DUMP TRUMP (previously 2020 candidates)
nan said:
drummerboy said:You were wrong about those Flint videos. In fact, Jordan Chairiton is still reporting and making a movie about Flint. He's the best reporter on Flint in the world. No one else even comes close. You spent a few superficial minutes comparing what he said to the government version and declared him an idiot. He was not the idiot.
oh christ nan, I've watched plenty of those things, and when I do, I tell you what's wrong with them, and you never engage me on the criticisms.
I remember that laughable Flint video that you though was so informative and I tried to explain that it was largely full of unfounded accusations and was really quite amateurish in terms of "journalism", but you wouldn't even listen.
You say you want to engage, but you really don't. You're so tied into your sources that you will brook no criticism of them.
Here is a link to his 126 videos on Flint. If you even watched one I'd be surprised. https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLt26I5I31rNstdrCV_M3OOtyK8V4X8kQh
You can say I "was wrong" all you want, but at the time you just ignored my critique. It's not like you tried to argue the points I brought up.
drummerboy said:
You can say I "was wrong" all you want, but at the time you just ignored my critique. It's not like you tried to argue the points I brought up.
The way I remember is that the topic was something other than Flint and you were trying to personally smear Jordan by saying that he is not a good reporter because he found the water still contaminated after the EPA (or other govt. Agency) declared it clean. You said the EPA was reliable and Jordon was an idiot or something. I did not want to continue because the topic was unrelated. Months after that conversation, Jordon interviewed many residents who said the inspectors told them to run the water for several minutes before doing the test, which flushed toxins from pipes and changed the results. I always wondered what you would say about that evidence, but I figured you were not really interested, but just finding a way to smear my source at the time. You were not willing to spend time investigating. If you want to open a thread about Flint, I would gladly put the time in to discuss.
nan said:
You were wrong about those Flint videos. In fact, Jordan Chairiton is still reporting and making a movie about Flint. He's the best reporter on Flint in the world. No one else even comes close. You spent a few superficial minutes comparing what he said to the government version and declared him an idiot. He was not the idiot.
Here is a link to his 126 videos on Flint. If you even watched one I'd be surprised. https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLt26I5I31rNstdrCV_M3OOtyK8V4X8kQh
it's truly becoming absurd at this point.
nan: "Here's a video!"
everyone else: "We are NOT going to watch a video."
nan: "Here's a video!"
everyone else: "We are NOT going to watch a video."
nan: "Here's a video!"
everyone else: "We told you, we are NOT going to watch a video."
nan: "Here's a video!"
everyone else: "We told you, we are NOT going to watch a video.
nan: "Here's a video!"
everyone else: "We told you, we are NOT going to watch a video."
nan: "No one is forcing you to watch a video. And here's another video!"
everyone else: "We told you, we are NOT going to watch a video."
nan: "OK then, but how about watching a video?"
Harris is in The View ... they don't have the sound on in the diner where I am.
Meghan McCain looks uncomfortable.
Why do businesses have TVs on without sound?
If they do they should have closed captioning turned on.
I think there should be Soapbox - All Politics bars with the sound blaring, much like sports bars. I'd drink to that.
Morganna said:
I think there should be Soapbox - All Politics bars with the sound blaring, much like sports bars. I'd drink to that.
you'd need to
ml1 said:
it's truly becoming absurd at this point.
nan: "Here's a video!"
everyone else: "We are NOT going to watch a video."
nan: "Here's a video!"
everyone else: "We are NOT going to watch a video."
nan: "Here's a video!"
everyone else: "We told you, we are NOT going to watch a video."
nan: "Here's a video!"
everyone else: "We told you, we are NOT going to watch a video.
nan: "Here's a video!"
everyone else: "We told you, we are NOT going to watch a video."
nan: "No one is forcing you to watch a video. And here's another video!"
everyone else: "We told you, we are NOT going to watch a video."
nan: "OK then, but how about watching a video?"
OK, so I guess we are not going to talk about politics anymore. We are just going to complain about and try to shame me. I'm not self-centered. I don't need threads to be about me. I'm happy just being one of the ants in a collaborative endeavor. Really,
And by the way, the last time we discussed this I agreed to try to post a script or article along with my video because you said you would read that and you made it clear that you would never watch one of my videos. I made it clear that I would continue to post videos, but that watching was optional. I also put some effort into giving you links to read. Have not noticed you responding to any of those. Instead you continue to berate me about videos that you can easily scroll on by.
Are we done yet, or are am I going to continue to have to defend myself? Because I did see more posters complaining about the stupid arguing than those complaining about my posting videos. FYI.
nan said:
OK, so I guess we are not going to talk about politics anymore. We are just going to complain about and try to shame me. I'm not self-centered. I don't need threads to be about me. I'm happy just being one of the ants in a collaborative endeavor. Really,
And by the way, the last time we discussed this I agreed to try to post a script or article along with my video because you said you would read that and you made it clear that you would never watch one of my videos. I made it clear that I would continue to post videos, but that watching was optional. I also put some effort into giving you links to read. Have not noticed you responding to any of those. Instead you continue to berate me about videos that you can easily scroll on by.
Are we done yet, or are am I going to continue to have to defend myself? Because I did see more posters complaining about the stupid arguing than those complaining about my posting videos. FYI.
you can do whatever you want. But it IS absurd that your response to people telling you they won't watch videos is to post more links to videos. I'm a fan of absurdity though, so I would never tell you to stop engaging in it.
and if I'm not responding to you it's because I only drop into this thread occasionally to see if anyone besides the 2-3 people responsible for 90% of the posts has written anything. and when I do, I scan past all the embedded YouTube videos. If you happened to post a link to an article, it's hard for me to find that bit of wheat among all the chaff.
One thing that is hard for me is that, if I am responding to a Nan-ideo on my IPhone and I am trying to quote her post, I cannot scroll past the video to get to the part where I would actually write my response. That is actually what got me to notice them in the first place (previously I had just been skipping over them when I was responding on my laptop).
Here's some positive news about Gov. Jay Inslee on the side of cougars and wolves. He has responded to petitions from those on the side of compassion. Just thought an animal friendly post would break up the trending discussions. Go Jay! Secretary of the Interior?
mrincredible said:
Harris is in The View ... they don't have the sound on in the diner where I am.
Meghan McCain looks uncomfortable.
Ok, alert, alert, I'm posting another video - Kamala Harris on the View. Got this from YouTube where they split up the interview into parts. This is the one talking about Joe Biden and Megan McCain has the "I don't like this and I'm mad" look.
I can't stand the View and think most of the hosts seem to know nothing about politics, despite discussing it all week and I especially despise Megan McCain because she mentions her father every other sentence. I got banned from MOL for a week for calling John McCain a war criminal, and don't regret it, so I'm not a fan. I was at least hoping for some high drama, but Megan for all her hissy fits is kind of a wimp.
Megan is also inconsistent. On a previous show, she tore into Tulsi Gabbard like she was a dog eating prime rib, but this time she confronts Kamala about her previously stated love for Joe Biden and says that the other "POC candidate," Tulsi Gabbard defended Biden. "What do you have to answer Gabbard?" a petulant Megan demands. Megan is now a Tulsi Gabbard defender. Who knew.
Kamala says she was pointing out differences, not attacking him, which was not true, although I was fine with it, as was just about everyone except Joe Biden fans. Kamala launches into a history lecture on Brown vs Board of Ed, 1954 and I'm wondering if we are are going to go through every year until she rides the bus, which would be about 1967. Fortunately, she cuts through to Biden and says they had a difference of opinion about those segregationists and who they were and that they worked on busing which directly impacted her. She says this is a presidential race and we should "not have personal attacks against each other" but we are on a debate stage and you should be prepared and ready to defend yourself against "a difference of opinion. . "
Megan interupts her to say that a Biden advisor called that "slick and slippery." I guess Megan likes Joe, no surprise.
Joy Behar (the "Progressive" who is barely progressive--and her next question is not even close to progressive), says, "A lot of people were not for busing; I remember that. Black people, white people were not for it. It was a small percentage. Looking back do you think it's a good idea?" Now that is a confrontational question! I am wondering how Kamala is going to respond to that one, but she quickly pulls up the history again and they all fall in line and Megan becomes apologetic in tone. The View has nothing on MOL, where no one gets away with anything, and every phase is challenged. You should all be proud of the work you do because you are better than the View and they get paid the big bucks.
So, Kamala gets the last word, which is that she and Joe fundamentally disagree and it was not a personal attack. Except it was a personal attack and she and Joe don't really disagree, or at least they did not disagree until Kamala made it "perfectly clear" that she and Joe disagreed. I can't stand either of them and would be happy to see them eat each other alive at the next debate and go down in flames together.
So Kamala wins this round like the pro that she is, but going against Trump, she would not be let off so easy. He would be challenging her about her past record that makes her sound comparable to Biden. The establishment media pretends to challenge establishment candidates, but it's all dramatic growling without any bite.
Morganna said:
Here's some positive news about Gov. Jay Inslee on the side of cougars and wolves. He has responded to petitions from those on the side of compassion. Just thought an animal friendly post would break up the trending discussions. Go Jay! Secretary of the Interior?
https://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/environment/inslee-reverses-panels-decision-to-increase-cougar-hunts/
https://www.courthousenews.com/inslee-breaks-with-state-officials-opposes-removing-protections-for-gray-wolf/
I think that was smart of him. I think there is huge support for animal rights and candidates should put policies out about animal welfare. I tried to send Bernie a message about that when he was answering questions on Redit one afternoon, but, there were thousands of other people ahead of me, so I don't think it even got read.
ml1 said:
you can do whatever you want. But it IS absurd that your response to people telling you they won't watch videos is to post more links to videos. I'm a fan of absurdity though, so I would never tell you to stop engaging in it.
and if I'm not responding to you it's because I only drop into this thread occasionally to see if anyone besides the 2-3 people responsible for 90% of the posts has written anything. and when I do, I scan past all the embedded YouTube videos. If you happened to post a link to an article, it's hard for me to find that bit of wheat among all the chaff.
I put it right above the video and noted that here was the article and below was the video discussing it. I've done a few of those. I always look for written material. The big group of videos I posted were on-the-street interviews with people about candidates. It was not talking heads giving political analysis. I thought they were fun to watch, especially for someone who has a sense of the absurd, although some were disturbing. I guess you will never know, since you are so opposed to the video medium.
nan said:
Klinker said:No, and I've looked. Please find one and I will be glad to watch it.
What I was asking is whether you had watched any videos that argued other people (Warren or Gabbard for example) are also really for Medicare for all and prepared to fight for it. Have you watched any videos like that?
I googled the terms warren supports medicare for all and then selected "video" for format and I got 139,000 hits. I did the same search for Gabbard supports medicare for all and got 40,600 hits. That's 180,000 hits between the two of them.
You must not have looked very hard.
Klinker said:
nan said:I googled the terms warren supports medicare for all and then selected "video" for format and I got 139,000 hits. I did the same search for Gabbard supports medicare for all and got 40,600 hits. That's 180,000 hits between the two of them.
Klinker said:No, and I've looked. Please find one and I will be glad to watch it.
What I was asking is whether you had watched any videos that argued other people (Warren or Gabbard for example) are also really for Medicare for all and prepared to fight for it. Have you watched any videos like that?
You must not have looked very hard.
Please do not be nan and post all 180,000 of them
Klinker said:
I googled the terms warren supports medicare for all and then selected "video" for format and I got 139,000 hits. I did the same search for Gabbard supports medicare for all and got 40,600 hits. That's 180,000 hits between the two of them.
You must not have looked very hard.
Saying you support Medicare for All and actually supporting Medicare for All are two different things. Almost all the candidates say they support Medicare for All eventually, even if they mean 200 years from now. I have watched several videos where Harris and Warren say they support Medicare for All but it is clear that they don't. You asked me to watch a video where Harris and Warren say they support Medicare for All and they actually do (with a plan for implementation). Perhaps in those 139,000 for Warren and 40,600 for Harris there is one? I have not found it yet. Please take a peak and let me know.
Pretty fair recap @nan. I watched the video, which caused me to hyper ventilate because I don't like the show.
Agree with you that it was a personal attack.
Agree with you that she danced around the issue.
Disagree with calling McCain a war criminal and don't mind any daughter being fixated on her dad after his death. I think about mine all the time.
Disagree with wanting to see Biden and Harris out of the race. If either appeals to the majority so be it.
Not surprised at the prodding by Behar on Harris's stance on bussing because it was as unpopular in Queens as it was in Brooklyn. This issue is going to follow Harris around.
Agree that MOL is much more entertaining than the View.
basil said:
Klinker said:Please do not be nan and post all 180,000 of them
nan said:I googled the terms warren supports medicare for all and then selected "video" for format and I got 139,000 hits. I did the same search for Gabbard supports medicare for all and got 40,600 hits. That's 180,000 hits between the two of them.
Klinker said:No, and I've looked. Please find one and I will be glad to watch it.
What I was asking is whether you had watched any videos that argued other people (Warren or Gabbard for example) are also really for Medicare for all and prepared to fight for it. Have you watched any videos like that?
You must not have looked very hard.
Damn! I didn't think about that.
nan said: Saying you support Medicare for All and actually supporting Medicare for All are two different things. Almost all the candidates say they support Medicare for All eventually, even if they mean 200 years from now. I have watched several videos where Harris and Warren say they support Medicare for All but it is clear that they don't.
Can you explain to me, without the use of a video, why it is clear that Warren does not support Medicare for All? You have said this repeatedly and it isn't at all clear to me.
Klinker said:
Can you explain to me, without the use of a video, why it is clear that Warren does not support Medicare for All? You have said this repeatedly and it isn't at all clear to me.
Medicare for All is going to be a heavy lift. You are talking about putting the powerful health insurance giants out of business. They have deep pockets and friends in the right places. They only way this will happen is if there is a huge movement of people demanding it and the right leadership who is steadfast and devoted and not afraid. The kind of leadership that will go to the state of people opposing and have rallies against them. Even then, it may not happen, but without these things, it does not stand a chance. You can't just put it up for a vote and hope for the best.
So, just saying you are for Medicare for All means nothing. It means even less when it's hardly mentioned on your webpage. It means little when you say things like "there are many paths to get there." When you give interviews where you say, "Let me be perfectly clear" and then you talk in word salad refusing to answer the question. Hard to believe it will happen when you don't talk about how you are going to fight for it. These are just some examples.
So, I would appreciate it if in those 100K+ videos you can find me one that makes me feel that either Elizabeth Warren, and especially Kamala Harris is committed to Medicare for All, which means getting rid of the insurance companies, then please post it and I will be glad to watch and comment.
So, you’re saying that the Sanders supporters won’t fight for Medicare for All if Bernie isn’t the nominee? Bernie won’t hold these rallies if he isn’t chosen President?
The way I see it is that one of the bonuses of a Warren presidency would be that she would have Bernie fighting full time for this while she tends to mending the Earth, tearing down the Concentration Camps and healing every other wound that has been inflicted on our country during this national nightmare (plus fighting for Medicare for All).
The next President will be President of the WHOLE country, not just health care. They are going to be busy.
Nan said:
So, I would appreciate it if in those 100K+ videos you can find me one that makes me feel that either Elizabeth Warren, and especially Kamala Harris is committed to Medicare for All, which means getting rid of the insurance companies, then please post it and I will be glad to watch and comment.
I would think that, if I have made one thing clear here, it would be that I don’t watch videos.
Morganna said:
Pretty fair recap @nan. I watched the video, which caused me to hyper ventilate because I don't like the show.
Agree with you that it was a personal attack.
Agree with you that she danced around the issue.
Disagree with calling McCain a war criminal and don't mind any daughter being fixated on her dad after his death. I think about mine all the time.
Disagree with wanting to see Biden and Harris out of the race. If either appeals to the majority so be it.
Not surprised at the prodding by Behar on Harris's stance on bussing because it was as unpopular in Queens as it was in Brooklyn. This issue is going to follow Harris around.
Agree that MOL is much more entertaining than the View.
Glad we agree on some of this, at least. and I was not close with my father so maybe I don't get it, but I look at those pictures of John McCain in the Ukraine and I get steam coming out of ears.
But, lets' get back to Kamala's interview on our "favorite" show. Clip 2 is about Dem infighting and beating Trump. They don't give the order so I don't know if this is before or after the last one.
This one opens with Whoppi Goldberg, whose deep political views seem to have been formed at Hollywood parties, giving Kamala a grandmotherly talk about being a good Democrat, saying "I don't want you all to cannibalize each other and that's what it felt like." Kamala is nodding her head in an active listening, yet bobble-headed way, while probably thinking "this woman is an idiot, keep looking sincerely grateful for her "wisdom." Then grandma Whoopi says she is a "55 baby" (born in 1955, not 55 years old--I checked), and she has seen it all and remembers who ran this country, implying it was racists (it was and is), and was not run by people friendly to "us" until maybe John Kennedy came and so "this is not a surprise," meaning, I guess, finding out Biden was buddies with segregationist. She says, "What I want to see is you all explain what you are going to do to get Trump out of office. Harris looks understandably pained through this condescending and short-sighted speech, but she's probably happy not to have to talk about overthrowing the status quo, since Whoppi has just embraced it.
So, then right on cue, Harris says, "I'm going to do to it" to wild applause. Now they are working together. Which is good for maintaining Kamala's' patience because Whoppi is still on her soapbox talking the Third Way establishment propaganda about "none of us are perfect and that includes these 55K people that are running." So she does this framing and then throws it back to Kamala to shine. "Kamala says, so predictably, "You are absolutely right!" and then launches into a collective group hug about the odious Trump and his repulsive slogans, followed by Kamala doing a Bernie Sanders imitation better than the one Trump did during his 2016 campaign rallies because she can focus on his current trade policies. She's talking about farmers and workers, soybeans, the whole nine yards, She slips into a southern accent when talking about the disenfranchised not benefiting from the stock market, "Wall that's great if you own stocks!" People are working two and three jobs. .
Suddenly, the Bernie love fest is interrupted (before Harris can say what she is going to do about the economy--her Bernie imitation only goes so far) by Joy Behar, who like the rest of us, is wondering what this has to do with Democrats not eating each other, supposedly Whoppi's main point. Joy says, "This AOC and this squad against Nancy, and then you and Biden have this thing. Is that hurting the party? Is that going to impede your goal of getting him out." So much for Joy being the Progressive one. No one explains about how Dems being nice to each other helps get Trump out, but I can't get that answered on MOL either, so I can't expect these lightweights to even recognize the disconnect. Finally, the one with the long straight brown hair who lately seems to be the only one with half a brain says, "This is a vetting process" Yes!!!! No one listens to her and then they hand it back to Kamala to summarize the talking points, and give her "inspirational" message of hope.
Kamala again says, she "could not agree more!" that things are not working with this administration Nothing is said about previous ones administrations or the system that led us to elect a fascist. She talks about wiping the slate clean and starting over with a vision for America in which everyone can "see themselves." No idea what this means, because I can see myself homeless in a few years if things go off of plan so what is her policy for improving our lives in a fundamental way? Right away, she says is not for "transforming the system for things that may or may not happen" So, she is standing up for the status quo and she says she will focus on the "3 o"clock in the morning issues" which she says are bipartisan, and "rarely through the lense of the party they vote for" which is true because both parties are corrupt and not supportive of working people, but that's not what Kamala wants you to think. I'm actually not sure what she is going for there, but you are supposed to think that Kamala understands you deeply and will help you sleep better, I guess. The View people nod and say "Yeah."
So, then in the last few seconds she mentions that people are worried about healthcare and she has a plan about teacher pay. and she lists policies off the tips of her fingers without going into detail.
And this is why I listen to second rate comedians talking about drone strikes in their garages and then post the videos on MOL. Cause when you have the dreck like the View, people like Jimmy Dore seem more inspired than God.
Klinker said:
So, you’re saying that the Sanders supporters won’t fight for Medicare for All if Bernie isn’t the nominee? Bernie won’t hold these rallies if he isn’t chosen President?
The way I see it is that one of the bonuses of a Warren presidency would be that she would have Bernie fighting full time for this while she tends to mending the Earth, tearing down the Concentration Camps and healing every other wound that has been inflicted on our country during this national nightmare (plus fighting for Medicare for All).
The next President will be President of the WHOLE country, not just health care. They are going to be busy.
What makes you think Warren will pick Sanders's to fight for Medicare for All? She did not endorse him in 2016. She does not seem to be that excited about Medicare for All herself.
To be fair, I have also thought of that possibility, but there is no evidence supporting that except wishful thinking. If you really want Medicare for All, vote for Bernie. Maybe he will bring Warren on to fight Wall Street. She does seem to have talent for that, although maybe that's just a perception:
Elizabeth Warren Wins Respect in Unlikely Place—Wall Street
https://fortune.com/2019/07/07/elizabeth-warren-wins-respect-in-unlikely-place-wall-street/
ARTICLE ABOVE-VIDEO BELOW:
Klinker said:
I would think that, if I have made one thing clear here, it would be that I don’t watch videos.
OK, well then, stop asking me to watch videos that don't exist.
nan,
In your estimation, if Bernie were elected, when would we get M4A?
Rentals
Sponsored Business
Promote your business here - Businesses get highlighted throughout the site and you can add a deal.
You were wrong about those Flint videos. In fact, Jordan Chairiton is still reporting and making a movie about Flint. He's the best reporter on Flint in the world. No one else even comes close. You spent a few superficial minutes comparing what he said to the government version and declared him an idiot. He was not the idiot.
Here is a link to his 126 videos on Flint. If you even watched one I'd be surprised. https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLt26I5I31rNstdrCV_M3OOtyK8V4X8kQh