Generational Theory Forum: The Fourth Turning Forum: A message board discussing generations and the Strauss Howe generational theory

(02-07-2017, 04:54 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: [ -> ]

(02-07-2017, 04:04 PM)Marypoza Wrote: [ -> ]

(02-07-2017, 03:04 PM)X_4AD_84 Wrote: [ -> ]

(02-04-2017, 08:19 PM)pbrower2a Wrote: [ -> ]

(02-03-2017, 05:13 PM)Classic-Xer Wrote: [ -> ]Actually, I don't support either one. I didn't support the life long public servant/politician who some how or anther became a multi-millionaire like you. I voted for the financially independent billionaire who promised to drain the swamp. Of coarse, he will need a super majority to fully accomplish that task. How long do you think it's going to be before your side finds it's being sued to death? How many so-called Greens like yourself voted for Hilary in California?

Donald Trump did not run on a platform of ravaging the environment or promoting financial corruption. Neither did he say that he would gut public education. But he has quickly aligned with people who act as if no human suffering is in excess so long as they get what they want.  We should have gotten a hint that he was bad news with his calls for violence, his ugly bigotry, and his "grab (women) by their pu$$ies".

The most rapacious plutocrats are not our benefactors; they are our exploiters. Military contractors should not be setting foreign policy; oil companies should not be setting energy policy; financial hustlers should not be allowed to determine how America does finance; mining companies should not be setting environmental policy. Donald Trump's policies are akin to letting pornographers determine the sexual mores of us all.

Four years from now we will be asking ourselves how we could have done to ourselves so much harm by electing Donald Trump, who offered vague promises of prosperity so long as we do not ask how we were to get it and who would reap the benefits. He has shown himself a cruel man, and I expect no trace of human decency in his economic policies. 

When we get through this mess we will need to make major political changes, shoring up the Constitution against corporate power and ruthless operatives -- and lengthening the norm of education so that American adults can be less gullible when a demagogue, Left or Right, offers vague promises of safety and plenty so long as we do not ask any troublesome questions.

When Citizens United was decided I was initially quite happy to see it. However, since then, I have come to despise that outcome. Among other things it allowed unions to become unlimited political syndicates, it allowed false front "corporations" to bundle foreign money and as many on the Left continue to argue, it gave actual corporations status as people. Here's the deal about giving a corporation status as a person vis a vis US politics. You want to be considered a legitimate person? Then you need to be an actual US entity. How many corporations are US entities any more? Talk about bundling foreign money and allowing interests potentially inimical to the US to have a voice in electoral processes and lobbying.

Citizens United has turned out to be a disaster. It is exactly the sort of thing George Washington feared. He we are. Where is the George Washington of the 21st Century?

--- the DNC sabotaged his campaign last yr 

Who keeps bringing it up, Mary? Hillary might also have been that leader. We'll never know.

Quote:He's still raising hell in the Senate however

He is our real leader.

-- yeah l bring up Bernie. I'll cop to that. He's still relevant. X asked where our George Washington is. Others have asked in different threads where our Franklin Roosevelt is. Answer- he got screwed over last yr & we got stuck with the Donald. This 4T is taking us down a different path

The Republicans have "impugned" Elizabeth Warren and tried to silence Democrats because she read the letter from Coretta Scott King opposing Jeff Sessions nomination to be a judge, a position to which he was not confirmed. Can you believe that? If they did this, then the Republicans have impugned themselves for all time; which they have done anyway by approving the worst cabinet appointments ever made.

No-one should have any doubt, IMO, that the Republicans are a menace to democracy and all American values.

Debate in the Senate is being silenced. How long before the USA becomes Russia, or Syria?

(02-07-2017, 11:57 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: [ -> ]The Republicans have "impugned" Elizabeth Warren and tried to silence Democrats because she read the letter from Coretta Scott King opposing Jeff Sessions nomination to be a judge, a position to which he was not confirmed. Can you believe that? If they did this, then the Republicans have impugned themselves for all time; which they have done anyway by approving the worst cabinet appointments ever made.

No-one should have any doubt, IMO, that the Republicans are a menace to democracy and all American values.

Debate in the Senate is being silenced. How long before the USA becomes Russia, or Syria?

-- l thought Sessions was up 4 AG. Anyhow it's good he wasn't confirmed, unlike Bimbo Betsy

& Bernie read the letter so it's all good

I can't see any confirmation on google news that Sessions wasn't confirmed for AG. We'll see I guess. But Drump seems to get anything he wants from the Republicans.

Bernie read the letter; that's good. I guess their behavior toward Elizabeth did backfire then, if Bernie got away with reading it. Or else, they find it easier to "impugn" a woman than a man??

(02-07-2017, 09:13 PM)Marypoza Wrote: [ -> ]

(02-07-2017, 04:54 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: [ -> ]

(02-07-2017, 04:04 PM)Marypoza Wrote: [ -> ]

(02-07-2017, 03:04 PM)X_4AD_84 Wrote: [ -> ]

(02-04-2017, 08:19 PM)pbrower2a Wrote: [ -> ]Donald Trump did not run on a platform of ravaging the environment or promoting financial corruption. Neither did he say that he would gut public education. But he has quickly aligned with people who act as if no human suffering is in excess so long as they get what they want.  We should have gotten a hint that he was bad news with his calls for violence, his ugly bigotry, and his "grab (women) by their pu$$ies".

The most rapacious plutocrats are not our benefactors; they are our exploiters. Military contractors should not be setting foreign policy; oil companies should not be setting energy policy; financial hustlers should not be allowed to determine how America does finance; mining companies should not be setting environmental policy. Donald Trump's policies are akin to letting pornographers determine the sexual mores of us all.

Four years from now we will be asking ourselves how we could have done to ourselves so much harm by electing Donald Trump, who offered vague promises of prosperity so long as we do not ask how we were to get it and who would reap the benefits. He has shown himself a cruel man, and I expect no trace of human decency in his economic policies. 

When we get through this mess we will need to make major political changes, shoring up the Constitution against corporate power and ruthless operatives -- and lengthening the norm of education so that American adults can be less gullible when a demagogue, Left or Right, offers vague promises of safety and plenty so long as we do not ask any troublesome questions.

When Citizens United was decided I was initially quite happy to see it. However, since then, I have come to despise that outcome. Among other things it allowed unions to become unlimited political syndicates, it allowed false front "corporations" to bundle foreign money and as many on the Left continue to argue, it gave actual corporations status as people. Here's the deal about giving a corporation status as a person vis a vis US politics. You want to be considered a legitimate person? Then you need to be an actual US entity. How many corporations are US entities any more? Talk about bundling foreign money and allowing interests potentially inimical to the US to have a voice in electoral processes and lobbying.

Citizens United has turned out to be a disaster. It is exactly the sort of thing George Washington feared. He we are. Where is the George Washington of the 21st Century?

--- the DNC sabotaged his campaign last yr 

Who keeps bringing it up, Mary? Hillary might also have been that leader. We'll never know.

Quote:He's still raising hell in the Senate however

He is our real leader.

-- yeah l bring up Bernie. I'll cop to that. He's still relevant. X asked where our George Washington is. Others have asked in different threads where our Franklin Roosevelt is. Answer- he got screwed over last yr & we got stuck with the Donald. This 4T is taking us down a different path

The voters chose Hillary. I'm not sure Bernie could have beat Trump (9-4), going by Bernie's current 14-7 score on my system. If anything, if I make any changes, his score is more likely to go down than up. And if that happens (I have no plans to further change my system now, but it's always fuzzy around the edges as any number system is), then IF Hillary's Jupiter rising (assuming I chose the right chart for her) is worth 10 points, then she's about equal with Bernie on my system anyway.

But it looks like Trump had the numbers to win on my system, and that the other main indicator that favored the party in power only applied to the popular vote. We're stuck with The Donald, so the only hope for regeneracy lies with the opposition.

Another point I like to make to those who say the 1990s were a long time ago. I say they were only 1 year ago, because we have had less than a year of movement forward since 1995. So, why should any of us assume that 22 years have passed, when only 1 of those years has been lived in a country that was not in stalemate or regression?

Lichtman also predicted Trump would win, based on his system that was only wrong in the year 2000 when the Supreme Court selected the president. So unless Lichtman gave Bernie the "charisma" key that he denied to Hillary, and also didn't assign the primary challenge key to the election (or changed another key such as the third party candidate), then Bernie would not have won the election either. Lichtman's system is largely based on the performance of the party in power during the previous 4 years.

https://youtu.be/lDXHv5cIBCA

(02-08-2017, 01:20 PM)Marypoza Wrote: [ -> ]

(02-08-2017, 11:25 AM)Marypoza Wrote: [ -> ]

(02-07-2017, 11:57 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: [ -> ]The Republicans have "impugned" Elizabeth Warren and tried to silence Democrats because she read the letter from Coretta Scott King opposing Jeff Sessions nomination to be a judge, a position to which he was not confirmed. Can you believe that? If they did this, then the Republicans have impugned themselves for all time; which they have done anyway by approving the worst cabinet appointments ever made.

No-one should have any doubt, IMO, that the Republicans are a menace to democracy and all American values.

Debate in the Senate is being silenced. How long before the USA becomes Russia, or Syria?

-- l thought Sessions was up 4 AG. Anyhow it's good he wasn't confirmed, unlike Bimbo Betsy

& Bernie read the letter so it's all good

(02-08-2017, 01:14 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: [ -> ]

(02-07-2017, 09:13 PM)Marypoza Wrote: [ -> ]

(02-07-2017, 04:54 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: [ -> ]

(02-07-2017, 04:04 PM)Marypoza Wrote: [ -> ]--- the DNC sabotaged his campaign last yr 

Who keeps bringing it up, Mary? Hillary might also have been that leader. We'll never know.

Quote:He's still raising hell in the Senate however

He is our real leader.

-- yeah l bring up Bernie. I'll cop to that. He's still relevant. X asked where our George Washington is. Others have asked in different threads where our Franklin Roosevelt is. Answer- he got screwed over last yr & we got stuck with the Donald. This 4T is taking us down a different path

The voters chose Hillary. I'm not sure Bernie could have beat Trump (9-4), going by Bernie's current 14-7 score on my system. If anything, if I make any changes, his score is more likely to go down than up. And if that happens (I have no plans to further change my system now, but it's always fuzzy around the edges as any number system is), then IF Hillary's Jupiter rising (assuming I chose the right chart for her) is worth 10 points, then she's about equal with Bernie on my system anyway.

But it looks like Trump had the numbers to win on my system, and that the other main indicator that favored the party in power only applied to the popular vote. We're stuck with The Donald, so the only hope for regeneracy lies with the opposition.

-- l thought Bernie was a 10-0

Remember, that system was from earlier years, but this year I did more thorough research and revised the scores.
http://philosopherswheel.com/presidentialelections.html
I still give some weight to my "traditional" score and traditional meanings in my points for the aspects; but give primary significance to the more thorough and more careful later empirical research and counting of the aspects and the candidates who had/have them. All 3 of these major 2016 candidates went down in their scores at the end of the process from what they had been.

(02-08-2017, 01:14 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: [ -> ]

(02-07-2017, 09:13 PM)Marypoza Wrote: [ -> ]

(02-07-2017, 04:54 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: [ -> ]

(02-07-2017, 04:04 PM)Marypoza Wrote: [ -> ]

(02-07-2017, 03:04 PM)X_4AD_84 Wrote: [ -> ]When Citizens United was decided I was initially quite happy to see it. However, since then, I have come to despise that outcome. Among other things it allowed unions to become unlimited political syndicates, it allowed false front "corporations" to bundle foreign money and as many on the Left continue to argue, it gave actual corporations status as people. Here's the deal about giving a corporation status as a person vis a vis US politics. You want to be considered a legitimate person? Then you need to be an actual US entity. How many corporations are US entities any more? Talk about bundling foreign money and allowing interests potentially inimical to the US to have a voice in electoral processes and lobbying.

Citizens United has turned out to be a disaster. It is exactly the sort of thing George Washington feared. He we are. Where is the George Washington of the 21st Century?

--- the DNC sabotaged his campaign last yr 

Who keeps bringing it up, Mary? Hillary might also have been that leader. We'll never know.

Quote:He's still raising hell in the Senate however

He is our real leader.

-- yeah l bring up Bernie. I'll cop to that. He's still relevant. X asked where our George Washington is. Others have asked in different threads where our Franklin Roosevelt is. Answer- he got screwed over last yr & we got stuck with the Donald. This 4T is taking us down a different path

The voters chose Hillary.

-- whatever. The states chose the Donald. Your point is?
Once again you are bringing up that irrelevant bitch. Not me. You

Eric Wrote:I'm not sure Bernie could have beat Trump (9-4), going by Bernie's current 14-7 score on my system. If anything, if I make any changes, his score is more likely to go down than up. And if that happens (I have no plans to further change my system now, but it's always fuzzy around the edges as any number system is), then IF Hillary's Jupiter rising (assuming I chose the right chart for her) is worth 10 points, then she's about equal with Bernie on my system anyway.

But it looks like Trump had the numbers to win on my system, and that the other main indicator that favored the party in power only applied to the popular vote. We're stuck with The Donald, so the only hope for regeneracy lies with the opposition.

Another point I like to make to those who say the 1990s were a long time ago. I say they were only 1 year ago, because we have had less than a year of movement forward since 1995. So, why should any of us assume that 22 years have passed, when only 1 of those years has been lived in a country that was not in stalemate or regression?

Lichtman also predicted Trump would win, based on his system that was only wrong in the year 2000 when the Supreme Court selected the president. So unless Lichtman gave Bernie the "charisma" key that he denied to Hillary, and also didn't assign the primary challenge key to the election, then Bernie would not have won the election either. Lichtman's system is largely based on the performance of the party in power during the previous 4 years.

https://youtu.be/lDXHv5cIBCA

-- l thought Bernie was 10-0. Why are you trying to shore the bitch up?  Your #s were right. Your system worked.ppl asked me after the election  why l wasn't surprised the Donald won. I knew bcuz l went by your #s. Why are you trying to retroactively make her #s better than what they are? That irrelevant pos will never be equal to Bernie btw, shame on you for even thinking it

Ok I saw your answer. You posted it while l was still editing my post.

KILL ALL THE LAWYERS
President Trump to Judges: Drop Dead

No president has ever sounded as authoritarian towards courts as this one. And with his next attorney general, he can do great harm to the independent judiciary.

Jay Michaelson
02.08.17 9:35 AM ET
http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/20...-dead.html

If Donald Trump has his way, federal judges will be treated like Senator Elizabeth Warren: forced to sit down and shut up.

In a series of comments since a Seattle judge placed a temporary hold on his travel ban, Trump has escalated his attack on the institutions of democracy: last week, the free press; this week, the independent judiciary.
“The courts seem to be so political,” Trump said to a gathering of law enforcement officers Tuesday, “and it would be so great for our justice system if they would be able to read a statement and do what’s right.”

Trump also complained “It’s really incredible to me that we have a court case that is going on so long” (actually, the first cases were filed two weeks ago). And, echoing his “Second Amendment People” campaign rhetoric, Trump accused judges of “taking away our weapons, one by one.”

It’s no coincidence that Trump’s comments come as the confirmation process for attorney general nominee Senator Jeff Sessions winds down: it’s Sessions, after all, who co-authored the ban itself. That fact seems to have been conveniently forgotten by Republicans who have opposed the ban but still plan to vote for Sessions.And, of course, Trump’s comments Tuesday were but the latest in a week of court-bashing.

These are truly unprecedented statements. Even the court-packing scheme of FDR and Andrew Jackson’s alleged pronouncement “John Marshall made his decision; now let him enforce it!” do not approach this level of contempt for the rule of law. Of course, presidents have often vociferously disagreed with judicial rulings, but even Richard Nixon reserved his most acerbic comments for private (albeit taped) conversations, not public statements like these.

In public, presidents have generally deferred to courts, as the guardians of the rule of law, while expressing confidence that their views would prevail in the end—not calling a judge a “so-called judge” or an opinion “ridiculous.”
Now, some of this is just Trump being Trump. It’s probably best to take his from-the-hip comments with a grain of salt. But let’s remember the substance of the debate, and the power that Trump and Sessions wield.

In fact, contrary to Trump’s assertion that this is all political, the legal, constitutional problems with the ban are legion.

First, it is wildly overbroad. Trump and Sessions (with input, according to reports, from White House senior advisor, Stephen Miller) imposed a seven-nation travel ban that included people who had already cleared exhaustive vetting procedures, people with approved visas, and people with green cards. (It may also be under-inclusive, omitting countries like Saudi Arabia, but that is a separate matter.)

Second, it arguably discriminates on the basis of religion. While the ban is explicitly based on nationality, not religion, it banned people from Muslim-majority countries after a heated campaign in which Trump had called for a ban on Muslims.

Third, it was rolled out hurriedly, with a minimum of consultation, leading to immediate and widespread chaos, imposing harms on hundreds of thousands of people. There have been reports that government officials have even defied court orders, which, if true, would be extremely serious violations.

These are not political questions; they are legal ones. Trump was right to read, at his Tuesday remarks, from the Immigration and Naturalization Act, which indeed grants him broad latitude in matters of immigration and national security. But broad latitude doesn’t mean unchecked latitude. For example, in Trump’s reading of the law, he could order that only white people be let into the country. Would that be constitutional?

In other words, the judges hearing these cases—whether they have upheld, partially upheld, or rejected the ban—are doing their jobs. The ban brings up serious First Amendment, Fifth Amendment, and statutory questions. To strongly disagree with a judge’s interpretations of those questions is any politician’s prerogative. To accuse them of illegitimacy is authoritarian.

And however the Ninth Circuit rules on the temporary stay, it seems clear that this issue, in one form or another, is headed for the Supreme Court. Will Trump delegitimize the Court, too, if it does not rule as he likes? Is there no limit to his contempt?

It’s also best not to minimize Trump’s remarks because of the power that he wields.

First, the Trump-Sessions Justice Department has extremely wide discretion to pursue or ignore legal claims. Already, there are reports that the department intends to set aside the consent decree regarding pervasive racism in the Baltimore Police Department. That has an immediate effect on the ground, on real people. Now multiply that by a thousand, with a DoJ siding with police reflexively, as Trump promised today.

Second, the Trump administration has the power to shape the federal judiciary—beginning, of course, with the Supreme Court, but perhaps more importantly with district judges, appellate judges, immigration court judges, and administrative judges. To be sure, Judge Neil Gorsuch, Trump’s pick for the Supreme Court, is an outstanding, if arch-conservative, jurist. But down the line, the clear signal is that lower court judges will be picked on the basis of ideology rather than independence (or competence). We’re going to have immigration courts presided over by the likes of Sheriff Joe Arpaio.

Third, as the Washington Post’s Aaron Blake noted, it’s entirely foreseeable that the Trump administration will simply not comply with judicial orders it doesn’t like. It hasn’t disobeyed the current stay on the travel ban; people from the affected countries are again being admitted, as long as their papers are in order. But at the very least, Trump’s rhetoric puts courts on notice that their orders might not be obeyed in the future. That would be, by definition, illegal.

As Blake gamed out in his piece, it’s not clear what would happen next. Contempt of court is an impeachable offense, but would the GOP-led House of Representatives ever impeach Trump? Or would they, as seems far more likely, adopt his rhetoric that the court orders in question were political, and thus not legitimate?

Trump’s comments over the last week bring us one step away from a constitutional crisis. And surely he knows this. His base loves attacks on “the courts” or “the media.” They don’t know and don’t care about the legal niceties of the Immigration and Naturalization Act. Trump is scaring and warning them into acceptance of his own unlimited authority—and it’s a very easy sell.

Again, if Trump’s remarks were just the childish ravings of a blogger somewhere, they would be nothing to get upset about. But this is the president of the United States we’re talking about—and, if Republican senators don’t stand up to creeping authoritarianism, the attorney general as well.

The real threat to democracy isn’t the tweets. It’s the power Trump has to fulfill them.

(02-08-2017, 02:06 PM)Marypoza Wrote: [ -> ]

(02-08-2017, 01:14 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: [ -> ]

(02-07-2017, 09:13 PM)Marypoza Wrote: [ -> ]

(02-07-2017, 04:54 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: [ -> ]

(02-07-2017, 04:04 PM)Marypoza Wrote: [ -> ]--- the DNC sabotaged his campaign last yr 

Who keeps bringing it up, Mary? Hillary might also have been that leader. We'll never know.

Quote:He's still raising hell in the Senate however

He is our real leader.

-- yeah l bring up Bernie. I'll cop to that. He's still relevant. X asked where our George Washington is. Others have asked in different threads where our Franklin Roosevelt is. Answer- he got screwed over last yr & we got stuck with the Donald. This 4T is taking us down a different path

The voters chose Hillary.

-- whatever. The states chose the Donald. Your point is?
Once again you are bringing up that irrelevant bitch. Not me. You

Eric Wrote:I'm not sure Bernie could have beat Trump (9-4), going by Bernie's current 14-7 score on my system. If anything, if I make any changes, his score is more likely to go down than up. And if that happens (I have no plans to further change my system now, but it's always fuzzy around the edges as any number system is), then IF Hillary's Jupiter rising (assuming I chose the right chart for her) is worth 10 points, then she's about equal with Bernie on my system anyway.

But it looks like Trump had the numbers to win on my system, and that the other main indicator that favored the party in power only applied to the popular vote. We're stuck with The Donald, so the only hope for regeneracy lies with the opposition.

Another point I like to make to those who say the 1990s were a long time ago. I say they were only 1 year ago, because we have had less than a year of movement forward since 1995. So, why should any of us assume that 22 years have passed, when only 1 of those years has been lived in a country that was not in stalemate or regression?

Lichtman also predicted Trump would win, based on his system that was only wrong in the year 2000 when the Supreme Court selected the president. So unless Lichtman gave Bernie the "charisma" key that he denied to Hillary, and also didn't assign the primary challenge key to the election, then Bernie would not have won the election either. Lichtman's system is largely based on the performance of the party in power during the previous 4 years.

https://youtu.be/lDXHv5cIBCA

-- l thought Bernie was 10-0. Why are you trying to shore the bitch up?  Your #s were right. Your system worked.ppl asked me after the election  why l wasn't surprised the Donald won. I knew bcuz l went by your #s. Why are you trying to retroactively make her #s better than what they are? That irrelevant pos will never be equal to Bernie btw, shame on you for even thinking it

I can't help what the numbers say.

It's on you that you keep calling her a bitch; not me.

No, as I said, Hillary's numbers went down too. Not good enough to beat Drump.

Scores are scores; Hillary's numbers might have been equal to Bernie's; not sure. There's no shame involved; remember the numbers only indicate which candidate is more likely to win elections, not which one would make the better president. I was with Bernie on that over Hillary; but massively either one over the Drump.

And you can't deny that my opinion of the Drump is being fulfilled.

Your anti-Hillary syndrome needs a cure. All the charges against her were false and distorted. So, keep bringing her up; not my fault.

Whenever you say "he got screwed over (by the DNC)", that's "bringing her up." That's on you. Get over it.

(02-08-2017, 02:23 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: [ -> ]

(02-08-2017, 02:06 PM)Marypoza Wrote: [ -> ]

(02-08-2017, 01:14 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: [ -> ]

(02-07-2017, 09:13 PM)Marypoza Wrote: [ -> ]

(02-07-2017, 04:54 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: [ -> ]Who keeps bringing it up, Mary? Hillary might also have been that leader. We'll never know.


He is our real leader.

-- yeah l bring up Bernie. I'll cop to that. He's still relevant. X asked where our George Washington is. Others have asked in different threads where our Franklin Roosevelt is. Answer- he got screwed over last yr & we got stuck with the Donald. This 4T is taking us down a different path

The voters chose Hillary.

-- whatever. The states chose the Donald. Your point is?
Once again you are bringing up that irrelevant bitch. Not me. You

Eric Wrote:I'm not sure Bernie could have beat Trump (9-4), going by Bernie's current 14-7 score on my system. If anything, if I make any changes, his score is more likely to go down than up. And if that happens (I have no plans to further change my system now, but it's always fuzzy around the edges as any number system is), then IF Hillary's Jupiter rising (assuming I chose the right chart for her) is worth 10 points, then she's about equal with Bernie on my system anyway.

But it looks like Trump had the numbers to win on my system, and that the other main indicator that favored the party in power only applied to the popular vote. We're stuck with The Donald, so the only hope for regeneracy lies with the opposition.

Another point I like to make to those who say the 1990s were a long time ago. I say they were only 1 year ago, because we have had less than a year of movement forward since 1995. So, why should any of us assume that 22 years have passed, when only 1 of those years has been lived in a country that was not in stalemate or regression?

Lichtman also predicted Trump would win, based on his system that was only wrong in the year 2000 when the Supreme Court selected the president. So unless Lichtman gave Bernie the "charisma" key that he denied to Hillary, and also didn't assign the primary challenge key to the election, then Bernie would not have won the election either. Lichtman's system is largely based on the performance of the party in power during the previous 4 years.

https://youtu.be/lDXHv5cIBCA

-- l thought Bernie was 10-0. Why are you trying to shore the bitch up?  Your #s were right. Your system worked.ppl asked me after the election  why l wasn't surprised the Donald won. I knew bcuz l went by your #s. Why are you trying to retroactively make her #s better than what they are? That irrelevant pos will never be equal to Bernie btw, shame on you for even thinking it

I can't help what the numbers say.

It's on you that you keep calling her a bitch; not me.

No, as I said, Hillary's numbers went down too.

Scores are scores; Hillary's numbers might have been equal to Bernie's; not sure. There's no shame involved; remember the numbers only indicate which candidate is more likely to win elections, not which one would make the better president. I was with Bernie on that over Hillary; but massively either one over the Drump.

And you can't deny that my opinion of the Drump is being fulfilled.

Your anti-Hillary syndrome needs a cure. All the charges against her were false and distorted. So, keep bringing her up; not my fault.

--& you know this how? Comey never said the charges were false & distorted. He just chose not to reccommend prosceution. Not that Lynch was gonna proscecute anyhow

Eric Wrote:Whenever you say "she got screwed over (by the DNC)", that's "bringing her up." That's on you. Get over it.

I never said she got screwed over by the DNC bcuz she didn't.  DNC pimped her all the way & we are stuck with the Donald as a result. Now l just wish she would just go away & stay away

The question now for Americans: does democracy matter to them? If we have a president who is worse than King John, or even Valdimir Putin, what are they going to do about it? Unless Drump discredits himself and the Republicans for all time in the minds and hearts of Americans, Americans have failed and their country has failed.

(02-08-2017, 02:32 PM)Marypoza Wrote: [ -> ]

(02-08-2017, 02:23 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: [ -> ]

(02-08-2017, 02:06 PM)Marypoza Wrote: [ -> ]

(02-08-2017, 01:14 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: [ -> ]

(02-07-2017, 09:13 PM)Marypoza Wrote: [ -> ]-- yeah l bring up Bernie. I'll cop to that. He's still relevant. X asked where our George Washington is. Others have asked in different threads where our Franklin Roosevelt is. Answer- he got screwed over last yr & we got stuck with the Donald. This 4T is taking us down a different path

The voters chose Hillary.

-- whatever. The states chose the Donald. Your point is?
Once again you are bringing up that irrelevant bitch. Not me. You

Eric Wrote:I'm not sure Bernie could have beat Trump (9-4), going by Bernie's current 14-7 score on my system. If anything, if I make any changes, his score is more likely to go down than up. And if that happens (I have no plans to further change my system now, but it's always fuzzy around the edges as any number system is), then IF Hillary's Jupiter rising (assuming I chose the right chart for her) is worth 10 points, then she's about equal with Bernie on my system anyway.

But it looks like Trump had the numbers to win on my system, and that the other main indicator that favored the party in power only applied to the popular vote. We're stuck with The Donald, so the only hope for regeneracy lies with the opposition.

Another point I like to make to those who say the 1990s were a long time ago. I say they were only 1 year ago, because we have had less than a year of movement forward since 1995. So, why should any of us assume that 22 years have passed, when only 1 of those years has been lived in a country that was not in stalemate or regression?

Lichtman also predicted Trump would win, based on his system that was only wrong in the year 2000 when the Supreme Court selected the president. So unless Lichtman gave Bernie the "charisma" key that he denied to Hillary, and also didn't assign the primary challenge key to the election, then Bernie would not have won the election either. Lichtman's system is largely based on the performance of the party in power during the previous 4 years.

https://youtu.be/lDXHv5cIBCA

-- l thought Bernie was 10-0. Why are you trying to shore the bitch up?  Your #s were right. Your system worked.ppl asked me after the election  why l wasn't surprised the Donald won. I knew bcuz l went by your #s. Why are you trying to retroactively make her #s better than what they are? That irrelevant pos will never be equal to Bernie btw, shame on you for even thinking it

I can't help what the numbers say.

It's on you that you keep calling her a bitch; not me.

No, as I said, Hillary's numbers went down too.

Scores are scores; Hillary's numbers might have been equal to Bernie's; not sure. There's no shame involved; remember the numbers only indicate which candidate is more likely to win elections, not which one would make the better president. I was with Bernie on that over Hillary; but massively either one over the Drump.

And you can't deny that my opinion of the Drump is being fulfilled.

Your anti-Hillary syndrome needs a cure. All the charges against her were false and distorted. So, keep bringing her up; not my fault.

--& you know this how?

Eric Wrote:Whenever you say "he got screwed over (by the DNC)", that's "bringing her up." That's on you. Get over it.

I never said he got screwed over by the DNC bcuz she didn't.  DNC pimped her all the way & we are stuck with the Donald as a result

No, not "as a result." Not going to argue that again; been over it, and Hillary is done and so is Shultz as DNC chair.

statements above corrected

Quote:--& you know this how? Comey never said the charges were false & distorted. He just chose not to reccommend prosceution. Not that Lynch was gonna proscecute anyhow

The charges were false. Not going there again; been over it thoroughly.

Quote:I never said (he) got screwed over by the DNC bcuz (he) didn't.  DNC pimped her all the way & we are stuck with the Donald as a result

I said "she" I meant "he" is what you said. No his (Bernie's) loss is not "as a result" of the DNC. Yes the DNC was against him; it didn't make any difference. Been over it already.

(02-08-2017, 01:05 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: [ -> ]I can't see any confirmation on google news that Sessions wasn't confirmed for AG. We'll see I guess. But Drump seems to get anything he wants from the Republicans.

Bernie read the letter; that's good. I guess their behavior toward Elizabeth did backfire then, if Bernie got away with reading it. Or else, they find it easier to "impugn" a woman than a man??

The vote on Sessions as AG has been delayed. He will still get confirmed, most likely.

Back in the 1980s, he was voted down to be a District judge. According to Wikipedia:

Quote:On June 5, 1986, the Committee voted 10–8 against recommending the nomination to the Senate floor, with Republican Senators Charles Mathias of Maryland and Arlen Specter of Pennsylvania voting with the Democrats. It then split 9–9 on a vote to send Sessions' nomination to the Senate floor with no recommendation, this time with Specter in support. A majority was required for the nomination to proceed.[32] The pivotal votes against Sessions came from his home state's Democratic Senator Howell Heflin of Alabama. Although Heflin had previously backed Sessions, he began to oppose Sessions after hearing testimony, concluding that there were "reasonable doubts" over Sessions' ability to be "fair and impartial." The nomination was withdrawn on July 31, 1986.[18]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jeff_Sessi...rict_court

(02-08-2017, 03:54 PM)The Wonkette Wrote: [ -> ]

(02-08-2017, 01:05 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: [ -> ]I can't see any confirmation on google news that Sessions wasn't confirmed for AG. We'll see I guess. But Drump seems to get anything he wants from the Republicans.

Bernie read the letter; that's good. I guess their behavior toward Elizabeth did backfire then, if Bernie got away with reading it. Or else, they find it easier to "impugn" a woman than a man??

The vote on Sessions as AG has been delayed. He will still get confirmed, most likely.

Probably delayed so he can continue to vote. Republicans get to decide who votes, and who gets to speak.

(02-08-2017, 02:33 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: [ -> ]The question now for Americans: does democracy matter to them? If we have a president who is worse than King John, or even Valdimir Putin, what are they going to do about it? Unless Drump discredits himself and the Republicans for all time in the minds and hearts of Americans, Americans have failed and their country has failed.

I think It matters more to Americans than it seems to matter to blues. If Donald Trump accomplishes/changes ten times more than Obama was able to accomplish/change that results in a commanding democratic majority, what are blues going to do about it? Fully commit to Calexit? How much of the state are you prepared to lose to the American states?

(02-08-2017, 01:05 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: [ -> ]I can't see any confirmation on google news that Sessions wasn't confirmed for AG. We'll see I guess. But Drump seems to get anything he wants from the Republicans.

Bernie read the letter; that's good. I guess their behavior toward Elizabeth did backfire then, if Bernie got away with reading it. Or else, they find it easier to "impugn" a woman than a man??

The entire EW takedown may be an orchestrated attempt to move her to the front of the line for 2020.  Trump has always believed he can beat her easily.  Of course, HRC thought that about The Donald, and we know how that turned out.

(02-08-2017, 04:18 PM)X_4AD_84 Wrote: [ -> ]

(02-07-2017, 11:57 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: [ -> ]The Republicans have "impugned" Elizabeth Warren and tried to silence Democrats because she read the letter from Coretta Scott King opposing Jeff Sessions nomination to be a judge, a position to which he was not confirmed. Can you believe that? If they did this, then the Republicans have impugned themselves for all time; which they have done anyway by approving the worst cabinet appointments ever made.

No-one should have any doubt, IMO, that the Republicans are a menace to democracy and all American values.

Debate in the Senate is being silenced. How long before the USA becomes Russia, or Syria?

McConnell is a smooth operator. I can't believe he's so naive as to think that this would not result in free PR for Warren. This is some mighty strange king making. One theory would be, the GOP want Warren to stand for PotUS election in 2020.

'
Is doing something to a high profile blue idiot which drums up massive support from other wannabe high profile blue idiots good for so-called liberals who seem to control the Democratic party PR wise?

(02-08-2017, 04:29 PM)David Horn Wrote: [ -> ]

(02-08-2017, 01:05 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: [ -> ]I can't see any confirmation on google news that Sessions wasn't confirmed for AG. We'll see I guess. But Drump seems to get anything he wants from the Republicans.

Bernie read the letter; that's good. I guess their behavior toward Elizabeth did backfire then, if Bernie got away with reading it. Or else, they find it easier to "impugn" a woman than a man??

The entire EW takedown may be an orchestrated attempt to move her to the front of the line for 2020.  Trump has always believed he can beat her easily.  Of course, HRC thought that about The Donald, and we know how that turned out.

Let see, she identified herself as a native American until a DNA test proved that she wasn't native American at all. Who isn't viewed as a blue dip shit these days?

(02-08-2017, 02:35 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: [ -> ]

Quote:--& you know this how? Comey never said the charges were false & distorted. He just chose not to reccommend prosceution. Not that Lynch was gonna proscecute anyhow

The charges were false. Not going there again; been over it thoroughly.

--iow you don't have a source..

Eric Wrote:

Quote:I never said (he) got screwed over by the DNC bcuz (he) didn't.  DNC pimped her all the way & we are stuck with the Donald as a result

I said "she" I meant "he" is what you said. No his (Bernie's) loss is not "as a result" of the DNC. Yes the DNC was against him; it didn't make any difference. Been over it already.

 -- you were trying to imply that l was bringing up the hildabitch. I wasn't. That was you.  Personally l wish she'd fall into a black hole so that ppl like you would just forget about her & stop whining about her to the rest of us.

To recap: X was wondering where our 21 century George Washington is. I have seen in other threads ppl wondering where our Roosevelt is.  I say he got sabotaged. To bring it in line with S&H: we had a chance last yr to have our own Washington/Roosevelt. The DNC shut him down. Not only that they "elevated" (their term) the Donald so that he would be the repug candidate.  So yeah, they stuck us with the Donald. & as a result this 4T is heading down a different path.

Those are facts. In black & white. Read the damn emails instead of argueing with me & anybody else here who mentions them.