence of great propaganda.  She said, and was widely reported as saying -  "But if Donald Trump tells us that we should take it. I’m not taking it."  There's no process in the United States where a vaccine can be administered based on that standard.  So why did she say it?  literally to undermine public confidence in a vaccine produced in record time by the Trump admin for her own political gain. 

Lest you have any doubt on her goal, here's the comment from the follow up, where she deliberately undermines even the public health officials signing off on a vaccine (again for here own gain).

Quote
When asked by Bash whether she thought that public health experts and scientists would get the last word on the efficacy of a vaccine, Harris predicted that they will not.
"If past is prologue that they will not, they'll be muzzled, they'll be suppressed, they will be sidelined," Harris said. "Because he's looking at an election coming up in less than 60 days and he's grasping to get whatever he can to pretend he has been a leader on this issue when he is not."

And while undermining that any approval will be the result of the good faith decisions of the public health officials she talks out of the otherside of her mouth about trusting Dr. Faucci.  It's literally double speak where she says both things - "don't trust a vaccine approved by Trump's admin" and "trust the vaccine approved by this prominent Democrat doctor," even though its exactly the same vaccine in exactly the same process on both tracks.

The media wants to cover for her so they widely broadcast the attack portion to target any Trump benefit on the vaccine and undermine confidence.  Effectively, don't vote for Trump because he oversaw a record breaking vaccine development (less than a year, apparently the prior record was 4 years for the Mumps), because he only did by "cutting corners."  Oh but hey, now that I have to take the vaccine totally safe because you know it was approved by "process" and Dr. Faucci says so.

That's the essence of propaganda, media handlers selectively using even contradictory quotes to support the person they want to support and undercut the person they want to cut down.

Thank you for bothering to look, but please next time hold your research to the same standard you would apply in Trump's case (you know, like for example, continually citing to his "failure" to condemn racism in Charlottesville, when that lie was refuted in the very same speech).

Quote
So, why don't you try again with an actual lie by her, rather than prove my words with a lie by you?

Sure, here's a classic Harris lie:  "The president said it was a 'hoax.” referring to the Coronavirus. 

Or, how about, her classic lie about who she was listening to when she smoked pot (an album that hadn't been released at the time).

I found this fun write up of 24 lies in a single debate, backed with references, most of the claims were not actively fact checked by the supposedly neutral fact checkers for some reason.  Gee I wonder why.  https://thehayride.com/2020/10/the-24-lies-kamala-harris-told-at-last-nights-debate/

I would suggest getting off Google and trying a less filtered search engine if you want balanced information, Google biases searches for Harris's lies to favor debunking by fact checkers of easy ones.  Effectively,  Google is running a giant strawman fallacy engine.  Try Duck Duck Go with a politically sensitive search and see if you don't get shockingly different results.

Quote
As for lies by Trump, gee let's start with today: "“Breaking News: In Pennsylvania there were 205,000 more votes than there were voters. This alone flips the state to President Trump.”

Is that a Trump quote?  As I understand it that's something that was tweeted on his account and that the media believed was a quote from someone else.  In any event, the media promptly claimed to debunk the underlying basis of the quote, though it's not clear that's what they did, more like they mansplained it.

As I understand it, at the moment, there are statistically more votes recorded in PA than there are voters recorded as having voted.  The explanation is that certain counties (and it won't surprise anyone if they go look at the names of the counties involved) have not actually updated the required records onto a second system that the state maintains on voter history.  Therefore, it's literally true that it appears there are more ballots than voters.

How then is that a lie?  It's not.  It could a misrepresentation if it were willful, but for Trump to retweet it?  At worst its wishful thinking and not being informed.  If you want to presume bad faith you could recast in a similar vein to Kamala's knowing false propaganda statements.

Quote
And then let's proceed with his entire life history. Let me quote from wikipedia:
Quote
Trump has promoted a number of conspiracy theories that have lacked substance. These have included Barack Obama citizenship conspiracy theories from 2011. Known as "birther" theories, these allege that Barack Obama was not born in the United States.[64][65][66] In 2011, Trump took credit for pushing the White House to release Obama's "long-form" birth certificate, while raising doubt about its legitimacy,[67] and in 2016 admitted Obama was a natural-born citizen from Hawaii.[68]

You guys really have TDS over this.  It will never be true that it can be proven that Obama was born in Hawaii or born in Kenya.  It will always be true that Hawaii certified him as born there.  No matter how much you wish it, the latter doesn't guarantee the former. 

I mean in the history of "dirty tricks" this controversy barely rates a 10% on the scale of most unfair tricks of all time.  Obama and his allies contributed to it for years with some of them using his "Kenyan" birth for marketing before it was relevant to his Presidential aspirations.  Here for example here is a link to one such instance being "explained," though there's literally no reason that the error would have been made in the first place if it didn't come from Obama, nor that he wouldn't have corrected it.  https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/OTUS/born-kenya-obamas-literary-agent-misidentified-birthplace-1991/story?id=16372566.  Compare that to falsely claiming someone is a Russian agent?  Or a Racist? as you guys like to do.  This just shows how double standards work, with anything eggregiously pro left being "fair" and even basic attacks fed by the person on the left and leftist operatives are "crimes of the century."

Honestly, given the real history where do you even get off claiming that no one could reasonably have questioned this?  Materials that Obama would have approved said.  Are you going to say its unfair going forward to claim that Hillaria Baldwin said she was born in Spain now that the lie has been blown up?

Quote
He later falsely stated that Hillary Clinton started the conspiracy theories.[68][69][70]

Okay... given it's widely known and was reported real time that Clinton allies were heavily involved in spreading it as an initial matter, and that even her campaign manager acknowledged they had to fire a staff member for spreading emails about it what is actually your beef?  Literally everyone in politics knew the "expanded" team Clinton was pushing the story even if they were taking pains to be make sure no one on "official" team Clinton could be connected.  They did the same thing against Trump and countless other times to undermine negative press.  There's a reason that "friends of Bill" is a widely known concept.

The Clintons have a lot of hanger arounds that do their dirty work in a coordinated fashion without any paper trails.

Quote
Within six months of Trump's announcement of his presidential campaign, FactCheck.org declared Trump the "King of Whoppers" stating, "In the 12 years of FactCheck.org's existence, we've never seen his match. He stands out not only for the sheer number of his factually false claims, but also for his brazen refusals to admit error when proven wrong."[71]

Shrug.  FactCheck.org is in my opinion a left biased organization.  Most "fact checkers" are, they are literally journalists pretending to have more credibility.  Journalists are overwhelmingly left.  Anyone remember when reporters were actually supposed to be fact checkers, lol.

Quote
In 2016, Trump suggested that Ted Cruz's father was involved in the assassination of John F. Kennedy. He also claimed that he lost the popular vote in the 2016 election only because of "millions" of illegal voters.[72][73]

Sigh.  Really?

Quote
During his campaign, Trump claimed that his father, Fred Trump, had given him "a small loan of a million dollars," which he used to build "a company that's worth more than $10 billion,"[74] denying Marco Rubio's allegation that he had inherited $200 million from his father.[75] An October 2018 New York Times exposé on Fred and Donald Trump's finances concludes that Donald "was a millionaire by age 8," and that he had received $413 million (adjusted for inflation) from his father's business empire over his lifetime, including over $60 million ($140 million in 2018 currency) in loans, which were largely unreimbursed.[76]

I read the expose.  I found it to spend a lot of time mischaracterizing values.  By being a "millionaire" at age 8, for example, it seems to have meant that his father had transferred to him some less than   $100,000.    In "today's value" circa 2018, those payments are "worth" a million dollars.  So for example Trump was receiving "$200,000" a year by age 3, really means he was receiving less than $18,000 a year in reality. 

Big whoop. 

You should read the critiques of the Times piece as well.  Forbes for one really tore apart much of the claims the NYTimes passed off on the valuation "illegalities" as nothing to write home about.  What Forbes covered, is literally the case in hundreds of thousands of valuation decisions every year that have never been questioned, never will be questioned, and would hold up in tax court or any other court, but the NYT can rephrase them to sound nefarious.

Honestly, when the headline has repeatedly been that Trump's father "gave" him at least $413 million dollar, yet much of that comes from Fred's estate when he died and all of it has been inflated to present value (circa 2018, regardless of when the transfers were made - generally at times where the multiple ranged from 13:1 to 6:1, very little at less than a 2:1 ratio).  It ignores that often times these transfers were not of cash at all, or even necessarily of accessible assets.  Forbes also pointed out that by the same measure Trump's worth was still a very large increase and that Trump had never been shy about spending money, which means the actual revenues involved were greater still.

Is the point that rich kids have a leg up?  No question.  Getting hire straight out of school by the family companies for highly compensated positions, totally an advantage.  Having parents set up trusts, partnerships and companies to facilitate wealth transfers to their kids, totally an advantage.

Pretending that just being rich is enough to explain Trump?  Delusional.  There are countless stories of rich kids that never did and never could have replicated that success.  Heck, his own siblings are in that number. 

On the million dollar loan, if I recall that was a claim in connection with a specific company set up by Donald Trump for Manhattan Real Estate, separate from his father's companies.  There's no question as a priviliged person Trump had other advantages, not least of which was access to better banking relationships and an experienced guide on government subsidy programs.

Quote
Was Ted Cruz's father involved in the assassination of JFK, Seriati? But I guess according to you that lie is just perfectly, same as all other Trump lies and same as your own lies - as long as they serve Trump.

Maybe you can pull your quote.  The articles I've seen have Trump highlighting a National Enquirer article with a picture that purported to be Ted Cruz's father with Lee Harvey Oswald.  Is there something more or specific?

Is everyone that links to dubious source somehow "lying" in your mind as well?  Trump has repeatedly retweeted others words, and somehow that translates in your head into Trump not only stating those words but also additional made words attached to them?

I thought you were disputing the idea of propaganda above, and yet you seem to be relying on it here.

TheDrake

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Predictions and thoughts on the Biden Presidency
« Reply #213 on: December 30, 2020, 06:04:49 PM »
Quote
Is that a Trump quote?  As I understand it that's something that was tweeted on his account and that the media believed was a quote from someone else.  In any event, the media promptly claimed to debunk the underlying basis of the quote, though it's not clear that's what they did, more like they mansplained it.

He tweeted it, therefore he said it.

WE article

The article likes to go on and on about how Trump was "misconstrued" which is a common complaint in the crazed right press like WE.

Clarity matters, which is probably why you shouldn't pop off with either deliberately or accidentally false statements.

DJQuag

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Predictions and thoughts on the Biden Presidency
« Reply #214 on: December 30, 2020, 06:43:13 PM »
"You guys really have TDS over this.  It will never be true that it can be proven that Obama was born in Hawaii or born in Kenya.  It will always be true that Hawaii certified him as born there.  No matter how much you wish it, the latter doesn't guarantee the former."

Just so everyone is aware Seriati is the half brother of Kim Jong Un. Through his father. His mother is Chinese and therefore he is working for the CCP as we speak. I guess one day some "state" can certify him as being born there but we will all know the truth. Like the man said, hard to impossible to prove a negative, right?

PS. God help Seriati after these shocking accusations if he dares to have brown skin.

Seriati

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Predictions and thoughts on the Biden Presidency
« Reply #215 on: December 30, 2020, 07:12:48 PM »
Lol.  Sure go with it.  The amazing thing about the internet is anyone of us could in fact be Kim Jong Un's illegitimate brother, or we could be someone else.

The fact that Obama got a benefit from the claim to have been born in Kenya and a different benefit from claiming to have been born in Hawaii, each at a different time in his life.  The fact that the information on where he was born either came from him, or was literally one of the most racist assumptions of all time - I can't even imagine the flack that should have resulted on that.  The fact that his allies, and even family members spread the claim that he was born in Kenya. 

Yep, all exactly the same as the "benefit" I'm getting from your claim there... oh wait I'm not getting a benefit?  Must be the exact same thing.

Grant

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Predictions and thoughts on the Biden Presidency
« Reply #216 on: December 30, 2020, 07:28:56 PM »
Lol.  Sure go with it.  The amazing thing about the internet is anyone of us could in fact be Kim Jong Un's illegitimate brother, or we could be someone else.

I'm actually the illegitimate son of Milton Berle.  I'd like to request that my screen name be changed to Grant Exanaconda. 

I'm sorry to hear that you're related to Kim Jong Un, Serati.  My advice is to keep it quiet.  Siblings of KJU don't really have a great life expectancy.  I promise to keep your secret.  I imagine this can psychologically explain some of your attraction to mentally unstable strongman leadership. 

Aris Katsaris

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Predictions and thoughts on the Biden Presidency
« Reply #217 on: December 31, 2020, 02:31:35 AM »
The fact that Obama got a benefit from the claim to have been born in Kenya and a different benefit from claiming to have been born in Hawaii, each at a different time in his life.  The fact that the information on where he was born either came from him, or was literally one of the most racist assumptions of all time - I can't even imagine the flack that should have resulted on that. 
Where does Trump's accusation of Hillary Clinton starting the birther controversy fit in with your obsession about blaming Obama himself over it?

Btw, when the next non-white person appeared in a presidential ticket, wow, Trump again argued that perhaps they're not eligible (https://www.vox.com/2020/8/13/21366668/trump-campaign-birtherism-kamala-harris-born-in-oakland).

It's so very amazingly coincidental that Trump has gone for this tactic 2-for-2 for every non-white person on the two times they appeared on a presidential ticket, and never does it for white people, is it not? It's almost as if he consistently wants to signal that he's a racist and get the racist vote.

Aris Katsaris

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Predictions and thoughts on the Biden Presidency
« Reply #218 on: December 31, 2020, 03:45:34 AM »
The fact that Obama got a benefit from the claim to have been born in Kenya and a different benefit from claiming to have been born in Hawaii, each at a different time in his life.  The fact that the information on where he was born either came from him, or was literally one of the most racist assumptions of all time - I can't even imagine the flack that should have resulted on that. 
Where does Trump's accusation of Hillary Clinton starting the birther controversy fit in with your obsession about blaming Obama himself over it?

Btw, when the next non-white person appeared in a presidential ticket, wow, Trump again argued that perhaps they're not eligible (https://www.vox.com/2020/8/13/21366668/trump-campaign-birtherism-kamala-harris-born-in-oakland).

It's so very amazingly coincidental that Trump has gone for this tactic 2-for-2 for every non-white person on the two times they appeared on a presidential ticket, and never does it for white people, is it not? It's almost as if he consistently wants to signal that he's a racist and get the racist vote.

Though, btw, I'll note, that it's ludicrous that we're still even discussing the moral quality of your beloved psychopath dictator-wannabe, when Trump just pardoned *censored*ing war criminals.

Trump is morally depraved, and ANYONE who defends him or supports him is either just as morally depraved as he is, or an utter and complete idiot.

And to compare and contrast with that, the sin of Harris that you managed to pinpoint is... that she may have confused music she was listening to 30 years ago with music she was listening to 25 years ago. Or perhaps she lied about what music she was listening to. Such a lie, much wow, really compares with Trump pushing conspiracy theories (racist and otherwise), Trump trying to overthrow democracy, and Trump pardoning mass murderers (it's okay to be a mass murderer, thinks Trump, if you're a white mass murderer killing brown people).

But as I said: the moral depravity of the Trump supporters really shows.

cherrypoptart

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Predictions and thoughts on the Biden Presidency
« Reply #219 on: December 31, 2020, 06:36:04 AM »
Holy cow you're right about Harris. I hadn't realized that. Maybe Obama was actually born in America but if that story about Harris is correct then she was not born in America. Not even close. Apparently she was actually born in California.

But the point as far as the birther thing goes is that Trump didn't start it. He just finished it.

cherrypoptart

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Predictions and thoughts on the Biden Presidency
« Reply #220 on: December 31, 2020, 06:43:21 AM »
Another thing that's likely to change with a Biden administration is that the whole pound me too movement is going to get the silent treatment from the media and the idea that women should be believed is out the window too as we can see from the treatment the woman who accused Biden of sexually assaulting her against a wall in a Capitol Hill corridor received by the media and Democrats in general which is exactly the same treatment the Bill Clinton accusers received. Some even say they believe her but they don't care. That whole thing was always so much more about just being against Trump and Republicans in general than it ever was about being for women being treated with dignity and respect.

Aris Katsaris

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Predictions and thoughts on the Biden Presidency
« Reply #221 on: December 31, 2020, 07:05:30 AM »
Quote
But the point as far as the birther thing goes is that Trump didn't start it. He just finished it.

Nobody sane gives a *censored* about who "started it" -- except the Trumpist apologists who found that cute little excuse... that doesn't actually mean anything.

Hint, hint: If it was actually OKAY for Trump to be pushing the birther conspiracy, you wouldn't have actually cared if he started it or not, because that would have ALSO been okay -- in fact it'd have been a point of honor that he brought the issue to people's attention if it was okay. The very fact that you guys AND Trump himself are so very much focusing on the fact that he didn't "start" it, means you actually understand very well that he was morally on the wrong in the whole issue, as the entirety of the birther conspiracy movement.

For years and years Trump was the main proponent and pusher of it, same as he was the pusher of a bunch of other ludicrous conspiracy theories which he keeps pushing with LIE AFTER LIE, and which LIES he never takes back or apologizes for.

Do you think he'll apologize or retract about his accusation for the non-existent brother of Georgia's Secretary of State?

No. Neither will wmLambert apologize for pushing the idea that servers in Frankfurt and Spain were raided, neither will any other Trump apologists apologize for any other lie they're pushing, in their support of Trump's attempt to overthrow American democracy.

Another thing that's likely to change with a Biden administration is that the whole pound me too movement is going to get the silent treatment from the media and the idea that women should be believed is out the window too as we can see from the treatment the woman who accused Biden of sexually assaulting her against a wall in a Capitol Hill corridor received by the media and Democrats in general which is exactly the same treatment the Bill Clinton accusers received. Some even say they believe her but they don't care. That whole thing was always so much more about just being against Trump and Republicans in general than it ever was about being for women being treated with dignity and respect.

The more one lowers the standard of proof in regards to rape accusations, the more likely one is going to incentivize actually false rape accusations, which eventually is going to lead to a pushback, and get people to realize they need to increase the standard of proof required again to reasonable levels. I welcome some people reverting to sanity, after going too far into one direction, (which was the correct direction, but again pushed too far, because some people have no sense of moderation.)

But the idea that "that whole thing", which if anything I gather started from the abuse of actresses in Hollywood, was supposedly about "Trump and Republicans", is ludicrous.

Seriati

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Predictions and thoughts on the Biden Presidency
« Reply #222 on: January 05, 2021, 01:45:56 AM »
Where does Trump's accusation of Hillary Clinton starting the birther controversy fit in with your obsession about blaming Obama himself over it?

Exactly where it always fit?  Clinton's dirty tricks team is without question the best in the business.  The fact that Obama most likely was the source of the original claims has little to do with how Clinton's team would have found the references.  We already know they're more than happy to make things up to distract.  What ever you think about Clinton's team inventing the fake Russian collusion story, there's hardly ever been any doubt about their strategy to make up the "vast right wing conspiracy" as the explanation for every attack, or to label everyone that ever accussed Bill of sexual abuse or rape as nothing but a bimbo and engage in open character assasination. 

Quote
It's so very amazingly coincidental that Trump has gone for this tactic 2-for-2 for every non-white person on the two times they appeared on a presidential ticket, and never does it for white people, is it not? It's almost as if he consistently wants to signal that he's a racist and get the racist vote.

Technically, he also used it to attack Ted Cruz, or weren't you going to count that?  And it was used to attack McCain when he ran (Panama) and several other candidates going back for quite some time.  But oh yeah, totally just a Trump thing.

But what's most funny is that by using this tactic, you mean he commented as follows:

Quote
“I heard it today that [Harris] doesn’t meet the requirements. And, by the way, the lawyer that wrote that piece is a very highly qualified, very talented lawyer. I have no idea if that’s right. I would have assumed the Democrats would have checked that out.”

Is something about that inaccurate?  He had just heard it, the idea was explored in a Newsweek Article on 8/12, Trump commented on it on 8/13 and Newsweek put a disclaimer on it 8/14 telling people that it was never intended to support racism or birtherism.  You can still however read it.  https://www.newsweek.com/some-questions-kamala-harris-about-eligibility-opinion-1524483

It's an interesting hypothetical argument, that never had any chance of holding up in court.

But mostly I love it.  You're all in an outrage over Trump promoting it and running with it based on the media telling you that was what was going on.  Yet I bothered to look it up.  It's from the back end of the WhiteHouse briefing for the day, and 100% a response to the media asking about it before Trump ever said a thing on it (he'd literally talked for more than 30 minutes on numerous consequential things at this point and already been harrased with insults from "reporters" several times).  Here's the "full exchange" on Harris:

Quote
Q    There are claims circulating on social media that Kamala Harris is not eligible to be — to run for Vice President because she was an “anchor baby,” I quote.  Do you or can you definitively say whether or not Kamala Harris is eligible — legal — and meets the legal requirements to run as Vice President?

THE PRESIDENT:  So, I just heard that.  I heard it today that she doesn’t meet the requirements.  And, by the way, the lawyer that wrote that piece is a very highly qualified, very talented lawyer.  I have no idea if that’s right.  I would’ve — I would have assumed the Democrats would have checked that out before she gets chosen to run for Vice President.

Q    (Inaudible.)

THE PRESIDENT:  But that’s a very serious — you’re saying that — they’re saying that she doesn’t qualify because she wasn’t born in this country?

Q    She was.

Q    No, she was born in this country, but her parents did not — the claims say that her parents did not receive their permanent residence at that time.

THE PRESIDENT:  Yeah, I don’t know about it.  I just heard about it.  I’ll take a look.
https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefings-statements/remarks-president-trump-press-briefing-august-13-2020/

Wow.  The Press asked the President about something they were reading on social media, and he answered that he just heard about, accurately stated that the lawyer that wrote the piece is a smart guy (and if you read the piece, I doubt you'd think he was trying to disqualify Harris by it) and that he doesn't have any idea if that's true but he'll look into it?

The Washington Post Headline on the same day is that "Trump Promotes false claim that Kamala Harris may not be a natural born citizen." 

Looks like a pretty clear case of fake news from the Washington Post and the AP, with a headline that they'd written before the question was even asked.  Buried pretty significant sucesses from the Press conference that people might have really cared about behind yet another made for the liberal sheep story faithfully misrepresenting reality.  Quite literally "news" the media made up by asking a question that Trump honestly responded to and running with a widely mischaracterizing headline, that over time has let you make an assertion that Trump was promoting a Harris birther story without the least bit of need for facts or proof.

Maybe spend less time calling me a liar, and more reviewing original source material.

Seriati

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Predictions and thoughts on the Biden Presidency
« Reply #223 on: January 05, 2021, 02:27:54 AM »
Though, btw, I'll note, that it's ludicrous that we're still even discussing the moral quality of your beloved psychopath dictator-wannabe, when Trump just pardoned *censored*ing war criminals.

Not a fan of the pardon of the Blackwater contractors.  Not an expert on it either.  Seems if he was going to do anything a commutation would have been preferable.  I don't think you're going to accept that there were two sides to that story even though that seems to be the case.  Still I agree these convictions don't seem to have needed  to have been overturned.

Quote
And to compare and contrast with that, the sin of Harris that you managed to pinpoint is... that she may have confused music she was listening to 30 years ago with music she was listening to 25 years ago. Or perhaps she lied about what music she was listening to. Such a lie, much wow, really compares with Trump pushing conspiracy theories (racist and otherwise), Trump trying to overthrow democracy, and Trump pardoning mass murderers (it's okay to be a mass murderer, thinks Trump, if you're a white mass murderer killing brown people).

So, you clearly didn't look up Harris's lie.  It wasn't that it was a lie about the music, it was about the context.  Harris trying to "normalize" herself as pro drug by claiming she was smoking pot in the past and it was no biggie.  The same Harris who was a district attorney of San Francisco and attorney general of California and responsible for putting other people into prison for smoking pot.

So was she a total hypocrite jailing others for crimes she was committing?  Or was she trying to recast her record for a party that believes in "defunding the police" as someone who didn't put thousands of people into prison?

I get it, you only see what you want to see in a situation.  And can't help yourself but to throw garbage against the wall to see what sticks when it comes to Trump.

Quote
But as I said: the moral depravity of the Trump supporters really shows.

Totally, shows.  How I can be patient while you hurl baseless insults time and again.  While I research the random diatribes you throw without even cursory research so I can be patronized by hearing the same nonsense again and again (by the way reference to the Nissour massacre was a good reference, not at all your typical garbage).

TheDrake

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Predictions and thoughts on the Biden Presidency
« Reply #224 on: January 05, 2021, 12:39:22 PM »
Quote
Is something about that inaccurate?  He had just heard it, the idea was explored in a Newsweek Article on 8/12, Trump commented on it on 8/13 and Newsweek put a disclaimer on it 8/14 telling people that it was never intended to support racism or birtherism.  You can still however read it.

In this case, I don't think you can call it inaccurate. I think I have to believe that Trump likes using any negative ammunition against opponents. Do we really think the Trump election team never thought to investigate that angle? Plus, it fails on Trump's part to recognize that someone born in the US is a US citizen for all purposes, including the Presidency. An appropriate response that doesn't fan flames would be something like, "I see no reason to believe that Harris is ineligible."

But I do agree, there is nothing substantive to point out that Trump was lying or spreading a false statement. I don't think it is wrong for the news organizations to comment on how it does encourage negativity and racism. Since the article, he's had four months to have someone look into it, including the white house counsel. He hired Eastman who wrote the ludicrous op-ed. In December. He's not bothered to correct the record in any way that I'm aware. I'm not aware of him ever correcting the record on his false statements.

I did read the piece, and I'm not sure what other purpose he could have had than disqualifying Harris.

Quote
It would be an inauspicious start for any campaign for the highest offices in the land to ignore the Constitution's eligibility requirements; how else could we possibly expect the candidates, if elected, to honor their oaths to "faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and...to the best of [their] Ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States?"

A direct challenge not only to her eligibility, which the rest of the piece suggest she is not based on his interpretation. He then goes on to suggest that because of this we can't expect her to defend the Constitution. It's basically a wistful desire that she would go away, despite acknowledging fully that he is in the minority on this interpretation and that his arguments will be dismissed.

Fenring

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Predictions and thoughts on the Biden Presidency
« Reply #225 on: January 05, 2021, 12:46:13 PM »
But I do agree, there is nothing substantive to point out that Trump was lying or spreading a false statement. I don't think it is wrong for the news organizations to comment on how it does encourage negativity and racism. Since the article, he's had four months to have someone look into it, including the white house counsel. He hired Eastman who wrote the ludicrous op-ed. In December. He's not bothered to correct the record in any way that I'm aware. I'm not aware of him ever correcting the record on his false statements.

For what it's worth you seem to have two separate standards going at once, one of which is whether Trump is a damned liar (which is the point Seriati was addressing) and the other of which is whether he is unusually virtuous and has gone out of his way to dismiss false claims about his opponents. While it would be nice, it is not something I would expect at the moment that a politician would make public statements with the express purpose of following up on random claims made against their opponents, to refute those claims. That would be extraordinarily charitable in the current political climate. I think Trump probably has his hands full refuting claims made against him on a daily basis, to hold him accountable for not refuting claims made against Harris.

Seriati

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Predictions and thoughts on the Biden Presidency
« Reply #226 on: January 05, 2021, 04:44:48 PM »
Well there's both of those Fen, but I'd actually like to point out a third point.  The claim was that Trump was promoting the Harris story in the same manner he was behind the Obama birther claims.  The point I was making is that that specific claim was false. 

This was a "controversy" invented by the media.  Trump responded to a media question rather neutrally and the media immediately published hundreds of articles implying Trump was pushing this narrative.  Go look at some of the articles published that day, long stories with multiple sections primarily written to remind people of Trump's interaction with Obama and to link the two "stories."  The entire point wasn't to convey that Trump was pushing Harris had a birth problem (which was objectively false) but to write lengthy negative diatribes about Trump's pushing the Obama birther story - which was completely stale as a new news item - by giving it a new "tie-in". 

Its no mistake that they also originated the racism version implying or flat out stating that Trump raised theses against the two candidates of color.

Looks like a premeditated hit job, and apparently that works.

yossarian22c

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Predictions and thoughts on the Biden Presidency
« Reply #227 on: January 14, 2021, 09:58:54 AM »
https://www.npr.org/sections/biden-transition-updates/2021/01/14/956620254/his-cabinet-still-unconfirmed-biden-looks-at-plan-b-for-early-days-in-office

Quote
Former President Barack Obama had six cabinet members confirmed by the Senate before his Inauguration Day in 2009. President Trump had two. But when President-elect Joe Biden takes office next week, it's unclear whether he'll have any cabinet members in place.

After he won the election, Biden rolled out his picks for top officials quickly. But between Trump's protracted political fight over election results and the future control of the Senate up in the air until the Jan. 5 Georgia runoffs, the Republican-controlled Senate was slow to schedule hearings for them.

The Senate may have hearings and confirm a few on the 19th. Many of his appointments are easy to confirm, they've been through the process before. After the 20th when power shifts from McConnel to Schumer I expect things will speed up dramatically. Most of his cabinet are moderates so once Republicans lose the leverage of obstruction by holding things up I expect most of them to get 70+ votes for confirmation.

IMO Biden's most controversial pick is for defense and not because the nominee isn't qualified but he picked someone who needs a recent military retiree waiver again. I heard Republicans complain about his pick for OBM but the main objection seemed to be that she was politically active on twitter. I didn't actually see any highly inflammatory tweets, but they could be out there. After the 20th I expect things will pick up, but that partially depends on the impeachment trial. McConnel could help make things easier. He could go more mainstream or he could follow the early Obama years approach slow down everything as much as possible to "make Biden a one term president."

cherrypoptart

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Predictions and thoughts on the Biden Presidency
« Reply #228 on: January 17, 2021, 12:50:16 PM »
Any predictions on what the national debt will look like by the end of Biden's first term?

Obama's thoughts on the subject have not aged very well:

On July 3, 2008 Barack Obama said that adding $4 trillion in debt was irresponsible and "unpatriotic":

"The problem is, is that the way Bush has done it over the last eight years is to take out a credit card from the Bank of China in the name of our children, driving up our national debt from $5 trillion for the first 42 presidents - #43 added $4 trillion by his lonesome, so that we now have over $9 trillion of debt that we are going to have to pay back -- $30,000 for every man, woman and child. That's irresponsible. It's unpatriotic."

It almost seems childish how naive he was, and maybe all of us. I mean I didn't actually think Obama was going to do anything about the national debt but I guess I had some small sliver of hope that it might be a remote possibility. Nope. Not a chance. It was just never going to happen.

Obviously I don't expect Biden to bring the national debt under any sort of control. I don't think he's promised to do so and it's not very realistic to believe he would especially under these circumstances so having said that I'll also say that if the national debt at the end of his first term is any lower than it is when Trump leaves office that would be a fantastic achievement by Biden and his administration and I'd tip my hat to him.

I very seriously doubt that will happen though so how about predictions on how high the national debt will actually go in the next four years, just for fun and bragging rights?

I don't want to go home so I'm going to go big. It seems like both Obama and Trump each raised the national debt by almost ten trillion smackers, give or take a trillion or two. If Biden only raises it by another ten trillion I guess that's actually kind of respectable. Can't fault him much for not doing any better than his predecessors. But I'm going to call it at twenty trillion. Biden will raise the national debt a little over another twenty trillion dollars so it'll be just shy of 50 trillion dollars by the time he leaves office in four years or even if Harris takes over before that.

msquared

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Predictions and thoughts on the Biden Presidency
« Reply #229 on: January 17, 2021, 12:54:51 PM »
There is no way the total debt is going to be the same or any smaller.  I would love to see the rate of increase slow, but until the pandemic ends, that will not, and probably should not happen.

In other words I would like to see a decrease in the rate of the increase in the annual deficit, but as you said, I Biden has not campaigned on that so it might not be a good measure of his term in office.

DonaldD

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Predictions and thoughts on the Biden Presidency
« Reply #230 on: January 17, 2021, 01:47:13 PM »
There are differences, of course.  Obama came into power at the very beginning of the world-wide 'great recession', and although the economy recovered over the next few years, it was a slow recovery.

Obama was then in power for 8 years, over which the debt increased by about $9 trillion.

Contrast that to Trump, who inherited an improving economy and who increased the national debt by about $8 trillion in only 4 years.  Yes, COVID happened in 2020, but the majority of the increase in debt occurred prior to the pandemic.

As Mark observed - under Biden, the debt will continue to increase, and it almost certainly should increase over the next several years - it would be completely irresponsible to do otherwise.

Lloyd Perna

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Predictions and thoughts on the Biden Presidency
« Reply #231 on: January 17, 2021, 02:00:23 PM »
Biden team already holding talks with Iran on US return to nuclear deal

If true, Isn't this what Flynn was accused of doing?

TheDeamon

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Predictions and thoughts on the Biden Presidency
« Reply #232 on: January 17, 2021, 08:50:22 PM »
Biden team already holding talks with Iran on US return to nuclear deal

If true, Isn't this what Flynn was accused of doing?

Yes, but we already knew those rules only apply to people who aren't members of the Democratic Party.

cherrypoptart

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Predictions and thoughts on the Biden Presidency
« Reply #233 on: January 19, 2021, 04:40:54 AM »
Another prediction for the Biden Presidency and this one seems pretty easy:

Border chaos. Again.

Was the Biden administration joking when they put out this line about the caravans not getting in immediately?

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/immigration/incoming-biden-administration-migrant-caravan-don-t-come-you-won-n1254550

"Incoming Biden administration to migrant caravan: Don't come, you won't get in immediately"

And why shouldn't they get in immediately? Why shouldn't anyone and everyone be able to come to America now that our official policy is one amnesty after another with a path to citizenship for people who get here no matter how?

Who is going to believe that there won't be another amnesty down the road after this one? Who in the world is going to respect our laws when our own President and the majority of our Congress say they don't deserve any respect by rewarding the people who break them with green cards and American citizenship? Nobody. That's who.

I don't feel sorry for what's about to happen to our country since our people voted and that's what they voted for but it is sad watching the problems caused in Latin America by Biden's open borders policy and promise of citizenship as a reward for breaking our immigration laws. The least Biden could have done was wait until after the Covid crisis had abated before bragging about ending Trump's Muslim travel ban while at the same time also blocking Trump's plan to lift COVID-19 European travel restrictions. How does that make any sense? Ban travel from Europe but keep the people flowing from everywhere else? He obviously understands that travel needs to be carefully controlled right now and yet he's encouraging masses to travel, slowly, all through Latin America to get here and there is no doubt they will be making the Covid problem worse just as all travelers have been doing since the outbreak started.

Grant had brought up the idea that we should celebrate the arrival of all the people who could survive the journey of hundreds or even thousands of miles even as they braved and endured Covid to do it. That misses the point though. It's not about the 99% who are fine with Covid. It's about the small percentage but still very large numbers of people who are suffering because the ones who don't have as much of a problem aren't protecting the ones who do.

Aris Katsaris

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Predictions and thoughts on the Biden Presidency
« Reply #234 on: January 19, 2021, 07:40:35 AM »
The least Biden could have done was wait until after the Covid crisis had abated before bragging about ending Trump's Muslim travel ban while at the same time also blocking Trump's plan to lift COVID-19 European travel restrictions. How does that make any sense? Ban travel from Europe but keep the people flowing from everywhere else?
Presumably unlike you, Biden has seen a map about which areas of the world suffer the most from the epidemic, and which ones suffer very little.

You should be asking yourself instead why the *censored* Trump wants on his final day to ease travel from the most covid-infected regions (Europe and Brazil), rather than why Biden wants to ease travel from the least covid-infected ones and keep the restrictions on the worst.

Of course I don't have much hope of you realizing that it's because Trump is an actively evil man, to such an extent we'd only previously seen in cartoons.
« Last Edit: January 19, 2021, 07:43:21 AM by Aris Katsaris »

DonaldD

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Predictions and thoughts on the Biden Presidency
« Reply #235 on: January 19, 2021, 10:33:45 AM »
You should be asking yourself instead why the *censored* Trump wants on his final day to ease travel from the most covid-infected regions (Europe and Brazil), rather than why Biden wants to ease travel from the least covid-infected ones and keep the restrictions on the worst.

The obvious answer is that Trump had no expectation that his executive order would come into effect.  What he wanted was either to use his EO as a signal to certain parties, or to force Biden to take an action that could be used to damage his administration in the future.  Whether that calculation is correct is another story.

yossarian22c

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Predictions and thoughts on the Biden Presidency
« Reply #236 on: January 19, 2021, 11:20:37 AM »
Biden team already holding talks with Iran on US return to nuclear deal

If true, Isn't this what Flynn was accused of doing?

Flynn was accused of lying to the FBI about doing this. So if the FBI has concerns about any contacts with Iran I suggest anyone on the Biden team that contacted Iranians that they not lie about it.

Lloyd Perna

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Predictions and thoughts on the Biden Presidency
« Reply #237 on: January 19, 2021, 01:03:41 PM »
Biden team already holding talks with Iran on US return to nuclear deal

If true, Isn't this what Flynn was accused of doing?

Flynn was accused of lying to the FBI about doing this. So if the FBI has concerns about any contacts with Iran I suggest anyone on the Biden team that contacted Iranians that they not lie about it.

This is why the FBI was interviewing Flynn in the first place though, because they were spying on his phone call, correct?  Are you agreeing that the Biden teams actions, if the reports are true, are at least as suspicious?

yossarian22c

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Predictions and thoughts on the Biden Presidency
« Reply #238 on: January 19, 2021, 01:11:53 PM »
Biden team already holding talks with Iran on US return to nuclear deal

If true, Isn't this what Flynn was accused of doing?

Flynn was accused of lying to the FBI about doing this. So if the FBI has concerns about any contacts with Iran I suggest anyone on the Biden team that contacted Iranians that they not lie about it.

This is why the FBI was interviewing Flynn in the first place though, because they were spying on his phone call, correct?  Are you agreeing that the Biden teams actions, if the reports are true, are at least as suspicious?

The FBI was spying on the Russian ambassador. The content of the call, discussing nullifying sanctions that were to punish the Russians for acting on behalf of Trump during the campaign were what made it suspicious.

Biden has people with serious government experience. I suspect the extent of the Biden team's calls are hey, when we take power we would like to have meetings ASAP to discuss a new iteration of the nuclear deal.

TheDeamon

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Predictions and thoughts on the Biden Presidency
« Reply #239 on: January 19, 2021, 04:54:48 PM »
At this point I'm waiting for the mass closings/bankruptcies of small businesses across the country as the Democrats try to stimulate the economy with a new $15/hour federal minimum wage. Due to Covid19 many are barely hanging on as it is, a $15 minimum wage will destroy them. But hey, that'll boost profits even more for Amazon, Walmart, and a select list of national restaurant chains. Those wonderful Democrats, always looking out for the little guy.

I'm also "eagerly awaiting" the Alien and Sedition Act version 3.0 now with "red flag" gun control provisions. Passing a law that violates the first amendment isn't enough, let's violate the 2nd amendment while we're at it.
 

TheDeamon

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Predictions and thoughts on the Biden Presidency
« Reply #240 on: January 21, 2021, 01:39:04 AM »
Fringier prediction, but one I can see happening.

The House enacts legislation to "keep America safe" and either the Senate obstructs, or Biden vetoes the bill.
Giving even odds on unironic left-wing led riotsmostly peaceful protests in response. Where any destructive mayhem that results will be blamed on "right wing agitators."

yossarian22c

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Predictions and thoughts on the Biden Presidency
« Reply #241 on: January 21, 2021, 09:44:30 AM »
Fringier prediction, but one I can see happening.

The House enacts legislation to "keep America safe" and either the Senate obstructs, or Biden vetoes the bill.
Giving even odds on unironic left-wing led riotsmostly peaceful protests in response. Where any destructive mayhem that results will be blamed on "right wing agitators."

I would bet against it. The house is narrowly divided. The whole democratic caucus has to be behind almost every bill. The Senate is 50/50. Biden is pretty much a moderate. Pelosi is smart enough to not force the few swing district members she has left to cast difficult votes on legislation that isn't going anywhere.


yossarian22c

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Predictions and thoughts on the Biden Presidency
« Reply #242 on: January 21, 2021, 09:50:39 AM »
Fringier prediction, but one I can see happening.

The House enacts legislation to "keep America safe" and either the Senate obstructs, or Biden vetoes the bill.
Giving even odds on unironic left-wing led riotsmostly peaceful protests in response. Where any destructive mayhem that results will be blamed on "right wing agitators."

Protests that criminals may turn into riots and looting are going to follow the next horrific police killing caught on video.

Maybe the protesters learned this summer, go home before the sun sets because the provocateurs come out at night and will co-opt your protest for anarchy and destruction.

TheDeamon

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Predictions and thoughts on the Biden Presidency
« Reply #243 on: January 21, 2021, 02:41:29 PM »
Fringier prediction, but one I can see happening.

The House enacts legislation to "keep America safe" and either the Senate obstructs, or Biden vetoes the bill.
Giving even odds on unironic left-wing led riotsmostly peaceful protests in response. Where any destructive mayhem that results will be blamed on "right wing agitators."

I would bet against it. The house is narrowly divided. The whole democratic caucus has to be behind almost every bill. The Senate is 50/50. Biden is pretty much a moderate. Pelosi is smart enough to not force the few swing district members she has left to cast difficult votes on legislation that isn't going anywhere.

https://greenwald.substack.com/p/the-new-domestic-war-on-terror-is

Quote
The more honest proponents of this new domestic War on Terror are explicitly admitting that they want to model it on the first one. A New York Times reporter noted on Monday that a “former intelligence official on PBS NewsHour” said “that the US should think about a ‘9/11 Commission’ for domestic extremism and consider applying some of the lessons from the fight against Al Qaeda here at home.” More amazingly, Gen. Stanley McChrystal — for years head of Joint Special Operations Command in Iraq and the commander of the war in Afghanistan — explicitly compared that war to this new one, speaking to Yahoo News:

Quote
I did see a similar dynamic in the evolution of al-Qaida in Iraq, where a whole generation of angry Arab youth with very poor prospects followed a powerful leader who promised to take them back in time to a better place, and he led them to embrace an ideology that justified their violence. This is now happening in America….I think we’re much further along in this radicalization process, and facing a much deeper problem as a country, than most Americans realize.”

Anyone who, despite all this, still harbors lingering doubts that the Capitol riot is and will be the neoliberal 9/11, and that a new War on Terror is being implemented in its name, need only watch the two short video clips below, which will clear their doubts for good. It is like being catapulted by an unholy time machine back to Paul Wolfowitz’s 2002 messaging lab.

https://twitter.com/tomselliott/status/1351134715177283584
https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2018/02/06/john-brennan-james-claper-michael-hayden-former-cia-media-216943

TheDeamon

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Predictions and thoughts on the Biden Presidency
« Reply #244 on: January 21, 2021, 10:01:34 PM »
Fringier prediction, but one I can see happening.

The House enacts legislation to "keep America safe" and either the Senate obstructs, or Biden vetoes the bill.
Giving even odds on unironic left-wing led riotsmostly peaceful protests in response. Where any destructive mayhem that results will be blamed on "right wing agitators."

I would bet against it. The house is narrowly divided. The whole democratic caucus has to be behind almost every bill. The Senate is 50/50. Biden is pretty much a moderate. Pelosi is smart enough to not force the few swing district members she has left to cast difficult votes on legislation that isn't going anywhere.

That didn't take long:
https://www.nytimes.com/2021/01/20/us/portland-protest.html
Quote
In Portland, about 200 people clad in black marched to the local Democratic headquarters, where some of them smashed windows and tipped over garbage containers, lighting the contents of one on fire.

Those who took to the streets on Wednesday said they were a mix of anarchists, anti-fascists and racial justice protesters. One of their signs said, “We don’t want Biden — we want revenge” for killings committed by police officers and “fascist massacres.”

cherrypoptart

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Predictions and thoughts on the Biden Presidency
« Reply #245 on: January 21, 2021, 10:25:58 PM »
Fox just putting into clear words and pictures my own thoughts on the subject since Biden first made his promise of open borders, mass amnesty, and no limits to immigration, illegal and otherwise.

https://www.yahoo.com/news/biden-administration-100-day-moratorium-114111710.html

At the height of the pandemic now with deaths at record levels Biden is so right about masks but so wrong about his open borders invitation. Whatever good results we're going to get from increased masking is going to be more than offset by the chaos Biden is sowing at the border.

Like the border agent there said, when you get thousands of people crossing and some of them have Covid-19, what are you supposed to do about that? The short answer is with Biden there is nothing you can do. You're just going to have to spread it around.

cherrypoptart

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Predictions and thoughts on the Biden Presidency
« Reply #246 on: January 24, 2021, 04:38:02 PM »
Here's kind of a crazy prediction that I hope does not come to pass.

China takes Taiwan.

I give it a low probability of actually happening but it seems like it has a much greater chance of happening now under the weakness Biden is projecting especially since he's already in China's pocket, bought and paid for. China also sees that Russia got away with taking Crimea under Obama. Sure there were some repercussions but they own it right now and that's not changing. Of course there are huge differences and that's why this prediction is crazy. If it happens though that will mark a massive failure of the Biden administration though it won't stop our media from making excuses for him and treating him as the greatest anyway.

TheDeamon

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Predictions and thoughts on the Biden Presidency
« Reply #247 on: January 24, 2021, 07:41:28 PM »
Taiwan is a problem for the US regardless of the outcome, biggest issue is there is no strong viable exit scenario for the US should it insert itself into things.

Beyond that, I've been inclined to believe that if China is going to invade Taiwan, they're going to do it in the next 5 years. And with Biden as PotUS and the nation being in the political condition it's in, the next 4 is entirely possible, and they're probably hard at work crunching numbers on the odds of an invasion working this year specifically.

As they have to be nominally aware that for their best chance of not getting the United States involved, they need either a friendly or luke-warm Democratic Congress which is in a position to advocate doing nothing. As such, invading in an election year (2022) is a bad idea, as it would make China's invasion of Taiwan the topic that Democrats couldn't avoid, they'd have to respond strongly from the onset. But where it comes to an invasion this year? They can limp-wrist the initial response, and once China's dug in they can make excuses for why going in to dig them out is a bad idea.

And 2023 becomes potentially more problematic for them if they believe that a Republican House and Senate is likely to happen. As the Republicans are unlikely to stand idly by as China invades, even if they have to ram something down Biden's throat. So I guess basically it's this year, maybe 2023 if the Democrats keep control of Congress by some means, or 2025 if the Democrats have control of everything once again.

In any case, weather patterns being what they are in the region, China won't be likely to do anything until the end of March at the earliest, the prevailing sea conditions at this time of year is more likely to result in troops making an amphibious landing being combat ineffective by the time they made landfall. And they need a window of opportunity that is measured in days/weeks for landing everything they'd need, not one measured in fractions of a day.

Grant

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Predictions and thoughts on the Biden Presidency
« Reply #248 on: January 24, 2021, 08:26:15 PM »
I give it a low probability of actually happening but it seems like it has a much greater chance of happening now under the weakness Biden is projecting especially since he's already in China's pocket, bought and paid for.

Where is this coming from?

Even without American intervention, China is going to have a rough time taking Taiwan.  Invading islands is pretty difficult, even if they are in seeing distance.  See 1940.  Even if everything goes right at first and the PLA is able to take out ROC's air forces, air defenses, and navy, they still have to deal with a million screaming Taiwanese. At this point I honestly believe that Japan, Australia, and the Phillipines are going to back Taiwan up, even without America helping out, which is traditionally what they would wait for and what they really want to see.  America being in the game makes it not a gamble for them.  China on the other hand would be gambling EVERYTHING on America not intervening, and being able to knock Taiwan out fast enough that Japan and Australia really can't help or are too scared to do so. 

I hate to generalize or use stereotypes, but the Chinese are some pretty good gamblers.  They know that American foreign power in general and American military projection in particular has been on the wane since 2004.  We're at an all time low since 1897.  They probably don't see that trend changing anytime soon.  So however good their chances of success are NOW, they will only continue to improve the longer they wait.  China is playing a long game and they have been since the 1980s.  Very much like Russia, they are very slowly turning up the heat on the the little frogs in the pot, little by little, to the point that by the time the water starts to boil, they never noticed and are cooked. 

I still don't know where you're getting that Biden is in China's pocket.  So far he's been projecting strengthening ties with allies that had been strained by The Perfect Caller's gangster/extortionist foreign policy. 

TheDeamon

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Predictions and thoughts on the Biden Presidency
« Reply #249 on: January 24, 2021, 09:34:31 PM »
Even without American intervention, China is going to have a rough time taking Taiwan.  Invading islands is pretty difficult, even if they are in seeing distance.  See 1940.  Even if everything goes right at first and the PLA is able to take out ROC's air forces, air defenses, and navy, they still have to deal with a million screaming Taiwanese. At this point I honestly believe that Japan, Australia, and the Phillipines are going to back Taiwan up, even without America helping out, which is traditionally what they would wait for and what they really want to see.  America being in the game makes it not a gamble for them.  China on the other hand would be gambling EVERYTHING on America not intervening, and being able to knock Taiwan out fast enough that Japan and Australia really can't help or are too scared to do so.

Uh... When was the last time you looked at what the various defense think-tanks and DOD has been putting out there?

In a Taiwan invasion scenario, any help that's going to be sent in basically has hours to get into Taiwan before the risk starts to become unacceptable. After that, it will likely be weeks before the United States could regain air supremacy over the region, and that still doesn't address the matter of China's missile defense umbrella which extends well beyond Taiwan already.

If the Americans expect to take the better part of a month getting to Taiwan as their best case once China initiates hostilities(Airfields are currently the limiting factor, China can put more planes in the air in the region with shorter turn-around times than the US + Allies can).

Any coalition forces without American Air support(or the US bases in the region) is unlikely to be able to do anything particularly effective. About the only thing Australia, Japan and the Philippines could do at that point is block China's ability to use the Straits of Malacca and some other access routes into the Indian Ocean. In either case, Taiwan is effectively on its own, nobody is getting Taiwan-friendly troops on the ground in Taiwan in anything resembling timely manner without the Americans being involved.

For Japan specifically, that also opens them up to a wide range of threats and problems of their own as well, as most of their trade is also going to need to divert away from the reach of Chinese forces, never mind China using their involvement as an excuse to gobble up some more real estate. Given in this scenario you're presuming Japan went in but America did not, this also means that the mutual defense pact with the US is presumably off the table as well so because Japan involved itself in a war with China that the US opted out of, the United States will not protect Japan from anything China does to Japan as a consequence.

The Philippines likewise has risks to contend with as well, but as China already controls their "9 dash line" claims thanks to Obama, they're possibly reasonably safe from outright ground invasion, bombings and missile strikes might be another matter.

Quote
I hate to generalize or use stereotypes, but the Chinese are some pretty good gamblers.  They know that American foreign power in general and American military projection in particular has been on the wane since 2004.  We're at an all time low since 1897.  They probably don't see that trend changing anytime soon.  So however good their chances of success are NOW, they will only continue to improve the longer they wait.  China is playing a long game and they have been since the 1980s.  Very much like Russia, they are very slowly turning up the heat on the the little frogs in the pot, little by little, to the point that by the time the water starts to boil, they never noticed and are cooked.

See above comment, their Air Force is rather large already, albeit not up to the standards of the US, Japan, Australia and other NATO forces, but Gen 3 and Gen 4 aircraft are still plenty formidable, and China has the airfields to support their craft in the region. We don't. Right now, it is believed it would take us anywhere from 4 to 6 weeks to knock out the Chinese PLAF. And US battle doctrine doesn't like to send surface forces into areas where we don't control the skies.

On top of that we have Chinese Surface to Air Capabiliies to contend with, as well as their DF-21 and DF-26 "carrier killer" missiles to keep the US Navy at a respectful distance.... Which also brings us to their PLAN, where they have more combat hulls than the US Navy does now, although the US Navy still reigns in terms of gross tonnage. And there is the matter some of the PLAN ships still date back to World War 2.

China's expectation is that their Area Denial Capabilities will hold a United States response at bay long enough that they can complete the conquest of Taiwan before US Troops are on the island in any kind of numbers. At which point the US will take it at a "fate accomplished" scenario for Taiwan and sue for peace before our manpower and equipment casualty count goes even higher.

That and they're pretty confident in their "kill chain" for the DF-21 and DF-26. They're inclined to believe that if they can knock out one or two of our super-carriers, and shoot down a couple F-35's, we'll be begging for an end to hostilities in short order. In a lot of respects, they're thinking a lot like General Lee during the early part of the US Civil War, or the Japanese when they went after Pearl Harbor... Or to some extent, Santa Anna when he went after the Alamo.