Posts: 10,013
Threads: 103
Joined: May 2016
07-12-2016, 05:34 PM
(This post was last modified: 07-12-2016, 05:36 PM by Eric the Green.)
(07-12-2016, 04:49 PM)Marypoza Wrote: (07-12-2016, 01:11 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: I hope some Bernie people get on the Hillary bangwagon, as Bernie wants us to do. You won't, and I'm not sure about me yet entirely; but although she has shortcomings, Hillary has real talent and vision, and she can do the job; although the Republicans will do all they can to sabotage her. But they have done that to ALL the Democratic presidents since they lost their entitlement on the White House. They smear them, and abuse them, and block them, and it's up to the people now to "move on" and shove the Repugs out of the way so the nation can do its business.
-- the DNC cheated, fixed elections, engaged in voter suppression, to keep Bernie from becoming the nominee. Why Bernie is giving all that a pass I don't know, but then he is an Artist. I am not & imho, to vote for the DNC's Annointed One is to approve their tactics & they'll do it again & again & again. Soooo don't vote 4 the Annointed One. Besides Jill is a much better candidate
That's all false. Nothing the DNC could have done, would have altered the result. It would have taken far more "cheating" than happened to accomplish that, and Bernie knows it.
Quote:Quote:I understand that Stein feels the need to slander Hillary as unfairly as the Repugs do, but it's unbecoming. If she gets some extra votes, she'll have to pull them away from the Hill. But she may lose mine that way. She needs to push the Green platform, instead of trying to boost her vote total at the expense of the Lady who is the only one that can do the job now as president.
How is Jill slandering the Hildabitch?
Stein is saying she should be indicted, even though she didn't break the law. That puts her on the same level as that snake Ryan. She calls her a liar and all the other things the Repugs say. Just like you insult her.
That doesn't make her a better candidate. Bernie didn't ever stoop that low, although he flirted with doing it sometimes. He knows which side of the aisle is better.
The Democratic platform is much more progressive now, almost like the Green. Bernie accomplished a lot in shifting Hillary's views, and the two worked together. Stein has a lot of the right ideas. But she has no sense of what's possible to accomplish, and speaks as if change were easy. She actually opposed the Affordable Care Act because it wasn't good enough. Bernie was not that foolish; he helped write it. They both agree, as do I, that single payer is better. But something is better than nothing or going backwards. Stein has much less experience and background for the job than Hillary or even Johnson. That's a consideration too. Hillary voted wrong on Iraq, but that was 13 years ago, and she didn't start the war. Right now Stein's foreign policy is less balanced than Hillary's. It's easy just to knock everything America does. It's harder to do what Hillary does, and think things out. So I'm leaning toward Hillary now, where I was leaning Stein before, but I won't decide or donate for a while yet. I'm still very much a Green.
Posts: 868
Threads: 3
Joined: May 2016
07-12-2016, 06:07 PM
(This post was last modified: 07-12-2016, 06:08 PM by Marypoza.)
(07-12-2016, 05:34 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: (07-12-2016, 04:49 PM)Marypoza Wrote: (07-12-2016, 01:11 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: I hope some Bernie people get on the Hillary bangwagon, as Bernie wants us to do. You won't, and I'm not sure about me yet entirely; but although she has shortcomings, Hillary has real talent and vision, and she can do the job; although the Republicans will do all they can to sabotage her. But they have done that to ALL the Democratic presidents since they lost their entitlement on the White House. They smear them, and abuse them, and block them, and it's up to the people now to "move on" and shove the Repugs out of the way so the nation can do its business.
-- the DNC cheated, fixed elections, engaged in voter suppression, to keep Bernie from becoming the nominee. Why Bernie is giving all that a pass I don't know, but then he is an Artist. I am not & imho, to vote for the DNC's Annointed One is to approve their tactics & they'll do it again & again & again. Soooo don't vote 4 the Annointed One. Besides Jill is a much better candidate
That's all false. Nothing the DNC could have done, would have altered the result. It would have taken far more "cheating" than happened to accomplish that, and Bernie knows it.
Quote:Quote:I understand that Stein feels the need to slander Hillary as unfairly as the Repugs do, but it's unbecoming. If she gets some extra votes, she'll have to pull them away from the Hill. But she may lose mine that way. She needs to push the Green platform, instead of trying to boost her vote total at the expense of the Lady who is the only one that can do the job now as president.
How is Jill slandering the Hildabitch?
Stein is saying she should be indicted, even though she didn't break the law. That puts her on the same level as that snake Ryan. She calls her a liar and all the other things the Repugs say. Just like you insult her.
That doesn't make her a better candidate. Bernie didn't ever stoop that low, although he flirted with doing it sometimes. He knows which side of the aisle is better.
The Democratic platform is much more progressive now, almost like the Green. Bernie accomplished a lot in shifting Hillary's views, and the two worked together. Stein has a lot of the right ideas. But she has no sense of what's possible to accomplish, and speaks as if change were easy. She actually opposed the Affordable Care Act because it wasn't good enough. Bernie was not that foolish; he helped write it. They both agree, as do I, that single payer is better. But something is better than nothing or going backwards. Stein has much less experience and background for the job than Hillary or even Johnson. That's a consideration too. Hillary voted wrong on Iraq, but that was 13 years ago, and she didn't start the war. Right now Stein's foreign policy is less balanced than Hillary's. It's easy just to knock everything America does. It's harder to do what Hillary does, and think things out. So I'm leaning toward Hillary now, where I was leaning Stein before, but I won't decide or donate for a while yet. I'm still very much a Green.
-- Hillary is still too warlike for me. She was behind destabilizing Syria & we see what a mess that turned out to be. The FBI said she was "extremely careless".. & she wants to run with the nuclear football? Uh no.
She's against single payer- that's a dealbreaker right there- & will doubtless flip back on TPP, considering her operatives vetoed anti TPP planks in the party's platform. Yes Bernie got some concessions, but the real stuff, the stuff that actually counts- no.
As for Jill, she's simply not pulling her punches the way Bernie was. But then Jill's no Artist either. Also, as I've told you before, I'm playing a longer game than this election. I want to see the Greens get their 5 or 10%- whichever it is. With Fric & Frac running we all know a clown is gonna get in the White House so voter turnout is gonna be low. All the more easier for the Greens to hit critical mass . Already the Bernie groups I know of are switching over to Jill, altho the official Dexit won't be until after the Convention. Look how far Bernie got without any help ftom the media or the DNC, if these groups organize for Jill just imagine what they can do for her.
Stick with Jill Eric, this is the yr to vote Green 
 my 2 yr old Niece/yr old Nephew 2020
Posts: 10,013
Threads: 103
Joined: May 2016
07-12-2016, 06:51 PM
(This post was last modified: 07-12-2016, 06:58 PM by Eric the Green.)
(07-12-2016, 06:07 PM)Marypoza Wrote: -- Hillary is still too warlike for me. She was behind destabilizing Syria & we see what a mess that turned out to be.
Repeating lies does not make your case. Assad is behind the destabilizing of Syria; no-one else. Hillary at least has some plans to deal with it. Too many lefties just say whatever America does is wrong and leave it at that. NO, it's not that simple. Sometimes people rise up for their rights and their dictators shoot them down. This is Planet Earth; it happens.
Quote: The FBI said she was "extremely careless".. & she wants to run with the nuclear football? Uh no.
So were Rice and Powell then. She sent emails about sensitive issues to her colleagues, but nowadays hacking has become more dangerous so that practice can't be allowed any more.
Quote:She's against single payer- that's a dealbreaker right there- & will doubtless flip back on TPP, considering her operatives vetoed anti TPP planks in the party's platform. Yes Bernie got some concessions, but the real stuff, the stuff that actually counts- no.
Bernie said she moved on health care. How do you know she wouldn't be for single payer, if she thought she could get it? Hillary has some sense of the possible. If her operatives put anti-TPP into the platform, that's good. It seemed like a good policy, what they arrived at. If the platform requires conditions for approval which can't be met, then that's the same as opposing it, as she said she would again in her speech with Bernie today.
Quote:As for Jill, she's simply not pulling her punches the way Bernie was. But then Jill's no Artist either. Also, as I've told you before, I'm playing a longer game than this election. I want to see the Greens get their 5 or 10%- whichever it is. With Fric & Frac running we all know a clown is gonna get in the White House so voter turnout is gonna be low. All the more easier for the Greens to hit critical mass . Already the Bernie groups I know of are switching over to Jill, altho the official Dexit won't be until after the Convention. Look how far Bernie got without any help from the media or the DNC, if these groups organize for Jill just imagine what they can do for her.
Stick with Jill Eric, this is the yr to vote Green
That's understandable. In the long term the Greens might be players. I am a registered Green, so I didn't even vote for Bernie, since that's not allowed in CA, but for Stein. So, we'll see what I decide.
It might be ironic for me, having voted Green every year since 1996, if this is "the year to vote Green," and I vote Democratic again? Because I like Hillary, while lots of leftie folks don't?
Posts: 1,402
Threads: 17
Joined: May 2016
(07-12-2016, 06:07 PM)Marypoza Wrote: Quote: She's against single payer- that's a dealbreaker right there- & will doubtless flip back on TPP, considering her operatives vetoed anti TPP planks in the party's platform. Yes Bernie got some concessions, but the real stuff, the stuff that actually counts- no.
Yeah, I know. Rags can get real cynical about TPP and knows that Hillary will get that thing enacted. However, one can make like a fat cat and buy ciggie stocks and Monsanto. Those stocks will go through the roof with TPP. Just imagine Phillip Morris taking the entire tobacco settlement to binding arbitration and winning. The states will have to pay every cent plus interest of the settlement right back. As for Monsanto, they'll get the green light to GMO the whole planet. So yeah, there's money to be made, but the same arbitration goes for coal companies and their product is just plain filthy. I think my medical bills will go sky high when all the anti pollution laws get scrapped. And yes, my medical bills will go sky high because we'll have some half baked "reform" that leaves health insurance companies alone to grift along with Big Pharma.
Quote:As for Jill, she's simply not pulling her punches the way Bernie was. But then Jill's no Artist either. Also, as I've told you before, I'm playing a longer game than this election. I want to see the Greens get their 5 or 10%- whichever it is. With Fric & Frac running we all know a clown is gonna get in the White House so voter turnout is gonna be low. All the more easier for the Greens to hit critical mass . Already the Bernie groups I know of are switching over to Jill, altho the official Dexit won't be until after the Convention. Look how far Bernie got without any help ftom the media or the DNC, if these groups organize for Jill just imagine what they can do for her.
Stick with Jill Eric, this is the yr to vote Green
Jill's pretty much the only option. I don't want cyanide [Clinton], or arsenic [Trump].
---Value Added 
Posts: 10,013
Threads: 103
Joined: May 2016
I thought you liked Poison.
Posts: 1,216
Threads: 29
Joined: May 2016
I refuse to vote for the Greens because they are full of ignorant technophobes.
#MakeTheDemocratsGreatAgain
Posts: 10,013
Threads: 103
Joined: May 2016
07-13-2016, 11:24 PM
(This post was last modified: 07-13-2016, 11:26 PM by Eric the Green.)
No technophobe Greens in Silicon Valley, of course; not among ones I know; they tend the opposite way. Stein is a medical doctor; technophia not likely, especially when green energy technology is top priority. However, the Greens I know tend to be more-often open to conspiracy theories like 9-11 truth, and tend to knock everything America does in foreign policy. So that does give me some pause these days, and prevented me from voting for a local Green candidate recently.
Posts: 10,013
Threads: 103
Joined: May 2016
HEY! Bernie or bust folks. Listen to Seth! Now! lol
https://youtu.be/f-_WrdCRkXQ
Posts: 10,013
Threads: 103
Joined: May 2016
Bernie: not too old to run again?
Posts: 868
Threads: 3
Joined: May 2016
my 2 yr old Niece/yr old Nephew 2020
Posts: 10,013
Threads: 103
Joined: May 2016
That's good. He has a good physical background as an athlete in youth; he is quite robust and may crack the high hard ceiling of agism. With his 14-5 horoscope score, he might be a good challenger to Trump's 8-4 score. It would be a very close election since the new moon before election favors the incumbent, and Republicans win the electoral vote if they win the popular vote. I know my prediction might fail, and I would be biased in favor of Bernie, so Galen calls it crap. But in fact, no prediction about human events can always work. Human behavior is not mechanistic, as Galen and other silly materialists like him think. So astrology can't be always right, and it hasn't been studied by smart people until recently, so it's really a new field, despite its ancient traditions.
The patterns I mention are not just arbitary rules; they were based on patterns with a long consistent history. But they are nowhere near as regular as physical patterns, like predicting the astronomical events which astrology is based on. As Obama said, his prediction was right that the Sun would rise on Nov.9. But predicting human behavior is another thing entirely. And good astrologers have a better record than pundits do. You know all the things I have predicted over the years; the bigger things I got right. I always had some trouble with elections though, until recently.
But, old as he is, Bernie does well on my horoscope point system. Trump is mediocre, compared to modern presidents, but his score was higher than almost all of his creepy Republican opponents and the Democratic nominee too. I don't think I would be able now to honestly predict based solely on astrology who would win in 2020, if Bernie and Donald are the candidates. The signs would conflict, as they did in 2016. I would have to discover other patterns, or test out others that were suggested to me by other astrologers who predicted Trump would win.
Posts: 868
Threads: 3
Joined: May 2016
(11-11-2016, 04:20 AM)Eric the Green Wrote: That's good. He has a good physical background as an athlete in youth; he is quite robust and may crack the high hard ceiling of agism. With his 14-5 horoscope score, he might be a good challenger to Trump's 8-4 score. It would be a very close election since the new moon before election favors the incumbent, and Republicans win the electoral vote if they win the popular vote. I know my prediction might fail, and I would be biased in favor of Bernie, so Galen calls it crap. But in fact, no prediction about human events can always work. Human behavior is not mechanistic, as Galen and other silly materialists like him think. So astrology can't be always right, and it hasn't been studied by smart people until recently, so it's really a new field, despite its ancient traditions.
The patterns I mention are not just arbitary rules; they were based on patterns with a long consistent history. But they are nowhere near as regular as physical patterns, like predicting the astronomical events which astrology is based on. As Obama said, his prediction was right that the Sun would rise on Nov.9. But predicting human behavior is another thing entirely. And good astrologers have a better record than pundits do. You know all the things I have predicted over the years; the bigger things I got right. I always had some trouble with elections though, until recently.
But, old as he is, Bernie does well on my horoscope point system. Trump is mediocre, compared to modern presidents, but his score was higher than almost all of his creepy Republican opponents and the Democratic nominee too. I don't think I would be able now to honestly predict based solely on astrology who would win in 2020, if Bernie and Donald are the candidates. The signs would conflict, as they did in 2016. I would have to discover other patterns, or test out others that were suggested to me by other astrologers who predicted Trump would win.
-- l have to agree, Bernie is in good health, & medicene has been increasing life expectancy into the 90s & even the triple digits. So even @ age 79, if his health remains good another presidential run isn't out of the question, esp if the political climate is similar to what it is today, making him still relevant. Besides, it'll be "his turn" 
Astrology is not exact, there's a reason it's called the Art of Astrology. But #s don't lie. You yourself said no candidate with her shitty #s ever got elected. hell she would never have made it thru the primaries if the DNC hadn't been rigging it. Stick with your #s next time around
my 2 yr old Niece/yr old Nephew 2020
Posts: 10,013
Threads: 103
Joined: May 2016
(11-11-2016, 10:18 AM)Marypoza Wrote: (11-11-2016, 04:20 AM)Eric the Green Wrote: That's good. He has a good physical background as an athlete in youth; he is quite robust and may crack the high hard ceiling of agism. With his 14-5 horoscope score, he might be a good challenger to Trump's 8-4 score. It would be a very close election since the new moon before election favors the incumbent, and Republicans win the electoral vote if they win the popular vote. I know my prediction might fail, and I would be biased in favor of Bernie, so Galen calls it crap. But in fact, no prediction about human events can always work. Human behavior is not mechanistic, as Galen and other silly materialists like him think. So astrology can't be always right, and it hasn't been studied by smart people until recently, so it's really a new field, despite its ancient traditions.
The patterns I mention are not just arbitary rules; they were based on patterns with a long consistent history. But they are nowhere near as regular as physical patterns, like predicting the astronomical events which astrology is based on. As Obama said, his prediction was right that the Sun would rise on Nov.9. But predicting human behavior is another thing entirely. And good astrologers have a better record than pundits do. You know all the things I have predicted over the years; the bigger things I got right. I always had some trouble with elections though, until recently.
But, old as he is, Bernie does well on my horoscope point system. Trump is mediocre, compared to modern presidents, but his score was higher than almost all of his creepy Republican opponents and the Democratic nominee too. I don't think I would be able now to honestly predict based solely on astrology who would win in 2020, if Bernie and Donald are the candidates. The signs would conflict, as they did in 2016. I would have to discover other patterns, or test out others that were suggested to me by other astrologers who predicted Trump would win.
-- l have to agree, Bernie is in good health, & medicene has been increasing life expectancy into the 90s & even the triple digits. So even @ age 79, if his health remains good another presidential run isn't out of the question, esp if the political climate is similar to what it is today, making him still relevant. Besides, it'll be "his turn"
Astrology is not exact, there's a reason it's called the Art of Astrology. But #s don't lie. You yourself said no candidate with her shitty #s ever got elected. hell she would never have made it thru the primaries if the DNC hadn't been rigging it. Stick with your #s next time around
What I said was that both candidates has more shitty numbers than any candidate since Herbert Hoover, and Trump had better numbers, but Taft did get elected in 1908 with only slightly better numbers than Hillary, so it was possible for her to win, and she narrowly missed. And the rigging was a myth that didn't happen. And believing that myth has cost us dearly indeed. Other Democrats, whether Establishment or voters, simply didn't know Bernie well enough or were scared that he was a socialist. They thought a more moderate candidate than Bernie had a better chance in right-wing Amerikkka. They had a point.
But I agree, it's his turn, and if he runs, then the nonsense about him being too far left has to be knocked out of the way completely and utterly. If we can elect a blatant racist and woman-hater and bully and unrepentant corporate trickle-downer and warrior on our environment as our president, then he needs to face someone who takes no prisoners from the other side.
The Democratic Party Establishment will have to eat crow for nominating yet another Democratic candidate who has such poor persuasion skills. Bernie is a leader, and Obama is a leader, and her husband is a leader too; she is not. We have to get serious and support the right policies, with no compromise this time. If he's up to it, then it will be our job to nominate someone with cajones and authenticity who can stand up to the bully, and be a real leader who can draw as big a crowd as the Liar in Chief and inspire them. That's Bernie Sanders. It's time to strike back unrelentingly with everything we got. Fight to the death if necessary.
If Bernie can't make it, then we'll have to settle for Liz, and probably lose. Or another Clinton clone like the current governor of Virginia, who has better numbers. But win or lose, we have to fight. It will bear fruit in the long, long run, if we as humans are destined to evolve and not die off. We'll see.
Posts: 10,013
Threads: 103
Joined: May 2016
11-15-2016, 12:46 AM
(This post was last modified: 11-15-2016, 01:09 AM by Eric the Green.)
That's good, Mr. X.
Just remember that the classic right's trickle-down economics, self-reliance memes are loud dog whistles for racial resentment. Reaganomics has been dominant and voted for for 40 years and counting, largely because enough white people don't want to give other ethnic groups "freebees," as they call them. Trump told them to "go home to mommy; get a job!" This is classic racist George Wallace rhetoric. The alt-right and classic right are one thing. Trump and Pence are their representatives, and see how they are working together. Classic Right Pence is choosing Alt-Right Trump's cabinet. That's no accident at all. At bottom they are the same movement in every respect. Supposed differences are surface deep. The Tea Party/Freedom Caucus and the Alt-Right are virtually indistinguishable, and both classic and alt-right themes dominate it. Note how quickly Ted Cruz got on board the Trump bandwagon. That's no accident, Mr. X.
Posts: 10,013
Threads: 103
Joined: May 2016
11-15-2016, 01:00 AM
(This post was last modified: 11-15-2016, 01:05 AM by Eric the Green.)
(11-14-2016, 12:21 PM)X_4AD_84 Wrote: (11-11-2016, 04:20 AM)Eric the Green Wrote: That's good. He has a good physical background as an athlete in youth; he is quite robust and may crack the high hard ceiling of agism. With his 14-5 horoscope score, he might be a good challenger to Trump's 8-4 score. It would be a very close election since the new moon before election favors the incumbent, and Republicans win the electoral vote if they win the popular vote. I know my prediction might fail, and I would be biased in favor of Bernie, so Galen calls it crap. But in fact, no prediction about human events can always work. Human behavior is not mechanistic, as Galen and other silly materialists like him think. So astrology can't be always right, and it hasn't been studied by smart people until recently, so it's really a new field, despite its ancient traditions.
The patterns I mention are not just arbitary rules; they were based on patterns with a long consistent history. But they are nowhere near as regular as physical patterns, like predicting the astronomical events which astrology is based on. As Obama said, his prediction was right that the Sun would rise on Nov.9. But predicting human behavior is another thing entirely. And good astrologers have a better record than pundits do. You know all the things I have predicted over the years; the bigger things I got right. I always had some trouble with elections though, until recently.
But, old as he is, Bernie does well on my horoscope point system. Trump is mediocre, compared to modern presidents, but his score was higher than almost all of his creepy Republican opponents and the Democratic nominee too. I don't think I would be able now to honestly predict based solely on astrology who would win in 2020, if Bernie and Donald are the candidates. The signs would conflict, as they did in 2016. I would have to discover other patterns, or test out others that were suggested to me by other astrologers who predicted Trump would win.
I predict the 2018 midterm will be similar to 2006. There are many non-partisan people who either sat out the 2016 election or stupidly got sucked into voting for Trump. I doubt they will be loyal. Fatigue will set in early and some of the backlash will never stop.
It's possible, I hope; at least in the House in 2018, though not the Senate, which can't be switched until 2020. I'm not predicting it, or not predicting it.
In recent years, because of the dominance of the Reagan memes ("less government, lower taxes"), it has only been Democratic presidents who have lost the congress in their second year; Republican presidents lose it in the 6th year, as is normal.
Quote:That will set the stage for a strong challenge from the main stream left in 2018. That in turn will set the stage for a true challenge to Trump from the Left in 2020. I also predict that the GOP will still fragment. There is a well schooled minority within the GOP who have never accepted, and will never accept Trump. Now that Bannon is named Chief Strategist, that will only grow in consequence. The Alt-Right is not all of the Right. So, in addition to a strong 2020 challenge from the Left, there will also be a challenge from within the GOP. Or some other new party of the Right.
The minority in the GOP who never accepted Trump is very tiny indeed. Trump got virtually all the GOP vote.
In 2020 I'm sure if Trump is unpopular enough to lose the general election, that he will have a primary challenge beforehand. Not that it would consist of anyone who would attract anyone on the Left. Someone like McMullin. It would likely fail and most GOPPERS would come back to Trump, because they are GOPPERS and that's what they do. But maybe a few more will not. Primary challenges, if strong enough, can sometimes be one of Lichtman's keys that cost an incumbent party the White House.
One time this happened, the roles were reversed. The Alt-Right's Pat Buchanan challenged Classic Right's Bush I in 1992, and Classic Right Bush I lost the general election. It was probably one of Lichtman's keys. But Sanders' challenge to Hillary Clinton was not considered a key.
Posts: 10,013
Threads: 103
Joined: May 2016
There's is virtual 100% virtual certainty that McCain is right. But it's all pretty much already happened. Assad is such a monster, that honestly I think NATO should have just taken him out and been done with it before the Russians even got involved. But now it's up to the states in the Middle East and Europe to try to find safe zones for the Syrians and rescue them as they escape. We have abdicated our responsibility, so it's up to them.
Posts: 10,013
Threads: 103
Joined: May 2016
(11-15-2016, 12:12 PM)X_4AD_84 Wrote: You see the actual overall 2016 vote numbers (e.g. D + R)? Overall turn out sort of sucked. Lower than 2012, which was lower than 2008. Many GOPers sat it out. As did many Dems. Or if they voted, they put no vote for President and only voted down ballot. I know some people who did that. Not my way of doing things, but to each their own.
Although I didn't buy the crap that Hillary was corrupt, I always felt that for some people it would be hard to get motivated to support Hillary. Her horoscope score was low. Her mixed record, mostly by association with her husband, but especially her lack of personal charisma and showmanship, or even authenticity, meant that the American peoples' natural desire for a strong, authoritarian leader would prevail.
It may be like, well, she wasn't black, so the blacks didn't come out. Kind of reminds me of that famous poem about who's left to come after me, after I let them come after all the other groups. Now we've got someone in office who will come after people.
Posts: 868
Threads: 3
Joined: May 2016
(11-14-2016, 12:21 PM)X_4AD_84 Wrote: (11-11-2016, 04:20 AM)Eric the Green Wrote: That's good. He has a good physical background as an athlete in youth; he is quite robust and may crack the high hard ceiling of agism. With his 14-5 horoscope score, he might be a good challenger to Trump's 8-4 score. It would be a very close election since the new moon before election favors the incumbent, and Republicans win the electoral vote if they win the popular vote. I know my prediction might fail, and I would be biased in favor of Bernie, so Galen calls it crap. But in fact, no prediction about human events can always work. Human behavior is not mechanistic, as Galen and other silly materialists like him think. So astrology can't be always right, and it hasn't been studied by smart people until recently, so it's really a new field, despite its ancient traditions.
The patterns I mention are not just arbitary rules; they were based on patterns with a long consistent history. But they are nowhere near as regular as physical patterns, like predicting the astronomical events which astrology is based on. As Obama said, his prediction was right that the Sun would rise on Nov.9. But predicting human behavior is another thing entirely. And good astrologers have a better record than pundits do. You know all the things I have predicted over the years; the bigger things I got right. I always had some trouble with elections though, until recently.
But, old as he is, Bernie does well on my horoscope point system. Trump is mediocre, compared to modern presidents, but his score was higher than almost all of his creepy Republican opponents and the Democratic nominee too. I don't think I would be able now to honestly predict based solely on astrology who would win in 2020, if Bernie and Donald are the candidates. The signs would conflict, as they did in 2016. I would have to discover other patterns, or test out others that were suggested to me by other astrologers who predicted Trump would win.
I predict the 2018 midterm will be similar to 2006. There are many non-partisan people who either sat out the 2016 election or stupidly got sucked into voting for Trump. I doubt they will be loyal. Fatigue will set in early and some of the backlash will never stop.
That will set the stage for a strong challenge from the main stream left in 2018. That in turn will set the stage for a true challenge to Trump from the Left in 2020. I also predict that the GOP will still fragment. There is a well schooled minority within the GOP who have never accepted, and will never accept Trump. Now that Bannon is named Chief Strategist, that will only grow in consequence. The Alt-Right is not all of the Right. So, in addition to a strong 2020 challenge from the Left, there will also be a challenge from within the GOP. Or some other new party of the Right.
-- this is partly why l'm blase about the Donald winning. The Senate @ least should flip come the midterms. Hopefully, the Dems will get their act together by 2020 & run a decent candidate. lt's painfully obvious they were playing this yr, & judging by the aftermath, they still are. We need to elect Berniecrats
my 2 yr old Niece/yr old Nephew 2020
Posts: 10,013
Threads: 103
Joined: May 2016
11-16-2016, 07:53 PM
(This post was last modified: 11-16-2016, 08:03 PM by Eric the Green.)
(11-16-2016, 07:19 PM)Marypoza Wrote: (11-14-2016, 12:21 PM)X_4AD_84 Wrote: (11-11-2016, 04:20 AM)Eric the Green Wrote: That's good. He has a good physical background as an athlete in youth; he is quite robust and may crack the high hard ceiling of agism. With his 14-5 horoscope score, he might be a good challenger to Trump's 8-4 score. It would be a very close election since the new moon before election favors the incumbent, and Republicans win the electoral vote if they win the popular vote. I know my prediction might fail, and I would be biased in favor of Bernie, so Galen calls it crap. But in fact, no prediction about human events can always work. Human behavior is not mechanistic, as Galen and other silly materialists like him think. So astrology can't be always right, and it hasn't been studied by smart people until recently, so it's really a new field, despite its ancient traditions.
The patterns I mention are not just arbitary rules; they were based on patterns with a long consistent history. But they are nowhere near as regular as physical patterns, like predicting the astronomical events which astrology is based on. As Obama said, his prediction was right that the Sun would rise on Nov.9. But predicting human behavior is another thing entirely. And good astrologers have a better record than pundits do. You know all the things I have predicted over the years; the bigger things I got right. I always had some trouble with elections though, until recently.
But, old as he is, Bernie does well on my horoscope point system. Trump is mediocre, compared to modern presidents, but his score was higher than almost all of his creepy Republican opponents and the Democratic nominee too. I don't think I would be able now to honestly predict based solely on astrology who would win in 2020, if Bernie and Donald are the candidates. The signs would conflict, as they did in 2016. I would have to discover other patterns, or test out others that were suggested to me by other astrologers who predicted Trump would win.
I predict the 2018 midterm will be similar to 2006. There are many non-partisan people who either sat out the 2016 election or stupidly got sucked into voting for Trump. I doubt they will be loyal. Fatigue will set in early and some of the backlash will never stop.
That will set the stage for a strong challenge from the main stream left in 2018. That in turn will set the stage for a true challenge to Trump from the Left in 2020. I also predict that the GOP will still fragment. There is a well schooled minority within the GOP who have never accepted, and will never accept Trump. Now that Bannon is named Chief Strategist, that will only grow in consequence. The Alt-Right is not all of the Right. So, in addition to a strong 2020 challenge from the Left, there will also be a challenge from within the GOP. Or some other new party of the Right.
-- this is partly why l'm blase about the Donald winning. The Senate @ least should flip come the midterms. Hopefully, the Dems will get their act together by 2020 & run a decent candidate. lt's painfully obvious they were playing this yr, & judging by the aftermath, they still are. We need to elect Berniecrats
That's why I am NOT blase about The Donald winning. The Senate CANNOT flip in 2018, because 10 Democrats are up for re-election in red states! Only 2 Republicans in blue or purple. Because a supreme court justice might die or resign. Because after 40 years people have not learned to ditch Reaganomics. Because scientists say global warming disaster is not reversible after 4 years from now.
Posts: 1,402
Threads: 17
Joined: May 2016
(11-15-2016, 03:10 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: There's is virtual 100% virtual certainty that McCain is right. But it's all pretty much already happened. Assad is such a monster, that honestly I think NATO should have just taken him out and been done with it before the Russians even got involved. But now it's up to the states in the Middle East and Europe to try to find safe zones for the Syrians and rescue them as they escape. We have abdicated our responsibility, so it's up to them.
Uh, what would you have replaced Assad with? Minor details like that matter you know.
---Value Added
|
