Talk:Main Page/Archive index/188

From Conservapedia
Jump to: navigation, search

This page is for discussion only of Main Page content and feature items. For discussion of other issues relating to the Conservapedia community please see: Conservapedia:Community Portal


Which inevitable loser of the 2020 presidential campaign will win the Democrat presidential primary?

See also 2020 presidential election
Candidates for Democratic Presidential Nominee Who will win?
Chance of becoming
Democratic nominee
Candidate CA
End of
End of
End of
End of
End of
End of
End of
End of
End of
V. Pres Joe Biden Bid DE 28.5% 20.2% 23.6% 18.0% 19.2% 22.0% 29.9% 28.8% 33.1%
Mayor Michael Bloomberg Blo NY 7.3% 6.6% 14.1% 8.7%
Mayor Pete Buttigieg But IN 11.1% 8.3% 6.1% 5.1% 9.8% 17.4% 10.3% 2.7%
Rep. Tulsi Gabbard Gab HI 2.5% 1.4% 1.4% 1.4% 1.3% 0.7% 0.4% 0.3% 0.2%
Sen. Kamala Harris Har CA 12.5% 27.4% 10.8% 4.3% 1.8% 2.1%
Sen. Amy Klobuchar Klo MN 0.8% 0.7% 0.6% 0.5% 1.0% 1.7% 2.4% 1.1%
Sen. Bernie Sanders San VT 11.2% 7.5% 13.4% 7.8% 7.5% 11.5% 21.1% 37.2% 48.3%
Sen. Elizabeth Warren War MA 15.9% 21.5% 31.5% 46.7% 43.7% 18.9% 16.4% 6.5% 1.4%
Sec'y Hillary Clinton Cli NY 1.7% 1.5% 2.0% 5.7% 6.1% 5.3% 3.8% 3.0% 2.2%
Andrew Yang Yan NY 5.5% 3.3% 4.0% 4.4% 3.0% 3.1% 2.8% 1.5%
Candidates for Democratic Presidential Nominee Who will win?
Twitter followers
Candidate CA
as of
V. Pres Joe Biden Bid DE   03.6M:1 +19,000 +64,000 +45,000 +145,000 +27,000 +63,000 +133,000 +152,000
Sen. Cory Booker Boo NJ 04.4M:2 +28,000 +39,000 +9,000 +29,000 +6,000 +13,000
Mayor Pete Buttigieg But IN 01.2M:2 +72,000 +101,000 +26,000 +63,000 +34,000 +29,000 +41,000
Rep. Tulsi Gabbard Gab HI 00.6M:2 +34,000 +118,000 +27,000 +168,000 +11,000 +38,000 +25,000 +24,000
Sen. Kamala Harris Har CA 03.6M:2 +245,000 +119,000 +48,000 +109,000 +32,000
Rep. Beto O'Rourke O'R TX 01.4M:1 +4,000 +116,000 +24,000 +35,000
Sen. Bernie Sanders San VT 17.8M:2 +134,000 +264,000 +93,000 +286,000 +108,000 +155,000 +521,000 +845,000
Sen. Elizabeth Warren War MA 07.8M:2 +225,000 +273,000 +137,000 +289,000 +70,000 +77,000 +200,000 +295,000
Sec'y Hillary Clinton Cli NY 24.7M:1 +316,000 +123,000 +322,000 +83,000 +147,000 +549,000 +206,000
Andrew Yang Yan NY 00.5M:1 +48,000 +90,000 +29,000 +54,000 +152,000

My gut instinct was correct: Bernie is probably going to win the Democratic primary

The Trump impeachment effort appeared to have backfired and merely increased Trump's fundraising and damaged Biden as it highlighted the corruptness of Joe Biden and Hunter Biden.

I knew that the unlikeable ex-prosecutor Kamala Harris was dead on arrival.

And now Bernie is surging. And given the leftward breeze of the Democrats, I wouldn't be surprised if Bernie won. I thought early on in the process that Bernie would probably win. The 2007/2008 financial crisis and its aftereffects is fueling populism. And Bernie is a leftist populist.

If Bernie keeps rising in support, the big question is whether or not Obama is going to step in and try to sabotage Bernie Sanders. Obama indicated he will step in and try to thwart Sanders if he feels Sanders has a decent chance to win the Democrat primary.Conservative (talk) 20:53, 31 January 2020 (EST)

Looking like Bernie right now; the DNC establishment is betting the farm on Bloomberg to stop him. RobSDe Plorabus Unum 02:48, 3 February 2020 (EST)
Bernie is getting a bit too big for his boots in the Democrat Party. Hypocrites like Obama, Bloomberg and the DNC itself will surely try to shut him down, since they have profited from capitalism despite denouncing it previously. Let's face it, nobody in the Establishment likes him. Our growing economy has made it obvious that Bernie's socialism will get him nowhere in the general, and nowhere in the future. --LawfulLibertarian (talk) 23:22, 8 February 2020 (EST)
IMO, the fact Sanders canceled his Democratic party registration after his 2016 loss and re-registered last year is all you need to know about what's going on. Sanders is no friend of Democrats, has always opposed it, and has since time immemorial sought to destroy it. RobSDe Plorabus Unum 16:55, 12 February 2020 (EST)
It's not Klobuchar, but Bloomberg who is now reaching dizzying new heights. For a brief few minutes Bloomberg had reached Bernie's level in the polls, even if the shock of it caused Bernie to bounce back up again and Bloomberg to bounce down. I don't know if Conservative's prediction is safe anymore. VargasMilan (talk) Saturday, 03:16, 15 February 2020 (EST)
In the last four hours, the gap has doubled to six percentage points between Bloomberg and Bernie. Wow. VargasMilan (talk) Saturday, 08:35, 15 February 2020 (EST)
Everybody is rushing to the camp where Biden wins South Carolina too, even though RobS predicted it would be a two-man race by then: Bernie and Bloomberg. VargasMilan (talk) Saturday, 12:23, 15 February 2020 (EST)
Amazing what $60 billion can buy? Commie libs looking to a racist sexist RINO to save them from a racist sexist RINO after the racist sexist RINO corrupted and destroyed democracy in the Democrat party. RobSDe Plorabus Unum 13:53, 15 February 2020 (EST)
I placed an embarrassing amount of money that Biden would not be one of the two competitors in South Carolina. Thankfully, I starting getting vivid pictures of alternative scenerios and reduced it to 80 bucks. All the losings goes to the University, but Biden is already 12 points ahead with Bloomberg on record having NO chance of winning. So how about a better prediction for the nomination? I don't want them to name a fountain after me. VargasMilan (talk) Saturday, 20:45, 15 February 2020 (EST)
We have to see how Blacks vote in South Carolina March 3; will they get on the Bernie bus? the Klobuchar bubble? or forgive Bloomberg's fascist tendencies? Maybe they will revive Biden's corpse or bend over for Bootyboy, two unlikely scenarios. Or even reward Warren for hijacking affirmative action programs to propel herself and her career. Whatever, the alleged "winner" will have a plurality. Nobody has momentum. Some people will pay attention to the delegate count, but the likelihood of rigging the Superdelegate scenario becomes more realistic. Pay attention to what Tulsi says about Tom Perez between now and the convention (whether she stays in or drops out). RobSDe Plorabus Unum 21:27, 15 February 2020 (EST)
Another factor working against a clear Democrat frontrunner is the DNC's abandonment of "winner-take-all" in favor of "proportional representation". This change was made largely for cosmetic purposes (after the 2020 Florida recount and hardened by the 2016 popular vote win and anti-electoral college movement). The Superdelegate trump-card held by DNC insiders can nullify proportional representation in a heartbeat in coming months. RobSDe Plorabus Unum 22:24, 15 February 2020 (EST)

My gut instinct was wrong. Bernie Sanders may be "cheated" out of the Democratic nomination

I watched a few minutes of the 2020 Democratic debate in Nevada. Bernie Sanders is the only candidate who thinks the nominee with the most delegates should win the primary contest. All the others want the process (which includes the super delegates) to work out. The super delegates voting in the second round could decide who wins the primary and they may go with the more moderate candidate and/or the one with more money. In short, Bloomberg.

The PERSONAL ELECTABILITY INDEX model, which has predicted every election since 1996, predicts the more outgoing, confident and alpha/dominant a candidate is, the higher the likelihood they will be elected. This points to Sanders or Bloomberg winning the Democratic primary and not Amy Klobucher or Pete Buttigieg winning the Democratic primary.

Anyway you slice it, a sizable portion of the Democrats may not be happy with the result. There will not be a civil war in the party due to the external threat of Trumpism, but there may be people sitting out who didn't get their way.

It looks like Trumpslide 2020 since the GOP has more party unity and Trump has more machismo! Olé! Olé! Olé!Conservative (talk) 00:45, 20 February 2020 (EST)

Predicting who the Democrats pick is hard. Bloomberg is not a good cultural fit with the Democrats given his: comments about his stop and frisk policies; his misogyny; his elitist comments about farmers and his arrogance/complacency. He seems out of step with today's populism. On the other hand, many believe Bernie Sanders is unelectable because he is a Democratic socialist with a communist sympathizer past and the Democrats want to someone who is electable.
And it seems like the other Democrat contenders don't have the fundraising ability of Sanders/Bloomberg so they will be blown out of the water by Trump's enthusiastic supporters and sizable campaign chest. Trump will have a good get out the vote operation and money for web/TV/etc. promotion. On top of this, the economy is good and Trump got many good things accomplished.
After all is said and done, the Democrats are in a very tough situation that they probably cannot overcome when it comes to the 2020 presidential race.Conservative (talk) 02:13, 20 February 2020 (EST)
The Democratic party is not now, nor has it ever been, 'democratic'. I came to this realization in 1975 after the resignation of Richard Nixon and toyed with the idea of leaving the GOP. RobSDe Plorabus Unum 08:30, 21 February 2020 (EST)

Roberts won't read Ciaramella question

The refusal of Chief Justice John Roberts to read a question from U.S. Senator Rand Paul shows that he is a deeply compromised man: "Read The Question About Eric Ciaramella That Chief Justice John Roberts Just Refused To Read." Roberts is the guy who appointed the FISA judges who approved the Carter Page warrant. Page had long worked with the FBI, so it's unlikely that they ever really thought he was Russian spy. The purpose of the warrant was to legitimize surveillance of the Trump campaign in 2016. As a CIA employee, Ciaramella is supposed to be working for the president. Paul wondered why he was instead plotting impeachment with the House staff long before impeachment hearings began. Every first year journalism major is taught that a news story should tell the reader "who, what, where, when, why, and how." Yet the mainstream media refuses to name the guy behind the impeachment effort or to explain why he is pushing it. PeterKa (talk) 20:55, 30 January 2020 (EST)

Either Roberts has no backbone or he leans towards the establishment or both. That he voted for ObamaCare and legislated from the bench in order to call it a tax, points to him being spineless and lacking character. Conservative (talk) 21:02, 30 January 2020 (EST)
What it likely means is Roberts is enforcing an agreement between McConnell and Schumer on trial rules - that Ciaramella's name cannot be mentioned in any context. What concession Schumer agreed to for this item is unknown, but it doesn't really matter since it has become increasingly obvious the Pelosi/Nadler/Schiff Articles were designed to fail.
As a procedural point, if Republicans forced a ruling on the matter (being that they hold all the cards), Roberts would loose. That's why it is likely part of agreed upon rules. RobSDe Plorabus Unum 22:21, 30 January 2020 (EST)
The impeachment trial, like the Electoral College, stacking the SCOTUS, abolishing the 1st, 2nd, 4th and 5th Amendments, is just part of the Democrats War on the Constitution (War on Freedom) that Democrats intend to brainwash juveniles with as to why the Constitution needs to be abolished, the Republican Party outlawed, and the need for a single party state. RobSDe Plorabus Unum 22:30, 30 January 2020 (EST)
I think the constitution is redundant today—barring Trump of course, you can see how sensitive the government already is to all the diverse complaints made by every conceivable interest group! But the system under the constitution is broken. If we could only listen to the lectures of our moral betters and disarm the citizenry, I really believe in my heart that we could give Venezuela a run for the money!
In fact, stubbornly clinging to the constitution in spite of the counsel of wise progressives is probably the cause of half of all the arguments that go on these days. These are the result of legitimate grievances and not a scheme to derive a benefit, because they couldn't possibly profit anyone. I mean in this country.
And how could anyone be against progress? You don't get to define progress, but we'll let you take your turn later. True, no one knows how radical leftism rematerialized and was put in charge, but who's going to be concerned about something as minor as that? Like I said, we'll let you take your turn later.
Maybe we can watch and learn who gets their turn first. We need look no further than the order of those hopping onto the civil rights gravy train much to the surprise of the American descendants of slaves for whom the civil rights benefits were supposed to be intended! These descendants of slaves must notice, that while these newcomers are undeserving, you might not know it from their faces, alternately looking sad and threatened, maybe making calls for a photo-op with the anti-gun lobby to kill two birds with one stone.
RobS says Democrats intend to brainwash our youth into believing radical views on issues, but that's ridiculous—thanks to our schools, they don't even understand the issues in the first place! Not that they need to if they simply imitate the tone of these newly minted civil rights leaders when they volunteer to express their feelings. Our longtime black communities should be grateful—it's not like they're calling themselves American heroes or anything. At least not yet. VargasMilan (talk) Friday, 04:31, 31 January 2020 (EST)
If Donald Trump is going to have more of a lasting impact, he will need to create more school choice pre-college/university which he is doing via Betty DeVos.
But Trump also needs to cut off the federal funding for useless college majors which indoctrinate students into cultural Marxism, leftism, identity politics, etc. College students are forced into taking useless classes and the federal government is subsidizing it via college loan program. The reason young people are Bernie Sanders supporters is due to the 2007/2008 financial crisis awakening leftist populism, but it is also due to indoctrination in the American school system.Conservative (talk) 07:06, 31 January 2020 (EST)
The world is changing faster than we can type. Coronavirus is the final nail in the globalist coffin. Travel bans are a matter of national security (supported by SCOTUS). What is not being reported is the Chinese people blame the communists and the government for the corona outbreak and mishandling of the crisis. Just as Chernobyl was the death knell of the CPSU, Corona may be the death knell of the CCP. RobSDe Plorabus Unum 09:33, 31 January 2020 (EST)

Brexit: "communists take another hit"

The British Communist Party, like the British Socialist Party, has been consistently anti-EU. Come on, a little due diligence - or checking with British conservapedians - won't hurt and it will save face. Rafael (talk) 19:20, 31 January 2020 (EST)

It refers to the commie dominated EU & Commission. RobSDe Plorabus Unum 19:26, 31 January 2020 (EST)
Wrong again. Like crime in a multistorey carpark, wrong on many levels. As User:Conservative correctly asserts, there is a wave of nationalist populism sweeping Europe so the countries aren't communist. The commission consists of nominees chosen by the governments of the member states, so the commission isn't communist. The largest bloc in the EU Parliament is the right to centre right European People's Group so the Parliament isn't communist. The EU was originally set up, and continues, to facilitate and promote the free flow of capital so their policies aren't communist. Perhaps you meant the euro-communist movement of the 1980s that represented a move from hard left to liberalism and died in its sleep in the early 90s? Rafael (talk) 03:15, 1 February 2020 (EST)
Yeah, about that... Writing in The Spectator (London) of 5th February 2000 John Laughland, in regards to the European Union, stated that "The West is now on the verge of achieving that of which Lenin and Trotsky dreamed in 1917. For the point is not to replace nation states with a European or world superstate. It is instead to achieve the old Marxist dream of abolishing statehood altogether". Pokeria1 (talk) 08:49, 1 February 2020 (EST)
[promoted by VM] Was Winston Churchill a Marxist? Rafael (talk) 11:11, 1 February 2020 (EST)
Never said that Winston Churchill was a Marxist, and quite frankly, he at least realized Stalin was NOT to be trusted to his credit. However, that doesn't mean he can't have been duped into supporting Communist policies while under the impression that they're anti-communist. America fell for that bit as well, where communists posed as anti-communists. Case in point, John McCloy's policies were advertised as being formed to fight the communists via the UN, yet in reality, he knew full well they'd aid the Communist cause and in fact designed them as a perfect trojan horse to aid them, and he was so good at his lying that even Ronald Reagan got tricked by him. Pokeria1 (talk) 15:12, 1 February 2020 (EST)
That's a lot of supposition, analogy and dicky inference to avoid primary evidence that the EU was not and is not a communist project. This isn't a competition. The facts are not negotiable. Personally, I believe it's better to be proven wrong and learn than to stubbornly persist in error but, hey, that's just me.
At a tangent, the leading British voice proposing to keep Stalin at bay - and pushing for a broad transatlantic post-war alliance - was Ernest Bevin, a socialist. Condoleeza Rice wrote her PhD thesis on him. Rafael (talk) 15:57, 1 February 2020 (EST)
[promoted by VM] Laughland wrote another article pointing out Communist ties to the EU, this one dated in 2009, and, well, he does cite a variety of sources at least, some of which came from the likes of Marx and Engels. [2]. And quite frankly, here's my idea of socialists. It could be Stalin, Hitler, or Bevin, doesn't matter who, all socialists and communists need to be wiped out of this planet, and the reason why is because all socialists and communists, as early back as the French Revolution, made it their number one goal to push atheism and more importantly exterminating not just Christianity, but any and all religions just for the "crime" of even existing in the first place. Pokeria1 (talk) 16:04, 1 February 2020 (EST)
EDIT: Also, might as well quote from New Republic's June 5, 2017 issue regarding McCloy for you to get a better understanding of what I was getting at regarding Communists posing as anti-Communists. It's on page 38, to be more specific, under the article The UN Founding and Founders:
John J. McCloy, known as the "chairman of the American establishment," was an insiders' insider. He was chairman of the CFR (from 1953-1970), chairman of the Chase Manhattan Bank, chairman of the Ford Foundation, assistant secretary of war, U.S. high commissioner for Germany, and president of the World Bank, as well as being friend and advisor to nine U.S. presidents, from Franklin Roosevelt to Ronald Reagan.

And yet McCloy, the quintessential wealthy Wall Streeter, was like so many others among the CFR elites, strangely friendly with communist dictators and supportive of communists and communist movements here in the United States. Max Holland, contributing editor to The Wilson Quarterly, reported in the Autumn 1991 issue of that journal that "In a May [1946] memo, FBI head J. Edgar Hoover warned the Truman Administration of an 'enormous Soviet espionage ring in Washington … with reference to atomic energy,' and identified McCloy along with Dean Acheson and Alger Hiss, as worrisome for 'their pro-Soviet leanings.'"

After all, it was McCloy who, two years earlier, as assistant secretary of war, approved an order permitting Communist Party members to become officers in the U.S. Army. He defended identified communist John Carter Vincent and supported J. Robert Oppenheimer after the scientist was denied a top security clearance. It was also McCloy who organized the U.S. Arms Control and Disarmament Agency for President Kennedy and who, together with Soviet counterpart Valerian Zorin, drew up the 1961 Freedom From War surrender plan that proposed to transfer all U.S. armaments, including the private arms of American civilians, to the United Nations.

However, McCloy, who was well versed in the dark arts of deception, learned early on that he could use anti-communist rhetoric to sell pro-communist schemes. He observed that a good way to assure a viewpoint gets noticed and wins approval is to cast it in terms of resisting the spread of communism. "People sat up and listened when the Soviet threat was mentioned," he once remarked. Allen and John Foster Dulles, Dean Acheson, Dean Rusk, Averell Harriman, Robert McNamara, and many other CFR "wise men" learned this lesson well, and regularly claimed their policies were aimed at fighting communism, when they were instead helping the communists.

During the war, McCloy and his fellow CFR globalists paved the way and drew up the plans for the organization that would become the United Nations. And in the postwar years they carried their schemes to fruition. What was the result? The United Nations became one of the most important vehicles for promoting communism and socialism worldwide.

We have space here for only one example that demonstrates, only seven years after its founding, where the UN was going. In 1952, Senator James O. Eastland summed up findings of an investigation by the Senate Committee on the Judiciary into "Activities of U.S. Citizens Employed by the UN." Senator Eastland stated:

I am appalled at the extensive evidence indicating that there is today in the UN among the American employees there, the greatest concentration of Communists that this Committee has ever encountered…. These people occupy high positions. They have very high salaries and almost all of these people have, in the past, been employees in the U.S. government in high and sensitive positions.
How did all of these communist agents and subversives get into those "high and sensitive positions?" Recalling his official government service, McCloy once remarked: "Whenever we needed a man we thumbed through the roll of the Council members and put through a call to New York."
Emphasis mine. If we Americans, even anti-Communist Cold Warriors like Reagan who ought to know better, could get snookered into promoting pro-Communist policies under the impression that we were supporting anti-Communist policies via McCloy, there's a good chance the British were similarly snookered as well. Pokeria1 (talk) 17:17, 1 February 2020 (EST)
EDIT 2: Can someone help me try to get the above into a block quote? Despite trying to do so, it doesn't format properly. Pokeria1 (talk) 17:22, 1 February 2020 (EST)
This being the 75th Anniversary of everything post-1945, Russia yesterday declassified documents on the Yalta Conference (in Crimea). Amazing, they seem to be willing to take more pride in founding the UN than contemporary American commie libs. RobSDe Plorabus Unum 18:16, 1 February 2020 (EST)
That kind of observation only encourages people who already know that the first Secretary-General of the U.N., Alger Hiss, was a secret communist. Everybody else thinks, "yeah, it got corrupted later, but why are conservatives always against international co-operation altogether?" VargasMilan (talk) Saturday, 19:45, 1 February 2020 (EST)
Another example of historical revisionism from Russian television: MSM Revising WW2 History: Auschwitz Was Liberated by Americans & Ukrainians, Not Russians! RobSDe Plorabus Unum 18:20, 3 February 2020 (EST)
[promoted by VM] Interesting that the USSR did not veto the UN Resolution to send troops to North Korea in 1950; perhaps it is just the sort of revisionism that is routine today in the West.
Incidentally, besides Hiss, "there were at least 16 high-level communists in the US delegation" to the UN organizing conference, "among whom were Harry Dexter White, Victor Perlo, Frank Coe, Lauchlin Currie," [3] Nathan Gregory Silvermaster and William Ludwig Ullman. RobSDe Plorabus Unum 20:46, 1 February 2020 (EST)
[demoted by VM] I remember learning that about Korea in junior high school. But wasn't that because the U.S.S.R. was boycotting the U.N. altogether, and not because they were against the brutal communist dictatorship in China? VargasMilan (talk) Saturday, 22:40, 1 February 2020 (EST)
Right. That's the point. Those weren't "U.S. troops" in Korea, they were "U.N. troops" (Russia could have vetoed the Resolution). Watch the video linked above - Putin's Russia NOW is taking credit for founding the U.N. and keeping global peace for 75 years - something Putin critics aren't ready to credibly dispute. RobSDe Plorabus Unum 22:50, 1 February 2020 (EST)
Well, technically, Russia boycotted the UN outright during that time (apparently they learned from their mistake afterward). And quite frankly, the fact that Putin's Russia is taking credit for founding the UN should reinforce why founding that Marxist organization was a mistake. And quite frankly, had I been in Putin's position and truly anti-Communist, I'd outlaw Communism to such an extent that I'd get rid of ALL icons relating to it, including Lenin's tomb (in fact, I'd probably make sure Lenin's corpse is hanging from a street lamp from that day forward), have all Communists arrested and shot, basically rendered Communism extinct, with no memory other than the fact that it was a very evil organization, and we'd also restore the Tsar specifically to ensure Marxism was completely exterminated. If Putin actually cared about restoring Russia, he'd make sure to extoll the glories of Tsarist Russia and NOT try to praise Stalin. And yes, I'm MORE than certain that Putin's still a Communist, especially given some choice statements and actions made by him. Pokeria1 (talk) 04:53, 2 February 2020 (EST)
[promoted by VM] I would imagine the Russians turning the site of the Yalta Conference in the Crimea into a shrine and tourist trap emphasizes the Russian role in keeping peace in Europe for 75 years. The symbolism can't be forgotten or shrouded in Ukrainian anti-Russian propaganda which has gripped Washington and the Democrat party. RobSDe Plorabus Unum 06:12, 2 February 2020 (EST)
Keeping peace? They constantly tried to turn Europe and the world into a Communist dictatorship, and there's plenty of evidence currently that Putin STILL attempts to bring about Communism right to this day. Were it ME in their position, I'd demand that we shut down the UN, even explicitly remove Russia from their UN status, take out all Communism to such an extent that the word is literally banned except for historical purposes (and even there, painted in such a horrific light no one would even DARE consider doing so), ban Communists, and even have them mass-executed. And just as an FYI, I don't need to look at Ukrainian propaganda to know this much about Putin still adhering to Communism, Putin himself more than gave his intentions away by even comparing Lenin's relics to Christian tenants (which, BTW, the Russian Orthodox Church, the ones not under Putin's control anyway, took exception to). Not to mention the Democrats only are cynically pushing anti-Russian propaganda in an attempt to paint Trump as a Russian stooge when that's obviously not true (Hillary Clinton did more stooging for Russia during the 2016 elections than Trump ever did). Pokeria1 (talk) 09:23, 2 February 2020 (EST)
[promoted by VM] Nuclear war in Europe? I must've missed that. Russia is communist? No, Western communists hate Russia and demonize Putin cause he doesn't glorify anal and lesbian sex. RobSDe Plorabus Unum 14:50, 2 February 2020 (EST)
If Russia wasn't communist anymore, they would have taken down Lenin's tomb, and in fact, hung Lenin's corpse from a street lamp where he'd be pecked at by crows, taken down Marx's statue at Teatralyana Square, outlawed the Communist party to such an extent that anyone identified as being a Communist party member is automatically lined to a wall and shot, and they certainly won't still be glorifying Stalin or comparing Lenin's relics to Christian doctrine. And don't think for one second that just because Putin doesn't glorify anal and lesbian sex doesn't mean he's any less of a communist, or for that matter they don't love Putin. Stalin didn't either (let's not forget that homosexuals tended to be thrown in the gulags under Stalin's Russia), nor did Che Guevara and Fidel Castro for that matter (same deal with Cuba's labor camps), yet Western Communists absolutely LOVED those guys, not to mention they weren't any less communist (saying Putin is not a communist just because he's slightly to the right of, say, Soros, is like saying Stalin wasn't a communist simply because he was slightly to the right of, say, Trotsky). Actually, if anything, I'm being consistently anti-Communist, to the extent that I want ALL forms of communism completely and totally destroyed, and replaced with a Christian Empire ruled by God alone. Pokeria1 (talk) 15:48, 2 February 2020 (EST)
So you'll be voting for Sanders? Only a Nazi would oppose Stalin. RobSDe Plorabus Unum 15:59, 2 February 2020 (EST)
[promoted by VM] Absolutely not. I'm voting for the same person I voted in 2016. Trump. And even in 2016, Sanders was NEVER one of my choices for the 2016 election (it was in fact Ben Carson who was my first choice). Not to mention, use common sense, do you REALLY think someone who wants to destroy Communism, replace it with a revived Christian Empire where God alone was in charge, and outlaw Communism, would even THINK about voting for Sanders? Absolutely not! In fact, if anything, I'd want Sanders dead precisely BECAUSE he wanted to kill off Christians via his communist ideology. And no, I'm no Nazi either, and if anything, I'd treat Hitler the same way I'd treat Stalin, put a bullet in BOTH their brains. If anything, I'm more of a Patton. Pokeria1 (talk) 16:05, 2 February 2020 (EST)
Ben Carson? that commie stooge? George Papadopoulos came from Carson's staff. RobSDe Plorabus Unum 16:12, 2 February 2020 (EST)
[promoted by VM] Since when was Ben Carson a commie stooge? If anything, he was anti-communist as even Conservapedia noted, not to mention against gay marriage and abortion. In fact, his anti-abortion stance and religious views are PRECISELY the reason why I have immense respect for the guy since middle school. Not to mention I'm extremely doubtful Trump would have even hired him into his cabinet if Carson was partly responsible for that collusion hoax. Pokeria1 (talk) 16:15, 2 February 2020 (EST)
"if anything, I'd want Sanders dead precisely BECAUSE he wanted to kill off Christians" - What happened to turning the other cheek? RobSDe Plorabus Unum 16:34, 2 February 2020 (EST)
We turned the other cheek with Voltaire, Diderot, Sade, Rousseau, Marx, Engels, and all of those guys quite a bit, too much if you ask me, not to mention we if anything repeatedly capitulated to their most radical demands, and our turning the other cheek just emboldened them to eventually lop our heads off. So no, I don't intend to turn the other cheek, lest I end up exactly like Beast when HE turned the other cheek to Gaston, especially after Beast let Belle go. Better to have the Crusades version of Christianity instead of the Christianity that's willing to just let illegal immigrants cross over and rape our countries on a silver platter, and in fact, God told us to go and spread the gospel to the four corners of the world, not kneel down and let the world beat us to death. Pokeria1 (talk) 16:46, 2 February 2020 (EST)
We're supposed to convert the world, kinda like Trump has converted the Republican party. Not exterminate them, which is a leftist solution. RobSDe Plorabus Unum 17:08, 2 February 2020 (EST)
Make no mistake, I most certainly would prefer converting the world over exterminating them. Unfortunately, especially thanks to Antonio Gramsci and Anita Dodd with their having Communists infiltrating the church via conversions, I cannot trust conversions right now (and that's DESPITE converting from Episcopalian to Catholicism at an early age myself), seeing it as only a means to infiltrate the church and destroy it from within. Heck, the fact that a Communist in all but name like Francis is currently Pope only reinforces my current views on conversion right now. Pokeria1 (talk) 17:17, 2 February 2020 (EST)
The church is "wherever two or more are gathered in my name", nothing more. The rest is politics. And Episcopalianism is Catholicism. RobSDe Plorabus Unum 18:06, 2 February 2020 (EST)
No, the church is literally stated to have been founded by Peter at Jesus's behest. "You are the rock upon which I shall found my church." It's not politics at all. Also, Episcopalianism isn't Catholicism. If anything, it's Protestantism. Pokeria1 (talk) 18:39, 2 February 2020 (EST)
Protestantism is catholicism also, a gentile church. Technically, the eglesia or called out ones came out of Egypt (strangers sojourned with Israel at that time, too). But the original church could not enter in because of their lack of faith (failure to believe God) and their carcasses fell in the wilderness. Peter headed the Jewish church, not the gentile church. RobSDe Plorabus Unum 18:46, 2 February 2020 (EST)
No, he did NOT helm the Jewish church. In fact, the Jewish people tried to slaughter Peter and the early Christians (and Paul, back when he was known as Saul, was especially eager to kill Christians until Jesus literally shattered his closed heart at Damascus via a lightning bolt), and the Jewish people who DID convert renounced their Jewish identity (that's also part of the reason why circumsition was not practiced in Christian communities, with Peter and Paul even explicitly forbidding it.). The Gospels themselves make this clear, as did the Catechism. Pokeria1 (talk) 19:01, 2 February 2020 (EST)
Galatians 2:7 the gospel of the uncircumcision was committed unto me [Paul], as the gospel of the circumcision was unto Peter; RobSDe Plorabus Unum 20:58, 2 February 2020 (EST)

Hitler, he only had one...

Hasn't Harvey Weinstein suffered enough? "Weinstein Accuser Says He Has No ███████" PeterKa (talk) 08:25, 1 February 2020 (EST)

The disinherited

As I strived for a top job in my vocation, I made deliberate choices to always be politically correct, choose the right fashion accessories, status symbols and lifestyle trends and signal the virtue of my social justice consciousness. Now Trump comes along, and it seems as if all the personal loyalty I gave up was for something that never really mattered or amounted to anything (e.g. Trump's thriving while having a garish second White House in Mar-a-lago that isn't even legal). What is a middle-class striver like me to do? If only he could have paused a moment and accepted our norms...instead of shattering them. (h/t @CityBureaucrat @MysteryGrove) VargasMilan (talk) Saturday, 19:30, 1 February 2020 (EST)

Face facts: Trump is a Visionary who was even ahead of his Republican colleagues. Trump's vision of America and the world transcends partisanship, party, race, creed, gender, sexual preference, national, ethnic, species and planetary origin. RobSDe Plorabus Unum 20:52, 1 February 2020 (EST)
Big, if true. (h/t @freddoso) VargasMilan (talk) Saturday, 22:24, 1 February 2020 (EST)

Impeachment saga approaches a climax

For the past three years, Washington has remained focused on impeachment regardless of what might be happening in the rest of the world. This obsession has its origin in the last stages of the 2016 election campaign. Liberals became convinced that Hillary was going to win. Was her chance of winning 98 percent (Nate Silver) or 99 percent (Huffington Post)? That type of debate was the mainstream media's idea letting both sides have their say. Even if Trump won the popular vote, he would be blocked by the "Blue Wall" in the Electoral College. This fatuous certainty led to a decline in turnout in Blue Wall states like Wisconsin, and thus possibly to Trump's election.

According to the book Shattered, Hillary staffers Robby Mook and John Podesta decided as soon as they knew the election result that they weren't taking the fall. They would blame Russia. On inauguration day, the Washington Post`s headline was "The campaign to impeach President Trump has begun." When the Russia hoax ran out of gas, the Dems moved on to Ukraine. The Ukraine issue opened in October with a flood of stories claiming that those listening to the July Trump-Zelensky call were "alarmed" and "appalled" by what they heard. Adam Schiff or whoever orchestrated this must have thought that Trump would never release the transcript of the call. When it was released, it was hard to see what all the fuss was about. Trump asked for Ukraine's cooperation in various investigations, as he has every right to do under the "Treaty with Ukraine on Mutual Legal Assistance in Criminal Matters." There was no "blackmail," at least not in the call itself, nor was there anything in the transcript about fabricating dirt on the Bidens. Yet these claims remain central to the impeachment effort.

During the 2016 campaign, Obama sicced the FBI on Trump. He even met personally with agents Peter Strzok and Lisa Page to find out about "everything we've been doing." From the Horowitz report, it seems that the FBI knew almost from the beginning that the claim of a Trump-Russia connection was nonsense. The FBI traced the "pee-pee tape" and other Steele Dossier claims back to American businessman Segei Millian, who told them they were made "in jest." Millian had no inside track to the Kremlin or even a Russia connection. What he had was some Belarussian friends and an imagination. To the mainstream media, nothing Obama did compares to the "scandal" of Trump asking the president of Ukraine to investigate how Joe Biden's ne'er do well son managed to score big. In short, the impeachment effort has always been about getting back at "deplorable" America and overturning an election. PeterKa (talk) 02:01, 2 February 2020 (EST)

I have yet to read anything on Boris Johnson's role in all this. As British foreign secretary, he was the cabinet member responsible for intelligence when the Steele Dossier was produced. With Stefan Halper, Joseph Mifsud, and the rest, an awful lot of the plotting against Trump was based in Britain. In the impeachment trial, the Dems have announced the standard of, "The president can't ask foreign countries for help against domestic political opponents." Obama didn't know about this rule, and I doubt he followed it. PeterKa (talk) 03:15, 2 February 2020 (EST)
Excellent summary. Which leads to almost a philosophical examination of the difference between liberals and conservatives.
Liberals take the initiative. Conservatives are reactive. Thus we have impeachment. Liberals knew the Horowitz report would expose fraud. The FISA Court has ruled the Mueller investigation illegal, and a host of other developments (Flynn, Biden, etc. etc). Liberals have once again taken the initiative to control the narrative - Trump has been impeached is their only election year issue (not counting free stuff). Very similar to the ethics complaint Schiff filed against Nunes in March 2017, derailing the HPSCI investigation for months, or a host of other examples (including Crossfire Hurricane, etc. etc.) Who cares that at Don Jr's Trump Tower meeting, that FusionGPS was being paid by the Russian lawyer as well as Hillary and the DNC? It's all moot so long as you can stay one step ahead of the false narrative that you yourself generated.
The latest now is, there was no Senate Trial and the Republican Senate is engaged in a coverup. Get used to it. This is all you will hear for the next ten months in addition to Schiff continuing impeachment proceedings in the House.
A problem, as I see it, is taking commie lib bait laid out in the fake news media. Best to ignore it, and more importantly, seize the initiative and mold our own narratives on events.
As to Bojo, watch a few minutes of this: MI6 Throws Christopher Steele Under the Bus (Bojo about 7 mins in). The whole program actually is quite funny. RobSDe Plorabus Unum 03:37, 2 February 2020 (EST)
Trump's impeachment saga never had a climax. It was dead on arrival. It had terrible television ratings - especially compared to Nixon's impeachment and Bill Clinton's impeachment. It was a yawn fest and even some of its participants were having a hard timing staying awake. I would rather watch paint dry rather than watch the proceedings.
I do like watching Jay Sekulow and Alan Dershowitz though because they are intelligent and can be educational. The Democrats were clowns though- especially Adam Schiff and Jerry Nadler. Watch this: Tensions flare between Schiff, Nadler during impeachment trial.Conservative (talk) 18:47, 2 February 2020 (EST)
Philbin stole the show. He's got a great career ahead of him. RobSDe Plorabus Unum 20:44, 2 February 2020 (EST)

According to the House managers, the standard for impeachment should no longer be "treason, bribery, and other high crimes and misdemeanors," but rather "You can't ask a foreigner for help against a domestic rival." This view has some interesting consequences if you try to apply it historically:

  • Just prior to the 1968 election, President Lyndon Johnson announced a breakthrough in the Paris peace talks with North Vietnam. Since this "breakthrough" wasn't followed up after the election, the obvious conclusion is that it was a stunt and that Johnson had conspired with the North Vietnamese to help Vice President Hubert Humphrey and disadvantage Richard Nixon. In recent years, the Dems have dealt with this issue by claiming that the missed peace was all Nixon's fault since he sent Anna Chennault to talk to President Nguyen Van Thieu in Saigon the South Vietnamese ambassador. South Vietnamese President Nguyen Van Thieu was a man with his own foreign ministry and his own intelligence service. The idea that he would have no way of knowing what was going on in American politics unless Chennault explained it to him is a bit silly.
  • In 1983, U.S. Senator Ted Kennedy wrote a letter to Soviet leader Yuri Andropov asking for help in his upcoming election campaign against President Ronald Reagan. This letter was found in the Soviet archive at the end of the Cold War and was published in the British press. No one in the American press ever asked Kennedy about it. In fact, nothing on this subject appeared in the U.S. until 2009, when Kennedy's obituaries were published.
  • Since Christopher Steele, author of the Steele dossier, was a British intelligence agent, candidate Hillary Clinton (who paid him) and President Barack Obama (who allowed the FBI to use the dossier) both fell afoul of the House managers' standard. PeterKa (talk) 00:30, 3 February 2020 (EST)
  • Lyndon Johnson illegally wiretapped a political rival, Richard Nixon's conversations with Anna Chennault and Madam Chiang Kai-shek - an impeachable offense. RobSDe Plorabus Unum 12:07, 3 February 2020 (EST)
  • Alexandra Chalupa visited the Ukraine embassy in June 2016 to dig up dirt on Trump campaign manager Paul Manafort while on the DNC payroll. [4]
  • Eric Ciaramella hosted Ukraine officials at the Obama White House with DOJ & FBI officials on January 19, 2016 to request opening an investigation into Paul Manafort and killing the Hunter Biden investigation. RobSDe Plorabus Unum 01:47, 3 February 2020 (EST)
  • Russian oligarch Oleg Deripaska was the Primary Sub-source for Christopher Steele. [5]
  • Andrew McCabe solicited Oleg Deripaska in September 2016 to help frame Donald Trump as the Carter Page FISA warrant was being prepared. [6] RobSDe Plorabus Unum 01:54, 3 February 2020 (EST)
  • FusionGPS boss Glenn Simpson was hired and paid by Russian lawyer Natalia Veselnitskaya.
  • Ukrainian parliamentarian Serhiy Leshchenko provided anti-Trump dirt to Glenn Simpson and FusionGPS. RobSDe Plorabus Unum 02:06, 3 February 2020 (EST)
We're certainly not starved for examples, are we? VargasMilan (talk) Monday, 21:21, 3 February 2020 (EST)
LBJ has a good claim to being our most corrupt president ever. When he was president, the left hated him. Now they are stuck defending every sleazy thing he did. Why? Because those who defend Nixon argue that LBJ did everything Nixon was accused of, only worse. Today's left argues that LBJ should have charged Nixon under the Logan Act. Unknown to the public at the time, the Johnson administration routinely surveiled "political rivals" ranging from Martin Luther King to Nixon. That would certainly have complicated any prosecution. PeterKa (talk) 07:07, 4 February 2020 (EST)
LBJ is a good example of historical revisionism. While the contemporary narrative is that Nixon committed treason being in contact with the "China lobby" (Madam Chaing kai-shek, Claire Chenault), revisionists ignore LBJ's impeachable offense of spying and wiretapping a political opponent - which only justifies Nixon's and Obama's conduct. RobSDe Plorabus Unum 11:23, 15 February 2020 (EST)

End of the road for Joe Biden?

Electable Joe may be underwater in Iowa and New Hampshire, but he can count on the black vote in the South. Or can he? Only yesterday, Biden supporters promised a "long fight" and that "Joe Biden is anything but doomed." That case is harder to make today: "Holy Cow: The Latest South Carolina Poll Is a Total Disaster for Joe Biden as His Firewall Crumbles." Nothing beats seeing the media's favorite candidates (Warren and Biden) kicked in the teeth! PeterKa (talk) 20:08, 2 February 2020 (EST)

The Des Moines Register`s pre-caucus Iowa poll is a much-anticipated tradition. But this year, the newspaper won't be releasing it: "Des Moines Register Fails to Release Its Historic Poll, Bernie Supporters Are Not Amused." Many suspect the unpublished poll shows Sanders beating Biden by too wide a margin. Sanders is four points ahead of Biden in the RCP average. PeterKa (talk) 20:42, 2 February 2020 (EST)
Biden's not needed anymore.
  • Zelensky election was April 21st, 2019.
  • Joe Biden announces his run for office April 25th, 2019.
  • WaPo publishes As vice president, Biden said Ukraine should increase gas production. Then his son got a job with a Ukrainian gas company. [7] on July 23rd, 2019.
  • Impeachment 1.0 collapses with Robert Mueller testimony on July 24th, 2019.
  • Trump-Zelensky phone call July 25th, 2019. "A lot of people are saying...."
  • Adam Schiff hires Sean Misko. Misko and Ciaramella meet secretly afterward on July 26, 2019.
  • Biden aide Ciaramella files whistleblower complaint August 12, 2019.
Biden was never a serious candidate. Biden posed as a "political rival" to set up Deep State coup 2.0. RobSDe Plorabus Unum
Dem establishment are rigging the process before our very eyes. Biden is dead meat. NAACP wants Klobuchar out two days before Iowa. Bootyboy gets stiffed by the Des Moines Register a day before caucuses. Bloomberg. who gave $100 to Congressional candidates last year to buy the House, is the go-to guy to stop a Sanders/Gabbard/AOC hostile takever. RobSDe Plorabus Unum 22:47, 2 February 2020 (EST)
Biden odds of winning nomination: June 26, 2019, 28.5%; February 3, 2020, 28.6%. VargasMilan (talk) Monday, 02:37, 3 February 2020 (EST)
Biden might win a brokered convention. But if that happens, many Bernie Bros will probably not bother voting.Wikignome72 (talk) 07:53, 3 February 2020 (EST)
Biden won't last that long. He'll be gone before Super Tuesday. By South Carolina it will be a two man race. RobSDe Plorabus Unum 11:59, 3 February 2020 (EST)
Sidenote: this would be a textbook case for someone investing in a political futures market: you have confidence in your unique knowledge and would perform a valuable service by lowering the expected odds of the rise of an individual who is likely to either financially benefit or disadvantage a great number of people, who can then hedge their risk. That is, of course, if it were worth your while to begin with to do so in a what is a rather small market. VargasMilan (talk) Monday, 13:10, 3 February 2020 (EST)
  • The canceled Des Moines Register poll is said to have put Sanders at 22 percent, Warren 18 percent, Buttigieg 16 percent, and Biden trailing with 13 percent.[8] PeterKa (talk) 19:57, 3 February 2020 (EST)
Basically, after Iowa and New Hampshire (Feb. 11), it's a two man race. Sanders and Bloomberg. RobSDe Plorabus Unum 20:13, 3 February 2020 (EST)

Limbaugh hit

See Fox News. VargasMilan (talk) Monday, 15:36, 3 February 2020 (EST)

Limbaugh is the poster child for liberalism now. If we had single payer, he'd be put in front of a death panel because of his age. With income inequality, he couldn't buy his way out of lung cancer. He proves God exists and answers liberal prayers, suffering a slow agonizing death. RobSDe Plorabus Unum 16:48, 3 February 2020 (EST)
Your observations, though cryptically and ironically stated, are not wrong. The disregular centralized control of single-payer (government-controlled) medical practice could be exploited to dispatch (or extort from or warn away) politically-inconvenient people. VargasMilan (talk) Monday, 17:00, 3 February 2020 (EST)
That's what's happening in socialist China right now. Due to the shortage of test kits and trained personnel, socialist death panels are sorting out who gets tested and treated, sending home infected people to infect their families. RobSDe Plorabus Unum 17:13, 3 February 2020 (EST)
Okay, am I missing something regarding a Limbaugh hit? I don't get Fox News except for local stations on Sundays, so I have no frame of reference. Pokeria1 (talk) 17:32, 3 February 2020 (EST)
They have a website, right? VargasMilan (talk) Monday, 18:24, 3 February 2020 (EST)
You never answered my story problem:

[Question for Pokeria

If only two percent of the delegates of the 1934 XVII Communist Party Congress returned to the 1939 XVIII Party Congress, the other 98% having been executed or shipped to the gulag by Stalin, is it fair to say at that point that Communism was whatever Stalin said it was?
Search Duckduckgo with "Ship of Theseus" if you're not sure. VargasMilan (talk) Wednesday, 06:04, 11 December 2019 (EST)] VargasMilan (talk) Monday, 21:39, 3 February 2020 (EST)
To answer your question, considering that Karl Marx himself advocated that people slaughter each other once Communism was in place in an explicit comparison to Robespierre's Reign of Terror (which, among other things, included Louis Grignon's infamous extermination campaigns during the Vendée massacres where he even advocated killing their own allies in Vendée simply to satiate bloodlust), it would still be what Marx was doing, and in fact, Stalin would be matching right up with Marx, since the entire point of communism is having people kill each other for a sick laugh. Pokeria1 (talk) 21:49, 3 February 2020 (EST)

Iowa results

The only Iowa results we have at this point are from the Sanders campaign. They claim to have counted 40 percent of the caucus sites. According to this count, Sanders got 30 percent, Buttigieg 25 percent, Warren 21 percent, and Biden 12 percent.[9] How long can the Biden campaign stop the U.S. media from reporting the fact that hardly anyone actually votes for Electable Joe? The only place where DNC censorship is being challenged is in the British press. It will be harder to suppress the results from New Hampshire. PeterKa (talk) 09:52, 4 February 2020 (EST)

I should have screenshot NYT 10:00 PM CST results. But they are posted on MPR. Sanders 27.7%; Warren 25.1%; Buttigieg 23.8%; Klobuchar 11.8%; Biden 11.1%. RobSDe Plorabus Unum 13:09, 4 February 2020 (EST)
It's currently 10 delegates for Sanders, 10 for Buttigieg, 4 for Warren, and 17 left to be assigned. I didn't see Buttigieg coming, but hey, Go Buttigieg! The black vote hasn't gone Republican since the 1930s. The New York Times is blaming the Iowa chaos on "a little-known company called Shadow Inc. that was founded by veterans of Hillary Clinton's unsuccessful presidential campaign."[10] Just as I suspected: Hillary is everywhere, and she's on a rampage against Bernie, Trump, and anyone else who has ever crossed her path.
Surely the big news coming out of Iowa is that Biden, the Democratic frontrunner just a few days ago, has now collapsed.[11] Yet the mainstream media isn't looking at it that way. It's full of headlines about the Iowa party's problems counting the vote. In short, there is some serious news manipulation going on.
Hopefully, this fiasco will result in Iowa losing its special status. It should follow the rules and go after New Hampshire like everyone else. It would be a first step toward shortening the primary season. Better yet, go back to the old days when the parties had paid memberships and caucused. There could be non-partisan primaries after the conventions with the top two candidates going on to the general election. PeterKa (talk) 23:42, 4 February 2020 (EST)
  • The counting chaos might not be Hillary's fault after all. The Buttigieg campaign paid Shadow nearly $50,000 for "software rights and subscriptions."[12] [13] PeterKa (talk) 01:00, 5 February 2020 (EST)
Peter will be out for a few days; having been dazzled and allured by the shifts of power accompanying the fleeting alliances of the Democratic mob, he has contracted a serious case of Stockholm Syndrome. He is being treated with medicinal syrups and is expected to recover sooner, not later, in a state where he no longer cheers on those seeking to marginalize him and remembers Democrat Adlai Stevenson campaigned against Eisenhower with a segregationist. VargasMilan (talk) Wednesday, 02:54, 5 February 2020 (EST)
Buttigieg did not win. The Democrats rigged the election. Don't start rumors about a fair election. RobSDe Plorabus Unum 10:55, 6 February 2020 (EST)
This is the Stop Sanders campaign. The DNC rigged the vote to defeat Bernie. Clinton operative Robby Mook headed the DNC committee that developed the app to rig the process. The DNC establishment is experiencing right now what the RNC establishment experienced 4 years ago, a hostile takeover by an outsider.
Bootyboy is the temporary placeholder, but the DNC is actively promoting Bloomberg. Biden posing as a candidate was part of the Impeachment coup and his usefulness is gone. Warren (Sanders Lite) crashed and burned on her own accord. Klobuchar beat Biden, but the DNC stepping over her is simply more evidence of establishment sexism.
Bloomberg represents the epitome of DNC establishment racism; like Sanders, he was never a Democrat. Yet the DNC drove all the people of color out of the race before changing the rules to allow Bloomberg in. RobSDe Plorabus Unum 13:30, 5 February 2020 (EST)
For those interested in following a good Progressive source on the DNC/Sanders war see MCSC Network W/ Niko House. The reported on the Shadow app Monday, before the caucuses started. They've had at least 11 on-site updates on the rigged Iowa caucus scandal and stolen election since it erupted Monday night. RobSDe Plorabus Unum 14:32, 5 February 2020 (EST)
With 96 percent of the vote counted, the second round totals are 26.5 percent for Bernie, 25.0 percent for Buttigieg, 20.3 for Warren, and 13.7 percent for Biden. This suggest that Buttigieg's final vote total is quite impressive, which makes his $42,000 payment to Shadow, Inc even harder to understand. This payment was made back in July when the race was a Biden-Warren contest. As I understand it, nobody knew Shadow would be counting the votes until just a day or two before the caucus. I assume there is a separate vote counting system for legal purposes, so eventually this will be sorted out. PeterKa (talk) 08:49, 6 February 2020 (EST)
Impressive? Yep, it's Stockholm syndrome.
Too much MSM/DNC propaganda has this effect on the rational mind's judgement and analytical abilities. It's like the opioid crisis, widespread and destroys lives and communities. As Adam Schiff would say, "There is evidence in plain sight." RobSDe Plorabus Unum 11:03, 6 February 2020 (EST)

Low turn-out

With all the controversy and competition, I expected there to have been massive turnout. Do you know how many Iowan Democrats showed up to vote? 172,000. VargasMilan (talk) Friday, 17:45, 7 February 2020 (EST)

GOP turnout was massive. Impressive for an incumbent.
Dick Morris explains the details of the alleged "recount" in 30 seconds. RobSDe Plorabus Unum 20:59, 7 February 2020 (EST)
The Dems seem to be out of gas now. Three years of outrage takes a toll. When they first cranked up the outrage machine in 2017, Rahm Emmanual said it too early and unstainable. How mad can you be that Hillary didn't become the first woman president? PeterKa (talk) 03:37, 8 February 2020 (EST)

U.S. Government revenue + debt

Revenue + debt as a % of Fiscal year GDP by presidency 1977-2000
Presidency 1st year 2nd year 3rd year 4th year bill to
Jimmy Carter  20.4%  20.4%  20.2%  21.4% ~$269B
Ronald Reagan  21.8%  23.0%  23.6%  21.8% ~$660B Arms race
Ronald Reagan  23.2  23.6  22.4  22.6 ~$1,030B Arms race
George Bush  22.4 ~23.6 ~24.0 ~22.6 ~$1,450B Peace dividend
Bill Clinton  22.0  21.4  21.4  21.4 ~$1,170B "Era of big government is over"
Bill Clinton  20.8  20.4  20.6  20.2  $445B "Vacation from history"
George W. Bush

What does your gut tell you comes next? VargasMilan (talk) Tuesday, 18:14, 4 February 2020 (EST)

Revenue + debt as a % of Fiscal year GDP by presidency 2001-
Presidency 1st year 2nd year 3rd year 4th year bill to
George W. Bush  20.2%  21.0%  20.6%  20.6%  $1,705B War on terror
George W. Bush  21.0  21.8  21.4  24.0  $2,646B
Barack Obama  27.6  25.6  23.0  23.2  $6,042B Jobless recovery
Barack Obama  20.8  23.6  19.8  25.2  $3,508B
Donald J. Trump  20.6  22.5  22.0  $3,641B

The symbol "~" means "about" or "approximately".

VargasMilan (talk) Tuesday, 23:12, 4 February 2020 (EST)

Very informative, and your comments in events are very good. Remember, however, it is the Congress in control of the debt and spending, not the President. RobSDe Plorabus Unum 13:47, 5 February 2020 (EST)
Fallacy! The U.S. constitution prescribes the president to "present a budget". And practically speaking, a knowledgeable president like economics major President Reagan can take a pen and a few charts on TV and rally the public against Congress! Or maybe they can't. Nobody watches the same channels anymore. Whatever. Yes I have a "table pie chart" that shows debt-share by Speaker of the House thank you very much, so it's not a question of "remembering" but of "doing".
But get this: maybe the President sets the tone, and Congress opens the flood-gates. Some of the "bills" look pretty reasonable, maybe some more than others, but a bill of $6-7 trillion to prevent a recession? How is that x times more important than the Cold War? Trump can't turn off the spending habits cold turkey without all hell breaking loose in a flood of sad stories in the left-wing media, so it's up to Trump now to do the tapering off if Congress has finally suffered enough abrasions to its reputation to break Trump's way.
I think I'll try to color-code the Congresses. VargasMilan (talk) Wednesday, 15:25, 5 February 2020 (EST)
The color is for the Speaker of the House. Red is the Democratic Party, Blue is the Republican Party, and Green is the Globalist Party. VargasMilan (talk) Wednesday, 15:46, 5 February 2020 (EST)
I'm joking, of course, about the "Globalist Party". I don't know what it would take to best show a commitment to globalism, so this is offered informally and without prejudice to whatever someone might eventually add to former Speakers Boehner's and Ryan's biographies. VargasMilan (talk) Wednesday, 19:03, 5 February 2020 (EST)
I think I'll try to color-code the Congresses. VargasMilan (talk) Wednesday, 15:25, 5 February 2020 (EST)
Good idea. You may need three colors (purple?) in the case of a divided Congress. Let's examine some facts:
  • The aid withheld from Ukraine, (adding $391 million to the national debt with money borrowed from China), was authorized by Congress.
  • The Vietnam War ended when Congress cut off funding for the government of South Vietnam, which Commander in Chief Lyndon Johnson determined was necessary with the addition of American blood, and Commander in Chief Nixon negotiated that funding into a Peace agreement with North Vietnam and withdrawal of America troops;
  • Deficits in the Reagan era were the result of a Defense budget with Congress authorized, and a rejection of Reagan's proposals to cut Great Society programs, which the Congress rejected.
In all three examples we Congress is responsible for the power of purse, and hence expansion of the national debt. RobSDe Plorabus Unum 16:06, 5 February 2020 (EST)
Another somewhat reverse example is Iran Contra, where Congress withheld aid to the Contras (as they did aid to the government of South Vietnam) and Reagan funded the Contras through dope sales. In the Ukrainian example, Congress did expand the debt by granting aid to Ukraine; however under the Sequestration Act, the President can impound funds temporarily. RobSDe Plorabus Unum 16:06, 5 February 2020 (EST)
Reagan had a divided Congress for first six years; Clinton for the last six years. Papa Bush had opposition Congress throughout. RobSDe Plorabus Unum 16:11, 5 February 2020 (EST)

Headline update: Pelosi rips transcript to shreds after State of the Union.

Guys, we should note on the newsfeed how the left just sunk to a new low when Pelosi just shredded the transcript for the State of the Union upon its conclusion. Pokeria1 (talk) 22:30, 4 February 2020 (EST)

There can be no more apt symbol and demonstration of Speaker Pelosi's impotent rage at the success of our beloved republic. VargasMilan (talk) Tuesday, 22:45, 4 February 2020 (EST)
If there's ever a Donald Trump: The Musical, we can add these lyrics to the Nancy Pelosi solo:
"So if you think that's funny
I'm not really laughing, honey
Your crib notes they are confetti
Tore them up, my hands were steady
"And then his ghastly face
Recurs in a nightmare place
Impeachment hour has come and gone
Much too short and much too long…"
(h/t @ItsGrahamParker) VargasMilan (talk) Tuesday, 23:28, 4 February 2020 (EST)

Good news

Trump's been acquitted, so we should note this on the newsfeed. I mean, it was certain he wouldn't be impeached, but nevertheless, especially given how wild the Democrat leftists were, we couldn't be too sure, and it's a good thing he's been acquitted of the impeachment hearings. Pokeria1 (talk) 19:54, 5 February 2020 (EST)

Good to hear, and nothing the Democrats, their liberal media cheerleaders or the Hollywood elitists say to the contrary will prove otherwise. Far as the American public is concerned, the kangaroo court show trial and illegal coup attempt that was the "impeachment hearings" is finito and President Trump was never "impeached forever" (as the Left likes to childishly and wishfully claim) because the Democrats never had a case against him, and they knew it, just as the public already knew (even though the Democrats tried to publicly pretend otherwise). Northwest (talk) 22:48, 5 February 2020 (EST)

Macron cover-up

"More than a hundred thousand anti-#Macron protesters out on the streets of #France today (yesterday), demanding Macron's resignation.

This was #Marseille today during the #greve6fevrier protest.

International mainstream media nowhere to be seen" "#MediaSilence" "#GlobalistCollusion"

VargasMilan (talk) Friday, 17:02, 7 February 2020 (EST)

Split ticket


(h/t @BridgieTherease) VargasMilan (talk) Friday, 19:00, 7 February 2020 (EST)

Bloomberg/Bootyboy or Sanders/Gabbard? RobSDe Plorabus Unum 20:56, 7 February 2020 (EST)

Trump, Giuliani, and Bloomberg

The race for the future of America is shaping up to be a contest involving three men, two former New York mayors and a New York mogul, Donald Trump. Bloomberg is Giuliani's hand picked successor. As a billionaire, Bloomberg blazed the trail for a greedy capitalist to buy his way into office and take over a major party. A third New York mayor, Bill De Blasio, tried bringing the Central Park jogger case back into the election to attack Trump. Now that Democrats have systematically excluded all black candidates and rigged the process for a rich white guy like Bloomberg to appear, it begs the question: If the Central Park jogger suspects were indeed framed and railroaded because of institutional racism, Why didn't Bloomberg do anything about it rather than leave it to DeBlasio? RobSDe Plorabus Unum 19:08, 8 February 2020 (EST)

Can't you use your imagination to present us with a more comforting "shape"? VargasMilan (talk) Saturday, 21:44, 8 February 2020 (EST)
Since Democrats are hemorrhaging black voters, with all their other failures and shortcomings, screaming 'racist' is all they got left. RobSDe Plorabus Unum 21:49, 9 February 2020 (EST)
The boomers are getting old. Some age well mentally, but others haven't. They rolled the dice with Mueller and Biden and came up with snake eyes twice.
The root problem is the educational system has produced left leaning, global warming believing and identity politics ridden younger generation that is unfit to lead on the Democrat side.Conservative (talk) 23:05, 9 February 2020 (EST)
"The shape of our democracy is the issue that affects every other issue," -- Deep Thoughts by Pete Buttigieg. RobSDe Plorabus Unum 23:37, 9 February 2020 (EST)
Rob S is right; Biden is there to be a lightning rod so whatever new liberal presidential identity prevails, the candidate with the identity will have defeated BIDEN and not a different liberal identity group. VargasMilan (talk) Monday, 01:24, 10 February 2020 (EST)
We're awaiting Mini Mike's leveraged buyout beginning in Nevada. From then on it's a two-man race, Bernie v. Mini Mike, with cards stacked against Bernie. RobSDe Plorabus Unum 02:31, 10 February 2020 (EST)
Rob S, I found another Buttigieg Deep Thought: "This election isn't just historic, it's urgent. And tonight, we look forward knowing this is our one shot not just to end the era of Donald Trump, but to launch the era that must come next.
"Join us as we turn the page to a new chapter in America's story." (h/t @emzanotti)
VargasMilan (talk) Wednesday, 18:38, 12 February 2020 (EST)
"We are the ones we've been waiting for." -- Barack Hussein Obama, RobSDe Plorabus Unum 07:58, 14 February 2020 (EST)

The Democrats: the party of science

Democrats are known for being on the cutting edge of medical technology such as vaccination safety assessments and the psychiatric sciences and doomed to be weighted down by the Luddite conservatives who can never keep up, notions they delight in employing to foster damaging stereotypes but somehow always backed by opinions stated in passing. Or if not that eventually found to be that what Andy has named "liberal clap-trap"—trappings of expertise clapped together, in these scientific cases like many others, to score leftist political goals, only to be abandoned as soon as it's time for the goalposts to be moved again.

And somehow also they struggle for days with recording the voting preferences of 172,000 Iowans when there are probably worldwide Twitter polls that large conducted nightly of similar complexity without a hitch to determine the vital issue of the favorite haircut of the members of the leading K-pop groups. VargasMilan (talk) Saturday, 22:57, 8 February 2020 (EST)

Few personalities are more dear to Hollywood and to liberalism than Oprah. Michael Moore wanted her to run for president. See "Oprah’s long history with junk science." She is the person most directly responsible for the anti-vaccine movement, although the media acts like it's all Trump's fault. PeterKa (talk) 04:29, 9 February 2020 (EST)
The Democrats are clearly not better at political science than the GOP. "Since the end of the New Deal era the Republicans have been much more successful than the Democrats at winning presidential elections."[14] Conservative (talk) 07:44, 9 February 2020 (EST)
I have very mixed emotions, then. I saw Oprah demonstrate the Neti pot (?, it's about 3-4 inches long) a device that you insert deeply into each of your nostrils and squirt water into your sinuses to help clean them out. At the time I thought: this certainly would help the kind of sexual libertarians who would like to normalize placing foreign objects into parts of their bodies win arguments.
It was also cited as "an ancient medical device". So, again, it would help those would like to portray Christian morals as an island of ignorance between ancient and Eastern wisdom and modern-day science.
The only problem was, two users who took the advice to try it didn't clean their pots well enough and were killed by the growth of amoebas that came from the water and passed through the brain-blood barrier. I guess the behaviors and thinking that I mentioned that the usage tended to deliver up as advanced, newly-restored and desirable practices must not be dangerous—or someone involved in promoting the Neti pot would have noted the irony in the final results of the scoffing at Christian morals that may very well have preceded the use.
Also the irony that those results, while they couldn't be a punishment from God, since he doesn't exist, somehow seem as if they wouldn't have been much different if He really did exist. A mystery of life. By that I mean the widely-broadcast guilt of the results from giving the advice in the context I mentioned, not necessarily from simply following the advice. VargasMilan (talk) Thursday, 14:18, 20 February 2020 (EST)

American Sun states the obvious, and something doesn't add up

"Peter Buttigieg came out of the closet at age 33. No partners from his past have done a single interview. He married a man, so is technically never going to have to interact with another gay man. His voice."



VargasMilan (talk) Sunday, 20:48, 9 February 2020 (EST)

It's a little conspiratorial to think he is a straight guy posing as a gay. But the Twitter thread referred to above does present evidence to suggest that Buttigieg might be asexual. PeterKa (talk) 23:26, 9 February 2020 (EST)
Liberal-critical Twitter is made for the lively hashing out of questions like that. There, detecting phoniness and manipulation is even more important than any conclusion you might eventually draw about particular issues. VargasMilan (talk) Monday, 01:03, 10 February 2020 (EST)
ButtiJeb has no legs. RobSDe Plorabus Unum 10:23, 10 February 2020 (EST)

Called on the carpet

"Lt. Col. Vindman, we meet at last."

"In your position at the White House, you countermanded my Ukrainian policy and attempted to alter an official transcript made while I carried out Presidential duties in order to facilitate playing the informer on otherwise routine executive branch foreign dealings, spurring an months-long national impeachment crisis by a hostile Congress."

"What do you have to say in your defense?"


"As a result of these blantantly insubordinate actions I have no choice but to deal with you to the full extent of what the executive branch civil service bureaucracy allows and render this decision regarding your station in my adminstration..."


VargasMilan (talk) Monday, 01:03, 10 February 2020 (EST)

In previous administrations, these head of state phone calls were treated as supersecret. Vindman must have told Ciaramella all about Trump-Zelensky call. Ciaramella was removed from the NSC after a previous phone call leak, so this was a major breach of trust. PeterKa (talk) 04:41, 10 February 2020 (EST)
It was never a crisis. The Democrats had a weak case and Mitch McConnell and the Republicans control the Senate. In addition, Trump has a strong record to run on in 2020. It was never more than a tempest in a teapot. The only thing left to do is for Trump to keep building his ground game, keep building his campaign war chest and "act more presidential" for the suburban women.
"Invincibility lies in the defense; the possibility of victory in the attack". - Sun Tzu. Trump has both! Conservative (talk) 11:41, 10 February 2020 (EST)
Trump has defanged the mainstream news organizations in terms of their credibility, but more of the damage was self-inflicted by these news organization upon themselves. So the fake impeachment was never going to do more than harm the Democrats. It harmed Joe Biden most of all by giving more media attention to Hunter/Joe Biden's corruption.Conservative (talk) 12:30, 10 February 2020 (EST)
The fake impeachment also rallied Trump's base, helped Trump's fundraising and didn't rally the Democratic base much. All in all Trump benefited from the impeachment.Conservative (talk) 12:33, 10 February 2020 (EST)
The economy is doing so well, it's the perfect time to clean house: "Bigger than Vindman: Trump scrubs 70 Obama holdovers from NSC." I had no idea 70 people worked at NSC. PeterKa (talk) 14:07, 10 February 2020 (EST)
What Obama did to the NSC is a case study in what he did to the FBI and the whole IC. Because it is impossible to fire civil servants, you simply double its size with your own cronies, then replace the attrition in the existing force (retirements, reassignments, etc) with your own cronies to create a governing "consensus" within the agency. A sort of "bureaucratic meiosis." This is essentially the difference between "big government liberals" and "small government conservatives" and happens throughout government when Democrats are elected. RobSDe Plorabus Unum 14:24, 10 February 2020 (EST)
You also told us you read a user comment at a website that said when Mueller led the FBI, he insisted that FBI field commanders move to Washington D.C. or retire early and "accidentally" lost the best who were smaller-town conservatives, didn't you? VargasMilan (talk) Tuesday, 08:28, 11 February 2020 (EST)

Bloomberg/Buttigieg/Klobuchar/Sanders appear to be siphoning off the national support of Biden since 1/25/2020

Michael Bloomberg, Pete Buttigieg, Bernie Sanders and Amy Klobuchar appear to be fairly rapidly siphoning off the national support of Joe Biden since 1/25/2020 according to polling.[15] Biden/Bernie almost have equal support. And the trend is good for Bernie and bad for Biden.Conservative (talk) 23:47, 10 February 2020 (EST)

Aimless Warbutcher moves up tonite, pro'lly run 3rd ahead of Warren and Biden. Biden was never a serious candidate. His alleged 'national polls' was a name recognition poll. He was part of Deep State coup 2.0. He joined the race four days after Zelensky's election. And, if you'll recall, Rudy cancelled his May 9 trip to Ukraine after Biden entered the race. The coup plotters (via Alexander Vindman) knew about Trump & Giuliani's interest in Ukraine. So they set up Biden as the impeachment coup bait as an alleged "political rival"; but Giuliani's initial trip to Ukraine was already scheduled before Biden's April 29 announcement. Giuliani had to cancel the trip cause it was obvious then what the coup plotters were trying to do.
Biden jumping into the race was intended to short circuit any investigation Giuliani would ask for. You see it again already. Firing and courtmartially Vindman for countermanding orders from the Commander-in-Chief and leaking classified national security information to Eric Ciaramella is being called an abuse of power and impeachable offense.
The media promoted Biden in much the same way they now are trying to Stop Bernie. Now they drop Biden like a hot potato. Bloomberg is next up as the media darling who can beat Trump.
There is a third factor or subtext at work here: the DNC does not like Iowa and NH going first and winnowing the field. But the primary schedule is worked out by agreement between the parties. So deliberately screwing up Iowa and NH is intended to outrage big city Democrats against rural white folks who traditionally vet the candidates first. This is part of a longer term agenda to revamp the primary process. RobSDe Plorabus Unum 00:26, 11 February 2020 (EST)
The Democrats/press thought Joe Biden could win. And he kept many moderates out of the race. But it was a Robert Mueller type situation. Public speaking unveiled that Biden is not aging gracefully in terms of his mental sharpness.
The are seniors in the their 90s who are still mentally sharp. But Biden didn't eat right and/or exercise enough which is pretty common for Americans. Japan has a significantly lower rate of dementia/Alzheimer's disease than meat/diary eating America. Fish is brain food and countries that eat more fish see lower mental decline among seniors.
If the pro-abortion Biden were a stronger Catholic maybe he would have eaten more fish on Fridays!Conservative (talk) 02:12, 11 February 2020 (EST)
Just let me emphasize what Conservative is saying: remember that too many carbohydrates (without exercise) can cause mental decline too! VargasMilan (talk) Tuesday, 08:12, 11 February 2020 (EST)
Trump was being polite by calling him 'Sleepy Joe' - he looked medicated. RobSDe Plorabus Unum 09:29, 11 February 2020 (EST)
An aside regarding Bloomberg: the devalued Democratic brand doesn't stick to Bloomberg like the other Democratic candidates. For one thing he didn't have to raise his hand when asked if he supported free healthcare for illegal aliens. VargasMilan (talk) Tuesday, 10:07, 11 February 2020 (EST)
We may as well fast forward to the end - Democrats have abandoned black voters. There is not a single one remaining who can rally blacks. You can already see the Hillary Effect - apathy among blacks. By contrast, Trump now has a record and testimonials of accomplishment.
The only thing bolstering Biden since last April were blacks. His support was cut in half since the impeachment vote. Not Sanders, Buttigieg, Bloomberg, Warren or Klobuchar can pick them up. RobSDe Plorabus Unum 10:33, 11 February 2020 (EST)
When something goes wrong, Bernie Sanders' first impulse is to blame others for his mistakes, the degree of embarassment matched by the malice of his enemies or those whom we assumed to be his friends to serve as dazzle camouflage. That doesn't seem like a good leadership strategy.
Klobuchar is rising to levels of popularity she has never reached before. The Democratic voters and supporters have successively tried out a number of candidates, having been dissatisfied each time. Klobuchar and Bloomberg have achieved a swell of popularity at the right timing of when the Democratic voters have to make a decision. Bloomberg could take a John Kerry approach and take the gloves off to beat on Trump, who seems a bit unfocused. VargasMilan (talk) Tuesday, 15:40, 11 February 2020 (EST)
It's all being set up for Bloomberg; GOP very effectively played the race card today. RobSDe Plorabus Unum 16:21, 11 February 2020 (EST)
If the Democratic establishment doesn't rally around a center-left candidate by Super Tuesday, Bernie Sanders is going to be the populist candidate who steamrolls the other candidates. Sanders is the Democrats' Donald Trump except he is a leftist populist and not a right leaning populist.
Michael Bloomberg's comments about minority murderers in NYC and his stop and frisk policy is going to make him unpalatable to minorities in a general election. Amy Klobuchar is more appealing than Bloomberg, but she lacks the charisma, leadership presence and money to win against Bloomberg's money and digital/general marketing team.
It's over. Trumpslide 2020!Conservative (talk) 01:18, 12 February 2020 (EST)
There is no center-left left in the Democrat party. They're all heel clicking, goosestepping Antifa thugs. Look at the facts: Democrats are looking to two non-Democrats to lead them - a Rino and a Socialist. And its highest elected leader tore up the Constitution on national TV. This is beyond a crisis of leadership.
The socialist takeover began with election of Pelosi as Minority Leader in 2002; it was completed with the election of Obama and passage of Obamacare. Now the name - socialist - the transitory phase to communism per Karl Marx, has simply come out of the closet. Chris Matthews admits that while Democrats nurtured this beast for decades to get their votes, they have known all along the violent nature of it.
The GOP's role now is twofold: (1) continue educating people of the imminent threat; and (2) welcome former Democrat refugees with open arms. Forget ideological proselytizing, for now. No socialist would join the Republican camp, but only as a spy, subversive, and infiltrator. We must separate the wheat from the chaff, the goats from the sheep. RobSDe Plorabus Unum 13:00, 12 February 2020 (EST)
OMG! I'm speechless, kneeling before the latest DNC Messiah. RobSDe Plorabus Unum 14:48, 17 February 2020 (EST)

Lol, no wonder they impeached him after he spoke to the Ukrainian president

Biden's son, Romney's son, Pelosi's son, Kerry's son—are all on the board of directors for energy companies doing business in Ukraine. h/t @RealDonaldTrump/@harmks/@Conservative.Coalition VargasMilan (talk) Tuesday, 07:47, 11 February 2020 (EST)

I double-checked these later this morning. It turns out there's no proof that Sen. Romney's son did, and Kerry's stepson stopped doing business with Biden's son Hunter shortly after he, and a mutual friend, joined Burisma after warning them not to, but that's all.
But a few months back I saw Speaker Pelosi and her son Paul Pelosi, Jr. appear and speak in a video commercial for Viscoil, which was actually a holding company, broadcast by a successor company NRGLab. The Epoch Times (the tweet is still up) also showed another video by the company (NRG Lab), which claimed it did business in the Ukraine. The journalist said Paul Pelosi, Jr. was an executive for that company and visited the Ukraine in 2017. But Pelosi's spokesman said vaguely that Viscoil "reorganized under a different name" and denied Paul Pelosi had a "role" in that company. VargasMilan (talk) Tuesday, 09:21, 11 February 2020 (EST) VargasMilan (talk) Tuesday, 09:43, 11 February 2020 (EST)
Here's the thing - Don't think for a minute that Biden-Ukraine was a unique situation. It's not. Congress routinely approves these foreign aid packages for which family and friends get kickbacks. The Clinton Foundation, McCain Institute, Obama Foundation, etc. etc. etc. are all examples. RobSDe Plorabus Unum 09:36, 11 February 2020 (EST)
Trump is willing to go on the attack more than most Republicans. Going on the attack against Joe/Hunter Biden was a smart move. The fake impeachment helped increase Trump's popularity and fundraising.
One of the criticisms I have about the Christian apologetics field is that they don't take the gloves off enough and go on the attack enough. For example, atheists commonly attack the Bible's passages on slavery, despite the fact that atheists are now engaging in more forced labor and slavery than Christian countries (See: Atheism and slavery). I really like Francis Schaeffer's "taking the roof off" method of apologetics which is a more aggressive form of Christian apologetics if taken to its fullest extent possible.
"The more comprehending we are as we take the roof off, the worse the man will feel if he rejects the Christian answer." - Francis Schaeffer
"Invincibility lies in the defense; the possibility of victory in the attack." - Sun Tzu.
Right now, Biden supporters don't have a lot of roof over their head thanks in part due to Trump.Conservative (talk) 11:20, 11 February 2020 (EST)
The perversion there is the notion that slavery started in the bible. In a limited sense, it did. Slavery originally was for payment of a debt, a notion related to the concept of justice and personal responsibility (unless you want thieves and murderers to run the planet). Racial slavery - i.e. a restriction of rights based upon birth or skin color is an entirely different concept.
In any event, grace redeems us from slavery. We are all debtors to sin and Christ has redeemed us from the curse of the law. RobSDe Plorabus Unum 11:28, 11 February 2020 (EST)

Trump understands branding more than most GOP politicians. And he takes measures to harm the opposition's brand. Hence, Jeb Bush was branded low energy Jeb Bush. Hillary was called "Crooked Hillary".

Romney had tons of negative attacks that defined him. Yet his fear of the liberal press prevented him from really going on the attack against Obama. John McCain also didn't go on the attack enough against Obama. I don't like the dirty tricks tactics of Lee Atwater and Richard Nixon as they sometimes spread lies about their opponents or used dirty tricks (breaking into WaterGate building for Nixon), but at least Atwater was willing to go on the attack. You can't win a war if you are not willing to go on the attack!Conservative (talk) 11:45, 11 February 2020 (EST)

I politely differ - I can't think of a single half truth Nixon or Atwater said about a Commucrat that wasn't true. RobSDe Plorabus Unum 12:24, 11 February 2020 (EST)
I might be wrong about Atwater spreading lies. The problem is that the people who said he lied about something are liars themselves. But if I am not mistaken, Atwater did push polling in the form of fake surveys by so-called independent pollsters. He used this method as a form of getting out negative information about his opponents. Not sure this is true, but if true, then this would be unethical. But maybe he did this push polling in an ethical way. The Atwater push polling methodology issue is a matter hard to research.Conservative (talk) 13:30, 11 February 2020 (EST)
Regarding Atwaters alleged "deathbed confession": - I listened to the lengthy audio tape (of poor quality) made by (if I recall) editors from he Nation. No such "confession" occurred. It was a series of baited and loaded questions, then edited entirely out of context. Atwater simply made the point that Southerners who voted for Goldwater in 1964, and later, were patriots concerned about national security issues. Atwater was making the point that by 1980, Southerner perspectives on national security issues led the nation before the North, Midwest, and West adopted those priorities. Nothing more. From this interview, The Nation concocted a narrative that totally unrelated to its context.
In the aftermath of 1980, Carter apologists behaved the same way as Hillary apologists did. Reagan personally was too popular, so slanders were directed against his advisors (as they have against Roger Stone, Jerome Corsi, etc. etc.) with the tag of "racism", of course.
Atwater couldn't rebut the posthumous slanders, and there the story lies. RobSDe Plorabus Unum 13:49, 11 February 2020 (EST)
I just saw an interview with Lee Atwater and Larry King and he came across as a nice guy. I also read some more about Atwater. I think a lot of the attacks against Atwater are motivated by the fact that he helped Republicans win races. On the positive side, Atwater was a hard worker and his opponents describe him as relentless.Conservative (talk) 13:58, 11 February 2020 (EST)
Awater claimed that in the 1964 election, Goldwater and the South didn't want involvement in Vietnam and took a hardline against the Soviet Union. By 1980, this perspective had a national consensus with the election of Reagan. Commie-libs twisted this to mean Atwater was a mover and shaker in the Democrats "Southern Strategy" conspiracy theory. RobSDe Plorabus Unum 14:04, 11 February 2020 (EST)
Atwater was very proud of the fact that Southern perspectives on foreign policy became a national consensus by 1980; Democrats twisted this to mean Southern perspectives on race became a national consensus by the election of Reagan.
Goldwater's statement, "Extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice" was directed at the Soviet Union (witness LBJ's "Daisy" commercial); Al Franken and other as recently as 2016 twisted that to mean it was directed against the civil rights movement. RobSDe Plorabus Unum 14:11, 11 February 2020 (EST)

The GOP strategist Ed Rollins said Atkins was a very hardworking guy, but he is used the word "con man" to describe Atwater because he claims Atwater faked his resume to get hired by Rollins. Ed Rollins was angry at Atwater because he claims Atwater doublecrossed him. After all is said and done, Atwater was a wily, smart, aggressive and bold guy who was very effective at winning political races, but it appears as if he cut ethical corners sometimes.Conservative (talk) 14:20, 11 February 2020 (EST)

Personally, I don't believe that. Atwater I respect as much as Richard Viguerie. Rollins, whom I admire and respect very much, too, is a closet NeverTrumper. Roger Stone warned in 2016 that any money donated to Rollins Great America PAC didn't go to electing Trump at all. And I believe Stone. Rollins can be thanked for a whole string of RINOs, Christy Todd Whitman among the most visible. RobSDe Plorabus Unum 14:27, 11 February 2020 (EST)
This author at PowerLine Blog came to the same conclusion (with links to original audio. "So the central point that Atwater made in the interview was the exact opposite of the proposition for which liberals have endlessly quoted him." RobSDe Plorabus Unum 15:01, 11 February 2020 (EST)
Before Atwater the GOP was too wimpy in national campaigns and did not go on the attack enough. And then Trump, the counter puncher, took going on the attack to a whole new level. Given that the left/liberal leaning press is heavily in favor of the Democrats and are its attack dogs, it forces Republican candidates to be tougher and go on the attack more.
On the whole, I don't think politicians and the government are scrutinized enough so "staying positive" and not criticizing your opponents, their actions and their positions is not healthy for politics. For example, I am glad that Biden's corruption was revealed by Trump. In addition, the U.S. government has been repeatedly misrepresenting their effectiveness in the Afghanistan War for almost two decades.[16]Conservative (talk) 15:25, 11 February 2020 (EST)
This is an interesting article on "Borking". Biden invented "borking" - using a public officials extensive record to destroy them. Since Buttigieg has a limited record, it's hard to "bork" him, but Biden has become a victim of his own methods. RobSDe Plorabus Unum 15:50, 11 February 2020 (EST)
Buttigieg, who doesn't have the name recognition of Joe Biden, is not going to be able to withstand the campaign money of Michael Bloomberg which could reach biblical proportions. Neither is Biden which is why is one of the reasons Biden is having a hard time with fundraising.
This race is probably going to drag on and a contested convention in Milwaukee is probably going to be the net result which will result in a Trumpslide 2020 (see: Trumpslide 2020. Start celebrating now, but don't be complacent).Conservative (talk) 18:23, 11 February 2020 (EST)
One third of all delegates will be awarded on Super Tuesday {3 wks from now). It'll be a two-man race by then between Sanders and (fill in the blank, likely Bloomberg, Buttigieg. or Klobuchar). Warrens delegates will go to Sanders after tonite. Biden's delegates are up for grabs after tonite, which is why Bloomberg is getting in. Yang, Steyer, Gabbard and the rest are finished after tonite, although Gabbard may linger as a protest vote for awhile. Eventually she'll get on the Sanders train as a possible VP pick competing with Buttigieg and Klobuchar. RobSDe Plorabus Unum 18:37, 11 February 2020 (EST)

Buttigieg and Zuckerberg

Bootyboy and Zuckerberg were butt buddies in college. Bootyboy was among Facebook's first 300 users. Somebody needs to research this and stick it in Bootyboy's article. RobSDe Plorabus Unum 11:15, 13 February 2020 (EST)

I did research it. It was first broken by Mercury News recently in an interview Buttigieg did in San Francisco. And Zuckerberg had visited South Bend and Mayor Buttigieg many months ago on his "I'm a normal guy, America" tour. Some stories stick around the Twittersphere like a toothache and won't go away. VargasMilan (talk) Thursday, 18:06, 13 February 2020 (EST)
What? Are you trying to deny the Buttigieg/Facebook conspiracy to take over America which has been in the works for morethan 15 years? [17] RobSDe Plorabus Unum 18:43, 13 February 2020 (EST)
It can't happen here. VargasMilan (talk) Thursday, 20:52, 13 February 2020 (EST)
40 percent of Americans believe America is ready for a homosexual president.[18] Ordinary voters are quoted saying they — or their “devout Christian” mother — “would never vote for a gay.” And the Buttigieg campaign’s own focus groups recently found that many undecided black voters in South Carolina regard the candidate’s sexual orientation as a “barrier” to winning their votes (source: New York Times[19]).
Buttigieg is a joke candidate. Klobzilla is a far more fearsome candidate!Conservative (talk) 11:17, 15 February 2020 (EST)
59% of conservatives married
46% of moderates married
40% of liberals married [20]
No breakdown on the percentage of gay married. But I'd guess a sizeable percentage of libs 40% are gay married, if the actual number isn't currently outpacing traditional marriage. Which leaves a question, Why has the gay rights movement latched onto such a declining popular trend? RobSDe Plorabus Unum 11:35, 15 February 2020 (EST)

The David P. McWhirter, M.D., and Andrew M. Mattison, M.S.W., Ph.D. study reported in their 1984 work The Male Couple: How Relationships Develop stated that in regards to relationships involving male homosexuality that "all couples with a relationship lasting more than 5 years have incorporated some provision for outside sexual activity in their relationships." See: Homosexuality and promiscuity

Homosexual "marriage" among males is likely a farce in terms of monogamy. I don't believe it often exists. Maybe I am wrong about this matter, but I doubt it.Conservative (talk) 11:54, 15 February 2020 (EST)

Stats show a typical hetero person may have between 1 and 20 lifetime encounters with different partners, with 200 at the upper extreme, whereas a typical homosexual has between 1 and 200, with 1,000 at the upper extreme. And as you just pointed, monogamy is rare in gay marriages and relationships. So no, gay behavior and relationships is not "just like" straight relationships. RobSDe Plorabus Unum 13:35, 15 February 2020 (EST)
In fact, marriage was instituted to protect the rights of a monogamous person with a cheating spouse. Evidence suggest in the first years of "legalized" gay marring, many enter into it who are already in polygamous relations, even with the knowledge and understanding of the parties. This destroys the whole concept of marriage. And the only argument that made gay marriage legal before SCOTUS is whataboutism. RobSDe Plorabus Unum 13:47, 15 February 2020 (EST)
Bernie: I promise to spend the remainder of our childrens' patrimony on Medicare for All adults, who are the ones always needing to see the doctor. We'll do it right under their noses, and once they figure out what we've done, we'll see a REAL revolution. After all the bloodshed we'll have a true socialist nation where we can practice cultural Marxism all we want, and the social chaos that ensues will be smoothed over by taking out our anger on former beneficiaries of capitalism and practitioners of heroic morals! VargasMilan (talk) Saturday, 19:07, 15 February 2020 (EST)
Bernie is already "moving to the center", if such a thing were possible. RobSDe Plorabus Unum 19:11, 15 February 2020 (EST)

Trump's Whisper Network

The media is all abuzz with a recent NYT op-ed, Trump's Whisper Network. It claims 2/3 of undecideds vote Trump (so just add that figure to any poll between now and election day). But among the other gems in this liberal tripe is this:

Republicans will organize their campaign around the country’s material prosperity under Trump; Democrats around its moral deterioration,

coming from the same people fielding a lily-white field of 5 sexist and racist Democrats who railroaded all candidates of color out and rigged the rules for a greedy white male capitalist to carry the banner of anal sex as a human right and transgender bathrooms. Sheesh.

Here's an idea for new slogan: We are the 90%! who, according to Gallup, are satisfied with our personal lives. RobSDe Plorabus Unum 20:52, 16 February 2020 (EST)

That's not enough. In the next four years, KAS: Keep America Satisfied. VargasMilan (talk) Sunday, 23:05, 16 February 2020 (EST)
Buttigieg also "carries the banner" that homosexuality is ethically equal to heterosexuality. But he doesn't care about our opinion. "We were never asked." And we won't be anytime soon. He just threatens to reveal secrets about heterosexuals who so much as hint that being a homosexual could be disadvantageous to being an American president, even cancer patient Rush Limbaugh. VargasMilan (talk) Monday, 07:58, 17 February 2020 (EST)

AG Barr goes after "sanctuary cities"

Like the title says, Attorney General of the United States William Barr is beginning legal proceedings against wholly-secular "sanctuary cities", including enabling the victims of crimes by illegal immigrant brutes, who kill about 60 a year in the United States, to sue those municipalities for damages. I can't wait for the host municipalities' populations of illegal "pedophile parishioners" in "sanctuarium" locations to be sued by families of victims for millions.

These "sanctuaries" are not just dangerous, they are unconstitutional:

No State shall, without the consent of Congress, lay any duty of tonnage, keep troops or ships of war in time of peace, enter into any agreement or compact with another State or with a foreign power, or engage in war, unless actually invaded or in such imminent danger as will not admit of delay.

Any state that tolerates, or is forced to tolerate, these squatter-camps of illicitly-residing and criminally-prone foreigners, who can potentially be used to menace or mobilize against non-globalists and their allies as local policy is formulated and issued from day to day, is constitutionally derelict for keeping a thinly-disguised standing army in times of peace that has been gradually growing in recent times, all while, as citizens burdened and excluded from benefits under the unfair legally-enforced arrangement, "We were never asked".

For shame, globalists! For shame, America!

VargasMilan (talk) Monday, 03:06, 17 February 2020 (EST)

Vargas Milan is a self-nominated editorialist for Conservapedia Talk:Main Page, who is eligible for the Pulitzer Prize.

What is Dataclarifier doing?

In Conservapedia article Mysticism, he has entitled one section: "Protestantism as a form of Gnostic Christianity". Gnosticism is heretical! I don't feel that is appropriate!

Worse, he makes a major three-step error to back up this assertion. He begins with a description of what he calls a "relativistic" approach in Protestantism. Is this only Protestant approach? Everyone knows it is not. Is it even a Protestant approach at all? The author he goes on to cite as an example is Joseph Campbell, who is not even a Christian!

Secondly, in between he states, "The Historical-grammatical method (Literal hermeneutic) of orthodox catholic biblical hermeneutics directly contradicts this [relativistic] approach."

Fine. When you click the link to Historical-grammatical method (Literal hermeneutic), which he also wrote in its entirety, you find the method is not "orthodox catholic" at all but established by Dr. Martin Luther, the founder of Protestantism himself, in a break with "orthodox catholic" Bible interpretation!

Finally, the link to the source he cites to prove this that he includes, shows this is no substitution error of attribution, but it indeed proves Luther is the founder of the Historical-grammatical method (Literal hermeneutic).

So to sum up: Dataclarifier goes out of his way to make a point of insulting Protestantism for supposedly not using the very Bible interpretation method that the founder of Protestantism actually broke with Catholic tradition in establishing!

So I ask again, what is Dataclarifier doing? VargasMilan (talk) Monday, 11:18, 17 February 2020 (EST)

Yes, we have the same cut'n paste in Salvation. I inquired at talk. It appears nothing more than an attack on Protestantism and does not further an understanding of Salvation.
Elsewhere, in extensive discussion, Dataclarifier has

admitted point blank to denying the authority of scripture. So I have no qualms about reverting wholesale any contributions on the subjuct of scripture, or quoting scripture as a source. Myself and others have likewise found blatant misuse of scriptural passages.

I'd recommend engaging him on talk. If he fails to respond in a reasonable amount of time, or spams the page with hypertext and circular responses, just revert wholesale.
Mysticism I can't find in my Strong's Concordance, so I don't really have any interest or understanding of the subject. But attacks on Protestantism like that should probably be dealt with in Essay space.RobSDe Plorabus Unum 13:22, 17 February 2020 (EST)
I think you checkmated DataClarifier, and he may have resented it, and when he developed vivid fantasies of frustrating authority figures, he transfered them to you and decided to carry them out one day. Perhaps with the help of the DavidE account and perhaps to hamper Conservapedia by isolating and entangling one of its officers. A Parthian shot that ended prematurely. VargasMilan (talk) Monday, 14:33, 17 February 2020 (EST)
Here are the article pages with the "Protestantism is Gnosticism" paragraphs he pasted onto, if an admin would like to do some kind of bulk reversion in easily defined parts (main body and leftovers), because that is how I might do it.:
Gnosticism Protestantism
Christianity Liberal Christianity
Mythology Historicity of Jesus
Resurrection Salvation: declarational salvation and ontological salvation
Eternal security (salvation) Salvation
Great Apostasy Heresy
Mysticism Antinomianism
Sola spiritu Anabaptist
Bogomil: Bogomilism Cathar
Albigensians Neo-Gnosticism
I guess that's all I can do without risking complicating the use of Admin tools. VargasMilan (talk) Monday, 14:52, 17 February 2020 (EST)
Thanks. Good work. I'm going to revert all entries related to Biblical terms, pending his response at Talk:Salvation. The rest maybe you could undo, and if he seeks to edit war rather than engage on the Salvation Talk page, a short block may be in order. RobSDe Plorabus Unum 15:06, 17 February 2020 (EST)
  • The Gnostics were a group active in the second century who wrote spurious texts intended to undermine other people's religions. "Gnostic Christianity" is a phrase created by National Geographic to get people interested in the Gospel of Thomas. PeterKa (talk) 15:20, 17 February 2020 (EST)
Yes, this is a very large topic. And one can't do justice to it without a fullscale, proper examination of the History of the Christian Church in India. So from the First Century you have the problem of attaching a Greek word to describe Christian teaching in the multi-lingual Indian subcontinent - a task I readily admit too big for me to even begin qualifying sources from the First Century onwards. RobSDe Plorabus Unum 15:40, 17 February 2020 (EST)
Peter, Elaine Pagels used the phrase "Gnostic Christianity" in the 1981 edition of The Gnostic Gospels or earlier. This book made a media splash and was the National Geographic Gnostic media feature of its time. It had a lot of smearing together of ideas, and Pagels built a career on it. VargasMilan (talk) Tuesday, 10:31, 18 February 2020 (EST)
And thank you for sharing that description of Gnostics. I've never seen it before, and by my using it as a hypothesis, it makes so many unconnected ideas I've had about Gnosticism fall into place as an explanatory device. Do you think they had cultural Marxism in the second century? VargasMilan (talk) Tuesday, 10:51, 18 February 2020 (EST)
Summary of the argument (from Essay:_Water_baptism_cannot_save,_the_Church_cannot_save,_Born_again_by_faith_alone):
::"[RobSmith] say,
The argument seems to be:
  • The Bible, or Word of God, is not authoritative;
  • Salvation is dependent upon church membership;
  • While baptism qualifies a person for adoption into God's family, it is no guarantee; salvation still must be earned by good works, or at least the sacrificial death of Jesus is insufficient to cleanse one of certain sins.
Dataclarifier's response (after much redundant spamming alleged to be "intellectual and scholarly"):
"Your analysis of the argument is a fairly accurate summary,"
Based on his own words, all contributions in mainspace articles with the Template:Christianity are questionable. RobSDe Plorabus Unum 15:31, 17 February 2020 (EST)
Here's my take on summarizing User:Dataclarifier's doctrinal error in discussing the nature of Christianity: User:Dataclarifier has supplanted (by his own words) biblical teaching with histories of the sinful nature of man since the time of Christ, as if it is the authoritative Word of God. This clouds the message of the gospel of grace and salvation. It's an old Satanic trick, as old as the Bible itself (the serpent tempting Eve, Satan misquoting the bible to Jesus in wilderness, etc. etc. etc.). RobSDe Plorabus Unum 16:00, 17 February 2020 (EST)
For example: his exhaustive study of Bogomil: Bogomilism is about as interesting as the History of the Origins of Spaghetti, and does nothing to further the Gospel of Jesus Christ. But it looks intellectual and authoritative. RobSDe Plorabus Unum 16:14, 17 February 2020 (EST)
Gnosticism was a heresy. Protestantism is not a heresy. I just deleted the material and oversighted it. Conservative (talk) 16:28, 17 February 2020 (EST)
There is a reason a portion of history is called the Reformation. What happened during this period? Some things were reformed!Conservative (talk) 16:30, 17 February 2020 (EST)
Thanks. I rvv'd all else except the rant still on the Salvation page. I gave him 24 hours to explain it. If it he fails to engage properly, then it'll be reverted. RobSDe Plorabus Unum 16:44, 17 February 2020 (EST)

I got rid of the rant.

I could attempt to put in the Catholicism article the fact the many prominent Protestants have asserted that the Whore of Babylon in Revelations is the Catholic church. I could also mention that the identification of the Pope as the Antichrist was written into Protestant creeds such as the Westminster Confession of 1646. But I just don't see the point of it as it would never stay in the article given that there are Catholic Conservapedians who are consistent editors and the fact the owner of the website is a Catholic.

Dataclarifier needs to end his jihad against Protestantism at this wiki because none of the spaghetti he is throwing against the wall is going to stick. There are too many consistent and prominent editors of Conservapedia who are Protestants and they are not going to stand for it.Conservative (talk) 17:57, 17 February 2020 (EST)

He's confused the history of sinful man in the Christian era with biblical teaching and the Word of God. This unclean spirit has a grip on him RobSDe Plorabus Unum 18:25, 17 February 2020 (EST)
Do you think he's doing it to scandalize? Maybe it's his way of defiling what he doesn't like. Thanks everyone for all your help. VargasMilan (talk) Monday, 19:45, 17 February 2020 (EST)
I still consider anti-Papism as a form of bigotry, but the more he posts the more I understand why the UK House of Commons passed anti-Papist legislation. RobSDe Plorabus Unum 20:32, 17 February 2020 (EST)
“If and when the Vatican is attacked by ISIS, which as everyone knows is ISIS’s ultimate trophy, I can promise you that the Pope would have only wished and prayed that Donald Trump would have been President because this would not have happened." - Donald Trump, 2016[21]
"A survey of more than 42,000 people in 41 different countries conducted by revealed that President Donald Trump is more admired than Pope Francis."[22]Conservative (talk) 11:06, 18 February 2020 (EST)
Just as an FYI, speaking as someone who IS Catholic, we Catholics aren't fond of Pope Francis, especially when he's gutting many of our sacraments (and there's evidence that Benedict XVI was forced to resign by Obama and his cronies in order to install Francis.). Pokeria1 (talk) 11:23, 18 February 2020 (EST)
I will also make a bit clear that DataClarifier does ultimately have a point, especially after Conservative inferred that Catholicism was inherently authoritarian as was the Russian Orthodox church, and implied that Protestantism isn't authoritarian, not to mention how RobS pretty much stated in one of the earlier talks that Christians don't view themselves as a religion and even implied that the church stopped existing since after Jesus ascended into heaven and insisted on a more relativistic approach under the guise of a personal relationship. Quite frankly, if Jesus didn't want Christianity to exist, he would never have gone as far as to even state that Peter act as the foundation of his church, as I pointed out earlier in an old thread on the Talk page. Your comments in those places certainly don't help dissuade his claims. Pokeria1 (talk) 11:27, 18 February 2020 (EST)
We're back to the authoritative words of Jesus: My kingdom is not of this world; where two or more are gathered in my name, there I am also. Now you can reject the words of Jesus and think Christianity is some political movement akin to all the other Satanic political entities that have governed the planet since time immemorial, or you can have simple faith (trust) in God's word. Those who openly reject the authority of the logos, and/or add more to it to water it down - there isn't much question which side they are on.
I'm gonna get blunt here - a doctrine that preaches that a pope, Mormon President, Ayatollah or Caliph speaks for God and replaces the words of Jesus isn't just in error, it's in rebellion against God. RobSDe Plorabus Unum 13:59, 18 February 2020 (EST)
One more statement of faith: Dataclarifier repeatedly alleges that the essence of Christianity is being a do-gooder. It is not. Romans 4:5 However, to the one who does not work but trusts God who justifies the ungodly, their faith is credited as righteousness. The essence is trusting God (faith).
What is faith? Trust in the Lord with all your heart, and lean not on your own understanding - is a much clearer and straight forward definition of faith than the substance of things hoped for...etc. RobSDe Plorabus Unum 14:10, 18 February 2020 (EST)
Except Jesus also told Peter "You're the rock upon which I shall found my church", essentially making Saint Peter the first pope. That is wholly in contradiction with what you essentially claimed. By making Peter the rock, that essentially means Jesus made a political entity with the church. He would never have founded Christianity, certainly not make Saint Peter the foundation of it, otherwise. In fact, he would have slaughtered humanity just to ENSURE there IS no political movements even in his name, and since his kingdom is NOT of his world anyways, it's no loss for him either. If you're going to use that as the authoritative words of Jesus, you must accept that bit as well about Peter being the first Pope, since that ALSO came from Jesus's own authoritative words. And no, the essence of Christianity is to obey God's will absolutely, obey the ten commandments without question, not to mention the books of Leviticus, Deuteronomy, and Numbers, all of which came DIRECTLY from God via Moses (with the only exceptions being those Jesus himself removed, such as the dietary restrictions on pork and presumably shellfish). You can't have it both ways. In fact, to be blunt, using your argument, Jesus by even MAKING Saint Peter his first pope was in open rebellion against his father as well. After all, if his father didn't want any political parties of ANY sort, viewing it as Satanic, then Jesus shouldn't have made Saint Peter the rock upon which he built the Christian church. It's that simple. In fact, he would have done to humanity what Jimmy Carter did with the Shah of Iran, leave his followers to die just to ensure there IS no church, no political party to be had. And for the record, listen to yourself, your statement about how Jesus doesn't want political parties is EXACTLY what DataClarifier is referring to when he called Anarchism a form of Christian Gnosticism. Pokeria1 (talk) 14:39, 18 February 2020 (EST)
Nah, don't think so. Acts 1:6 Lord, will you at this time restore the kingdom to Israel? The followers still didn't get it. The followers still were walking in the flesh - even after all Jesus had been through. (IOWs, the followers were not spiritually born. Unless you are born again, you cannot enter the kingdom of God.)RobSDe Plorabus Unum 15:15, 18 February 2020 (EST)
The essence is faith - knowing that whatsoever He had promised, He was able to deliver, i.e. the resurrection. Faith in the resurrection. RobSDe Plorabus Unum 15:19, 18 February 2020 (EST)
Faith in the resurrection is the only doctrinal difference between Christianity and Orthodox Judaism. Orthodox Judaism even preaches grace. There are those however, even within Orthodox Judaism, that teach there is no afterlife. RobSDe Plorabus Unum 15:30, 18 February 2020 (EST)
Oh, I believe Jesus resurrected himself, alright, and quite frankly, I'm pretty sure if Jesus didn't want any politics, he would NOT have formed one with Christianity. In fact, he'd leave his followers to die at the Romans specifically to ensure no politic could ever be formed even in his own name. Pokeria1 (talk) 16:55, 18 February 2020 (EST)
When we speak of the resurrection, we are not speaking only about the first born from the dead. We are speaking about YOU being resurrected from death to life by faith in Christ. Behold, he is a new creature. Today is the day of salvation. The Resurrection begins the moment you are spiritually born, it does not occur after the spirit departs from a corpse. This is eternal life in Christ. RobSDe Plorabus Unum 17:18, 18 February 2020 (EST)

Statistically, Protestant countries have less corruption than Catholic countries ( Article on Protestant vs. Catholic religion and corruption).

In addition, here is data related to countries, Protestant missionaries and democracies/republics:

"Woodberry already had historical proof that missionaries had educated women and the poor, promoted widespread printing, led nationalist movements that empowered ordinary citizens, and fueled other key elements of democracy. Now the statistics were backing it up: Missionaries weren't just part of the picture. They were central to it...
Areas where Protestant missionaries had a significant presence in the past are on average more economically developed today, with comparatively better health, lower infant mortality, lower corruption, greater literacy, higher educational attainment (especially for women), and more robust membership in nongovernmental associations.
In short: Want a blossoming democracy today? The solution is simple—if you have a time machine: Send a 19th-century missionary."- Christianity Today, Surprising Discovery About Those Colonialist, Proselytizing Missionaries, January 8, 2014

As far as authoritarianism, on the whole, Protestantism and Protestant countries are less authoritarian. In my estimation, churches that follow the biblical model of authority via a pastor overseer/elders[23][24] are doing things correctly. There are Protestant churches where the pastor is authoritarian and there are nonexistent elders or weak elders leadership, but I would argue that is unbiblical.Conservative (talk) 16:40, 18 February 2020 (EST)

Except God himself IS authoritarian. How else could he rule over humanity without being an authoritarian? If he weren't authoritarian, he'd be a dithering dullard, and you know that's obviously not the case. Besides, I can name plenty of protestant sects, even ones helmed by John Calvin and Martin Luther, who are exceptionally authoritarian by your definition. Pokeria1 (talk) 16:53, 18 February 2020 (EST)
Our eternal destiny is still an individual choice. it's not dependent upon membership in a fellowship or because your parents sprinkled water on you as a child.
I'm sometimes amused by the preaching and testimonies I hear in Christian churches. For example, take the book of Exodus. In sum, God's people were protected from the plagues, witnessed God's mighty power in parting the sea and destruction of their enemies. Yet they still bowed down to worship the Golden Calf. What does this teach us about the rebellious heart of man? Yet I hear endless testimonies from contemporary Christians how somehow they have stronger faith than the eyewitnesses to God's mighty power - whose carcasses fell in the wilderness. Do these people even read their bibles with any understanding? RobSDe Plorabus Unum 16:59, 18 February 2020 (EST)
The Apostle Paul says to have peace with all men, if possible. In my personal life, I have productive relationships with Protestants, Jews, Muslims, etc. and fairly recently had a cordial relationship with an atheist (who was aware of my atheism articles).
Biblical Protestantism does not dispute that God is the ultimate authority and it argues that God is a just and benevolent authority. That does not negative the biblical model of church authority among Christians.
Also, Calvinism very much stresses the sovereignty of God.
The data does show that biblical Protestantism does have a very positive effect on societies. And this makes perfect sense given Jesus' teaching about a good tree producing good fruit. On the other hand, there are plenty of corrupt Catholic countries. Ireland is a decent country though. And Ireland is a beautiful country as well. I know there has been violence/friction between Catholics/Protestants in Ireland, but there is evidence that Catholics/Protestants have influenced each other in Ireland.[25] On the whole, Anglicanism is a weak form of Protestantism and its foundation was weak as well (King Henry VIII not being able to get annulment). So the type of Protestantism which often influenced Ireland was not ideal.Conservative (talk) 17:15, 18 February 2020 (EST)
As far as biblical Christianity, the matter of personal choice and salvation is not unanimous. There is Calvinistic/non-Calvinistic Protestantism.
This much is agreed on. God definitely does the calling and so He is the initiator.Conservative (talk) 17:20, 18 February 2020 (EST)
There is one cultural concept in many Catholic countries that I like to taunt atheists with. The concept of machismo! Olé! Olé! Olé! See: Essay: Does Richard Dawkins have machismo?Conservative (talk) 17:31, 18 February 2020 (EST)
The Catholic/Protestant split, both on the continent and in England, largely originated over real estate and beginning of corporate law (See mortmain). The Papacy held land deeds that they acquired from dead people. Local princes wanted the real estate for rents and tax revenue. Some men of God, Martin Luther for example, exposed the doctrinal fraud of the papacy's claims. In Ireland, the Irish sided with papists largely as an ally against their British oppressors, not out of any religious or doctrinal position. Much of it degenerated into political squabbles on the continent and in the British Isles, but the fraud of the breakaway, Unorthodox Roman Church was exposed. The Unorthodox Roman Church doubled down on error, adding more books to bible, making claims Peter and Pope (fill in the blank) had the authority of Christ, etc. etc. etc.
Baring Reform Protestant clergymen, the rest was a power grab between popes and princes. RobSDe Plorabus Unum 17:34, 18 February 2020 (EST)

Essay: Does Richard Dawkins have machismo? had the view counter reset. I estimate it has had over 100,000 page views.

It apparently got under the skin of the author John Grant who cited it in his book.[26] An agnostic/atheist at a forum who goes by username Hokulele wrote about the article: "Although the "Does Richard Dawkins have Machismo?" article is funny."Conservative (talk) 17:43, 18 February 2020 (EST)

Moral supremacy

Moral supremacy is the doctrine that those who have suffered the most, as a determining factor, deserve to rule over those that haven't—even if the suffering is self-inflicted, inducing the fabrication of oppression narratives that compete alongside the American black historical experience to make sure blacks don't get all the spots in liberal organizations.

It will never get discussed in that way, as it would be self-defeating (a too obvious demonstration that it leads to a political rule belonging to the same species of oppression complained about), but a repeated oppression narrative is simply inserted when an opposing political view arises that needs to be checked when it occurs at a politically inconvient time, [for example at a time], like [when] distracting from a new different narrative while it's beginning to harden. Hence, moral supremacy is the unexamined basis of intersectionality. VargasMilan (talk) Wednesday, 04:55, 19 February 2020 (EST) VargasMilan (talk) Wednesday, 19:52, 19 February 2020 (EST)

User Not Democrat template

Could one of the admins here lock this new user template I created to keep it from getting vandalized or otherwise messed with by any ill-intentioned trolls? Northwest (talk) 07:16, 19 February 2020 (EST)

Done Karajou (talk) 08:34, 19 February 2020 (EST)
Righteous, thanks.  :D Northwest (talk) 18:31, 19 February 2020 (EST)

Guidance counselor

I'm curious. Has anyone ever heard of the Occupational Outlook Quarterly? VargasMilan (talk) Friday, 01:41, 21 February 2020 (EST)

It's mentioned HERE for historical reasons.
Given that the Occupational Outlook Handbook is online, its not surprising that the Occupational Outlook Quarterly appears to have ceased publication.Conservative (talk) 04:06, 21 February 2020 (EST)
What I mean is, if it's available in any form at all, and it has been, why did shoals of college students take out large student loans in the Worst College Majors to go to expensive colleges and expect to pay the loans back quickly, if they have competent high school guidance counselors and could look up expected job demand and salary?
Likewise, why are businesses complaining there aren't enough qualified applicants if they can raise their salaries over the course of any three months (quarterly) of the year and attract more students to what must then be seen as the "Best College Majors" of the time through that same publication?
I never learned of the publication from my high school guidance counselor—didn't need to; I learned about it from the government advertising it on TV beginning in grade school!
Was this a marketing failure? Or did it fail some other way? Supposedly we billed future generations $6-8 trillion to prevent a depression; shouldn't we have at least gotten out of it some reality to a reasonably polled "occupational outlook" for the students entering college at that time?
This all looks like people warping the yardstick and then "measuring out" their adversity for their own share of government goodies or getting rid of the yardstick altogether like it never existed and trusting the adversity fishermen not to tell tall tales about size of the fish they caught when they try to sell them at the market? Or in today's oppression culture, probably the size of the fish that bit them. VargasMilan (talk) Friday, 05:43, 21 February 2020 (EST)

MPR: "replacement conspiracy"

MPR reads, "drop in its fertility rate to a below replacement level of births similar to Europe" I suggest modifying it to "'drop in its fertility rate similar to Europe" The mass shooting in Germany yesterday is attributed to a "right wing terrorist" motivated by "The Great Replacement conspiracy theory", according to German state TV. [27] The Great Replacement is the title of the New Zealand mosque shooting manifesto; "Jews will not replace us" was chanted by Charlottesville neo-nazis. We shouldn't use this term, "replacement". There are other ways to communicate the consequences of a drop in fertility. RobSDe Plorabus Unum 07:28, 21 February 2020 (EST)

Sanders wins New Hampshire

Before Iowa, just a couple of weeks back, Joe Biden was the Democratic frontrunner. In New Hampshire, Electable Joe came in fifth. Things didn't go much better for Warren, also a former frontrunner. She came in fourth. Together, the media's two favorite candidates got less than 18 percent of the vote. Is everyone looking forward to the coming battle between Bernie Sanders and Michael Bloomberg for the soul of the Democratic Party? It's hard to see either one as a threat to Trump. This has got to be the party's worst week since Appomattox. PeterKa (talk) 05:49, 12 February 2020 (EST)

Amy Klobuchar is a long shot, but she still may win the Democratic presidential nomination. It may depend on Michael Bloomberg recognizing he isn't going to get enough racial minority support to win in 2020 and dropping out. It comes down to intelligence vs. ego with Michael Bloomberg. If intelligence prevails, he will drop out. Personally, I think Bloomsberg's ego is going to win this fight and he will not drop out soon. By the time he drops out, he will have created more dissension in an already divided party.Conservative (talk) 12:11, 12 February 2020 (EST)
Pete Buttigieg did well. Lots of Fox News Channel types are saying he can't win, but many of them said the same thing about Barack Obama in 2008.--Andy Schlafly (talk) 12:13, 12 February 2020 (EST)
Trump will put pressure on Fox News and they will start being attack dogs who attack Pete Buttigieg. Even his fellow homosexuals doubt Buttigieg can win. Los Angeles Times: Gay voters take pride in Pete Buttigieg’s candidacy, but many question whether he can win.[28]
On top of this, while wimpy McCain and wimpy Romney did not attack Obama's leftist past, Trump is not going to be reluctant in pointing out how left leaning Pete Buttigieg is.Conservative (talk) 12:24, 12 February 2020 (EST)
Enlarge the place of thy tent, and let them stretch forth the curtains of thine habitations: spare not, lengthen thy cords, and strengthen thy stakes; - Is 54:2.
The Socialist take over of the DNC is complete. Time for the GOP to welcome Democrat refugees with a open arms. This change is permanent. Democrats must rely on the votes of dead people, illegal immigrants, and felons. Republicans must learn to form coalitions with people they never imagined they would. RobSDe Plorabus Unum 12:38, 12 February 2020 (EST)

Here is the difficult part. If Trump attacks an upcoming opponent, it could stoke Democratic support for the opponent and Trump's team may recognize this. Maybe the reason why Amy Klobuchar doesn't have a Trump nickname yet is because she is the biggest threat. But the lack of a Trump nickname for Klobuchar is probably because he doesn't see her as a threat yet. In addition, Trump doesn't want to get the suburban women mad at him. Also, Klobuchar comes across nice with her "Minnesota niceness", so voters could see a Trump attack against her as being akin to a Rottweiler attacking a Yorkshire Terrier. Also, Klobuchar is more feminine than Warren so attacking her is going to get more blowback. Despite the growth of feminism in the USA, people still don't like men attacking women.

Also, if Trump says nice things about a potential opponent, this could cause Democrats to dislike that person.

This is definitely 3D political chess!Conservative (talk) 12:49, 12 February 2020 (EST)

RobS, the socialist takeover of the Democratic Party is not permanent. Losing election after election has a sobering effect on political parties.
The long term solution in defeating socialism in the USA is to offer more school/education choice and starve public schools and universities of cash. The root cause of socialism in the USA is the educational system. The Trump administration will need political will and one more conservative SCOTUS judge in order to make big changes in the educational system.
In addition, in order to reduce socialism in the USA, the Trump administration should increase the ease of doing business in the USA so there is more small business growth.
The 2007/2008 financial crises accelerated the growth of socialism in the USA. The USA needs to have people be better able to stand on their own two feet and have more opportunity. More school choice would raise the quality of education and help people become more independent. So would making it easier for people to start businesses. Conservative (talk) 13:18, 12 February 2020 (EST)
Snow woman. Klobuchar looks like a real heavyweight threat, even as VP. RobSDe Plorabus Unum 13:21, 12 February 2020 (EST)
I think Amy Klobuchar's Minnesota accent is too thick for her to win the Democratic primary. Walter Mondale did not have such a thick Minnesota accent. In addition, she is more feminine than Hillary/Warren and I don't think America is ready for a feminine president. Also, the Democrats want a fighter in the ring with "Trump the political brawler" and she doesn't fit the bill.
But after all is said and done, Klobuchar is the most likeable Democratic candidate and likeability is important in politics. I think Klobuchar is the biggest threat right now because Michael Bloomberg's NYC police stop and frisk policy and his quotes about it are coming out. And Bloomberg can't win without racial minority support.Conservative (talk) 13:32, 12 February 2020 (EST)
Amy Klobuchar being the biggest threat to Donald Trump = Trumpslide 2020.Conservative (talk) 13:33, 12 February 2020 (EST)
Larry Nichols explains the difficulty in running against Commucrats: [29]
You've got one candidate saying, "If you vote for me I'm gonna give you $5,000 reparation or $25,000 for a family of four". Now if you're a black person and you say, "I don't believe they really can do that. It doesn't make sense, that they can do that. But you know what, I gotta see. You know, it's a shot. We gotta take that." $25,000 can save some people's lives, and you have got to at least try it.

Same thing with the colleges. You've got families that have college-age students going into school running up huge debts or the families having to pay huge amounts of money for them to go to college. Yeah, and a candidate is sitting there saying "if you vote for me I want to do away with all college cost". It's all three. Yeah. You know, if you're in that category, if somebody has kids going to college, yeah. You almost hope to see if they'll do it.

So you have no fault then. Look at the other category. If you're one of the people that's sitting there with a $1500 or fifty to a hundred thousand dollar college loan debt, and somebody says, "I want to wipe it out", well once again you may not believe it, you may not think it's true, but you're boxed in because you kind of got to see, you know, it's worth a shot.
RobSDe Plorabus Unum 13:39, 12 February 2020 (EST)
I realize it is harder to fight against socialists post 2007/2008 financial crises, but in some ways it is easier. Right-wing populism is growing in Europe/USA/Latin America/world. There has been more failures of big government such as France, Venezuela, etc.Conservative (talk) 13:45, 12 February 2020 (EST)
Another reason it is harder to promote socialism now is that trust in media is lower now.Conservative (talk) 13:46, 12 February 2020 (EST)

Furthermore, now that Trump is making NATO nations pay more for their defense, it will be harder for center-left European governments to provide quality healthcare - especially with aging populations.Conservative (talk) 13:51, 12 February 2020 (EST)

My point is, the same tired old arguments of free stuff v. individual responsibility isn't the message centrists and center-left Democrats are looking for. We need to be accommodating. Even Chris Matthews expressed fear of violence and fear for his life in the face of Bernie's fascist brigades. We need to adapt. RobSDe Plorabus Unum 13:59, 12 February 2020 (EST)
Our message can be simple: confidence and reality. Save the ideological stuff for later. We need to exude confidence in the future. It is the real hope fearful people are looking for. RobSDe Plorabus Unum 14:04, 12 February 2020 (EST)
Leadership (which includes having confidence and showing bona fide concern for your followers) and quality education are important in order to defeat socialism.
"Ethos, Pathos, and Logos are modes of persuasion used to convince audiences. They are also referred to as the three artistic proofs (Aristotle coined the terms), and are all represented by Greek words... Ethos or the ethical appeal, means to convince an audience of the author’s credibility or character... Pathos or the emotional appeal, means to persuade an audience by appealing to their emotions... Logos or the appeal to logic, means to convince an audience by use of logic or reason."[30]
In order to convince people socialism is wrongheaded, using ethos, pathos and logos are all important. And part of employing ethos to argue against socialism is telling people to accept responsibility for their lives.Conservative (talk) 14:14, 12 February 2020 (EST)
We're talking to each other. We need to be talking to centrist Democrats. RobSDe Plorabus Unum 14:26, 12 February 2020 (EST)
Center-left Democrats are screwed at the presidential level in 2020 and probably 2024.
AOC has a big social media presence and it will take awhile for the educational system to be reformed. Center-left Democrats should vote for conservative Republicans if they want more money in the pocketbook. And if they don't want social anarchy that doesn't even recognize that gender is not merely a social construct, but has a strong biological basis. And of course, desecularization and right-wing populism are very strong trends right now (see: Decline of the secular left).
Resistance is futile. Trade in your weak, center-left pony for a strong, right-wing, Christian horse!Conservative (talk) 17:19, 12 February 2020 (EST)
Rumor is AOC faces a tough primary challenge (she won with total of 12,000 primary votes cast in district of 700,000) and has her eye on Schumer's Senate seat. RobSDe Plorabus Unum
Donald Trump repeated the Senate rumor, so it's getting a lot of circulation.
In 2019 only 10% of Democrats believed the economy was getting better. That suggests to me they are not good listeners to political arguments, and that the attitude of Democrats in Congress at the State of the Union are not unique. But the Democrats in Congress are in a position to know better, which, together with the impeachment remarks I saw, suggests to me that they are filled with lies.
As an aside, I understand that Nancy Pelosi didn't introduce the president at the State of the Union with customary complementary words in addition to tearing up his speech. That doesn't bother me. When the Executive branch and the Legislative branch were chummy, it gave us globalism.
People like Chris Matthews and Ruth Bader Ginsburg brought the socialist/communist Frankenstein into being to serve as leverage on the far left for their side (where a little bit of force in numbers causes a big torque), got to depend on it, it grew, and now it is threatening them. VargasMilan (talk) Wednesday, 18:08, 12 February 2020 (EST)
White liberal socialists are learning the same thing blacks already know - Democrats give lip service to concerns, as long as they don't get too uppity and want change. Personally, I find the most despicable thing about this monster the Democrat establishment created is, they always knew the violent nature of the movement and that moderate Democrats were playing with dynamite by courting communist voters. RobSDe Plorabus Unum 18:59, 12 February 2020 (EST)

The Brexit political wave helped sweep Donald Trump into office. The next French and German national elections which will happen in 2017/2022 will move the political spectrum in the Western World to the right. Mike Pence/Donald Trump Jr. will ride these French/German political waves into the White House in 2024! Let's go surfin' now. Everybody's learning how. Come on and safari with me!Conservative (talk) 18:22, 12 February 2020 (EST)

Jan 30:—
Every element of establishment power — from the Bank of England to the BBC, from the universities to the Church of England, from the civil service to the world of high finance — mobilized in the effort to kill Brexit.
They failed.
—@Sohrab Ahmari
VargasMilan (talk) Thursday, 08:00, 13 February 2020 (EST)

MPR and Klobzilla

We need to begin attaching to Bernie and his fascist supporters, effective immediately, at every opportunity to link Bernie and his violent supporters to Antifa, Bernie Bros, and the unhinged violence caused by Sanders and his brownshirt supporters over the past 3 years.

Also, wee should make light of Bloomberg's racist views and agenda at every opportunity. RobSDe Plorabus Unum 01:02, 13 February 2020 (EST)

Feb 12:—
"Does anyone with a functioning frontal lobe disagree with this? By pursuing the wacky idea of having cops frisk kids in high-crime areas for minor offenses like turnstile jumping, Mayor Rudy Giuliani cut the murder rate from more than 2,000 per year to about 600. No one thought it could possibly go any lower -- and then Bloomberg got murders down to an unfathomable 300 or so per year.
"Giuliani and Bloomberg did more for young minorities than all living Democrats combined. In New York City alone, at least 20,000 more black men are alive today than would be under the genius crime-fighting ideas of prior administrations (and The New York Times)."
—Ann Coulter
VargasMilan (talk) Thursday, 03:38, 13 February 2020 (EST)
I have to admit I'm a little depressed that Klobzilla was too big even for Talk:Main Page. VargasMilan (talk) Thursday, 07:01, 13 February 2020 (EST)
C'mon now. We know this game. Democrats play stupid and ignorant, then suddenly they are sharp as a tack with facts. It doesn't matter. We're going forward with the plan. Trust the plan. RobSDe Plorabus Unum 11:06, 13 February 2020 (EST)
This has to be your most cryptic reply yet. Then again I don't rely on Rolling Stone magazine or website (MPR) to choose crime-fighting methods. We'd still be wondering what to do if it were up to them. VargasMilan (talk) Thursday, 18:08, 13 February 2020 (EST)
We'll see who carries New York's electoral votes in a Trump/Bloomberg matchup, Bloomberg who tossed Blacks in jail in a mass incarceration round up, or Trump who bailed them out with the First Step Act. Either way, it is the Republicans (Trump and Bloomberg) who liberated Blacks from the Democrat plantation. RobSDe Plorabus Unum 18:40, 13 February 2020 (EST)
You said it was Biden who did that. VargasMilan (talk) Thursday, 20:53, 13 February 2020 (EST)
Bloomberg stopped and frisked 500,000 minorities before it was ruled unconstitutional, and after Rudy only did 92,000 over the same amount of time. RobSDe Plorabus Unum 23:56, 13 February 2020 (EST)
I saw statistics that show that 95% of the gun perps and victims were minorities. Nationwide John Lott says it's 59%. I understand stop, question and frisk got shortened to stop and frisk, and some instances became unconstitutional VargasMilan (talk) Friday, 02:02, 14 February 2020 (EST)
Stop and frisk was an updated form of racial profiling. It was justified (as Bloomberg says) by disproportionately deploying police resources in "high crime neighborhoods", i.e. "minority neighborhoods." SCOTUS ruled a long time ago frisking without probable cause is ok as an "officer safety issue". 'Stopping' without probable cause can be a violation of a person's right to 'pursue happiness'. 'Questioning' is an investigation which requires probable cause. Most arrests resulted in marijuana charges, which was the point Louis Farrakhan made in his famous "That's a wicked woman" comment (precursor of Trump's "nasty woman"); ReasonTV posted yesterday the point that Bloomberg once said he "enjoyed" marijuana, yet arrested hundreds of thousands of poor minority kids for possession of a blunt - which is exactly the same point Tulsi Gabbard made that destroyed Kamala Harris's campaign. RobSDe Plorabus Unum 09:02, 14 February 2020 (EST)
Klobzilla has 7 delegates. Joe Biden merely has 6 delegates. Andrew Yang dropped out of the race. Senator Michael Bennet dropped out. Joe Walsh dropped out. John Delaney dropped out. Senator Cory Booker dropped out. Marianne Williamson dropped out. Julián Castro dropped out. Senator Kamala Harris dropped out. Governor Steve Bullock dropped out.

She's the most foul, cruel, and bad-tempered Minnesotan you ever set eyes on! Former aides have called Klobzilla "dehumanizing" - not merely "demanding."[1] She's got huge, sharp... She can leap about. Look at the bones of her political adversaries!

I warned you, but did you listen to me? Oh, no, you knew it all, didn't you? Oh, she's just a harmless little Minnesotan, isn't she? Well, it's always the same. I always tell them.
Stop and frisk could have worked if arrests were limited to seizure of illegal guns, as Giuliani used it; Bloomberg expanded it to arrests for possession of a blunt. Due to the marginal legal basis of the policy, officers often make an arrest for whatever they can to CYA to protect themselves from charges of violating due process and civil rights. It's not surprising courts finally tossed it out. However, it still can be practiced in neighborhoods, say on a street corner for instance, where police receive an excessive number of complains about dope trafficking cause that in itself can create probable cause.
OTOH as well, if New York did not have such stringent gun control laws, and the 2nd Amendment were respected, Stop and frisk would not be much of a concern. Here, as usual, you have another great example of Democrats "voting against their own interests". RobSDe Plorabus Unum 09:12, 14 February 2020 (EST)
I haven't heard too much talk about the "superdelegates" this nomination season. So much so I have to ask myself whether they exist anymore. They would have the choice of giving Bernie Sanders the thumbs up or the thumbs down for the nomination if he maintains a lead with a rate of less than about 50% of the available delegates. Maybe it's being kept hush-hush so the party elites can snipe Bernie and maintain the element of surprise against the resulting angry Democratic nomination voters as they work to subdue them. VargasMilan (talk) Thursday, 21:13, 13 February 2020 (EST)
The DNC which changed the rules to let Mini Mike in, now is discussing changing the rules on Superdelegates. As of now, Superdelegates vote on the second round (there hasn't been a second round in either party since 1952). 20% of Superdelegates can swing a convention for a candidate with a plurality (actually, even a majority) of the popular vote in primaries, if Superdelegates are allowed to vote in the first round to avoid the embarrassment of an open convention. RobSDe Plorabus Unum 23:56, 13 February 2020 (EST)
Thank you. VargasMilan (talk) Friday, 02:02, 14 February 2020 (EST)
Like George McGovern, our country needs to decisively reject the Bernie Sanderses of the world. VargasMilan (talk) Thursday, 23:22, 13 February 2020 (EST)
Dick Morris attributes Klobzilla's success to women voters fleeing Biden and Warren. This is an interesting new phenomenon. In an age of feminism, gay marriage, homosexual rights, and the War on Family, it's the first time women voted en bloc for a woman because she is a woman - something Hillary only dreamed of - without that woman explicitly running on an anti-family & feminist platform. It's basically a default anti-male protest vote. Even after Klobzilla drops out, this unorganized voting bloc and its motivations remain. RobSDe Plorabus Unum 11:05, 15 February 2020 (EST)

Bannon is a CP reader

Bannon quotes directly from CP's Bloomberg entry: ": Bloomberg has a personal vendetta against Trump"; "personal vendetta" was uncited cause its my original research. RobSDe Plorabus Unum 16:22, 16 February 2020 (EST)

Gosh, you're right. The Youtube video does indeed contain the sentence "Bloomberg has a personal vendetta against Trump". That sentence also gets 5.4 million Google hits. Are you sure your article was the one being cited? SamHB (talk) 00:38, 17 February 2020 (EST)
Sam, you've got to put it in quotes. When you do that, it's only 44. Did you see I skipped the lecture? Wasn't that nice of me? VargasMilan (talk) Monday, 06:59, 17 February 2020 (EST)
(EC) I did put it in quotes. When I do the query now, in quotes, I get over 6 million hits. That must be an extremely popular talk page. Did you perhaps have your browser set to exclude Commie sites? SamHB (talk) 11:27, 17 February 2020 (EST)
By "skipped the lecture" did you mean you refrained from pointing out my stupidity and intellectual ineptness? Yes, I saw that, and I appreciate it. SamHB (talk) 11:29, 17 February 2020 (EST)
I don't think I've ever used such a global negative about your thinking skills; however, I recently mentioned, as is true sometimes, in some cases, you can do better. VargasMilan (talk) Monday, 11:42, 17 February 2020 (EST)
Vargas, my friend, I was being playful. In nearly all of my talk page interactions with you, I assume playfulness on both sides. (The same is true of my other friend Cons.) If there was some kind of serious "lecture", exhorting me to do better in my interactions on this site, I'd like to hear it. SamHB (talk) 19:33, 17 February 2020 (EST)
My OR is somewhere in the diffs. This illustrates the role of CP; while national conserv's may not link directly, they get good ideas and rhetoric under free license that they can claim as their own. RobSDe Plorabus Unum 13:04, 17 February 2020 (EST)
It's up to 6.33 million now. That's a heck of a lot of people getting "good ideas and rhetoric" from you. Keep up the good work. SamHB (talk) 19:33, 17 February 2020 (EST)
Steve Bannon is a world-historical figure. This is a big deal. VargasMilan (talk) Monday, 19:58, 17 February 2020 (EST)
I'm just an unsung hero of the anti-Bloomberg revolution. Democrats one day will thank me for this. RobSDe Plorabus Unum 20:26, 17 February 2020 (EST)
Oh, yeah, I'm an unsung hero too. But Conservative is not a hero. He's an unsung person. VargasMilan (talk) Wednesday, 22:15, 19 February 2020 (EST)

Sometimes to get things done it is better to be unsung. Many right-wingers/conservatives crave the limelight and don't work well with others. And it is hard to get things done by yourself. Anne Coulter said Stephen Miller has thwarted Donald Trump in getting better immigration policies done because he wants to be given all the credit himself. Ronald Reagan said, "It is amazing what you can accomplish if you don't care who gets the credit".

And let's not forget what the strategist Sun Tzu said. ""Be extremely subtle, even to the point of formlessness. Be extremely mysterious, even to the point of soundlessness. Thereby you can be the director of the opponent's fate." - Sun Tzu. Conservative (talk) 02:26, 20 February 2020 (EST)

Each situation is different. Donald Trump takes a lot of action and does things to get attention to "flood the zone" because opposing journalists have a hard time following more than one shiny ball at once. So it is harder for them to really focus on one thing and get traction. And then add to the mix that Trump trolls journalist/liberals/leftists to further flood the zone. "If your opponent is of choleric temperament, seek to irritate him." - Sun Tzu.
Again each situation calls for different strategies/tactics. "Do not repeat the tactics which have gained you one victory, but let your methods be regulated by the infinite variety of circumstances." - Sun Tzu. Conservative (talk) 02:32, 20 February 2020 (EST)
How about a thank you for the compliment? It's not as if I insecurely used the fancy title on myself, drained it of its poetry and then condescendingly pretended I "fixed" it so it could be applied to you too! Some people. VargasMilan (talk) Thursday, 15:51, 20 February 2020 (EST)
  • Many right-wingers/conservatives crave the limelight and don't work well with others - in addition to black and Hispanic males ages 16-25 as well. RobSDe Plorabus Unum 00:11, 24 February 2020 (EST)

The cold hard facts

Look, let me warn you in advance: if Bloomberg offers to pay me $10,000 to call one of you guys a loser, I'm taking it.

Let's hope black voters are less accommodating in their politics than me toward Democratic presidential candidates, like RobS recently claimed. VargasMilan (talk) Friday, 08:51, 21 February 2020 (EST)

"Given the cash that Bloomberg is throwing around, you can set the countdown clocks now for a surge of 'former Republicans' in the media to develop a 'strange new respect' for the diminutive geriatric billionaire purely out of their 'pragmatic principles'". —Buck Sexton

VargasMilan (talk) Friday, 08:54, 21 February 2020 (EST)

Klo-butcher ought to be cashing in on SC blacks right now (despite NAACP opposition); elsewise their choices are breathing life into Biden's corpse, bending over for Bootyboy, or sanctioning stop n frisk Bloomberg. What's not being reported is mainstream Blacks' wholesale rejection of communist liberals and progressives like Sanders and Warren (and by extension, Obama). RobSDe Plorabus Unum 08:58, 21 February 2020 (EST)
Cold hard facts are, Blacks and Hispanics are the "moderates" of the Democratic party. That's why there are no moderates left in the Democratic party. Blacks and Hispanics oppose the Planned Parenthood genocide of their race. That's why the communists, Booker and Harris, had no Black support. That's why Blacks and Hispanics are leaving the Democrat party. That's why insiders pin their hopes on a RINO racist. RobSDe Plorabus Unum 17:21, 21 February 2020 (EST)
You said Booker and Harris were torpedoed by Democratic white racists not Democratic moderate minorities.
And who is this RINO racist? You do know RINO means Republican In Name Only. So how can the Democrats be running a candidate with a Republican "name"?
I would encourage readers to allow Rob to answer next week if he likes and in the meantime give him the benefit of the doubt, given the amount of knowledge he has been shown to have exhibited over long periods of time. VargasMilan (talk) Friday, 20:32, 21 February 2020 (EST)
Booker and Harris, who had maybe 4% between the two of them, were torpedoed by white racists lack of support and minority pro-family, God-fearing anti-socialists.
Why do you think we call them RINO? cause they are racist democrats and Republican in Name Only. RobSDe Plorabus Unum 21:33, 21 February 2020 (EST)

Mighty Bloomberg checked at last by fate, and it's not pretty

"Twitter suspends 70 Bloomberg-boosting accounts for violating company policy" — New York Post. (h/t @Ethics13) VargasMilan (talk) Saturday, 04:24, 22 February 2020 (EST)

Speaking of Mighty Bloomberg, what gave Conservative the idea to link to that Mighty Mouse video? It's not as if the theme song has replayed in my head over 30 to 40 times ever since then or anything. VargasMilan (talk) Saturday, 04:32, 22 February 2020 (EST)

  • This is Twitter saying, "Hey Bloomberg, where is our money?" PeterKa (talk) 06:19, 22 February 2020 (EST)
The contrast is interesting. Bloomberg, who regards Trump as an amateurish billionaire rival. has shown himself as the product of the insular world of New York City with no understanding of the outside world; and Trump who was schooled in both the New York and national media markets and among the New York lobbying class hasn't even slung a shot at this Goliath yet. Like Hillary, Bloomberg's stumbling over his own money, power, and ego. Critics say that about Trump, but thus far it's proven illusory. RobSDe Plorabus Unum 07:50, 22 February 2020 (EST)
This is a Must Watch! RobSDe Plorabus Unum 16:01, 22 February 2020 (EST)
Don't count Michael Bloomberg out in terms of winning the Democratic primary. Bernie Sanders had a heart attack. Sanders said doctors recommended he do more walking and get more sleep. Will Sanders do that during a presidential primary campaign?
Yes, Michael Bloomberg might win the Democratic primary over Sanders assisted by the Grim Reaper. I know the Grim Reaper has his faults, but if there is one thing that can be said of the Grim Reaper is that he is persistent!Conservative (talk) 02:01, 23 February 2020 (EST)
I would also point out that anger and heart conditions don't go well together.[31][32] Does Bernie Sanders ever sound like he is angry? Don't count the cool, calm and collected Michael Bloomberg out! Even under withering attack by Elizabeth Warren during the Nevada debate, Bloomberg did not get angry or break a sweat!Conservative (talk) 02:11, 23 February 2020 (EST)
You're thinking in terms of an old fashioned honest election, with an honest media, and no IC interference where voters get to decide the Democratic nominee. Those rules don't apply anymore. RobSDe Plorabus Unum 02:17, 23 February 2020 (EST)

Rob S overturned?

Understandably, Nevada has a lot of low-income service workers, but still? 54% of Hispanic primary voters picked Bernie in Nevada primary entrance poll. Blacks, 28%. VargasMilan (talk) Sunday, 05:42, 23 February 2020 (EST)

Bernie's winner halo and his economic "arguments" (class warfare and "free" stuff) trumped race. Also, see my arguments in this section.Conservative (talk) 11:02, 23 February 2020 (EST)
Yes, no, and maybe. You have to look participation rates by demographic group. To say, "Blacks voted blah blah blah" is meaningless. You have to look at the Democrat primary participation rate of blacks at its peak in 2008 and 2012; then compare it to 2016 and 2020. What you will find is apathy in a shrinking base. RobSDe Plorabus Unum 16:19, 23 February 2020 (EST)

Bernie ahead of Bloomberg 31 points

Bloomberg flew too close to the sun and was Berned to a crisp. Only Superdelegate can save us now. VargasMilan (talk) Thursday, 16:00, 20 February 2020 (EST)

Bloomberg certainly had an awful night in Nevada. Bernie may be the frontrunner at this point, but he is getting only 30 percent in the polls. The other 70 percent of primary voters can viewed as potential Bloomberg supporters. Bloomberg has enough money to finance a comeback. He seems to understand what went wrong in Nevada and can be expected to improve his performance next time. He was a good mayor. He should defend stop-and-frisk and the rest of his record. If he continues to apologize for it, what selling point does he have? "Vote for me. I have a pile of money"? Or even worse, "Vote for me. Some of Bernie's supporters are rude."
Everyone noticed Warren's slash and burn performance. If she still wanted the nomination, she would focus on Bernie. But instead she attacks Bloomberg. This makes sense only if she has given up on the nomination and is staying in the race to be Bernie's running mate or secretary of state. PeterKa (talk) 19:20, 20 February 2020 (EST)
RobS says blacks won't vote for Warren. This could spell more defections. If so, we needn't bother looking up the demographics, since although blacks make up 25% of the Democratic primary, if the undecided non-participants who might vote Trump in the general election are swayed toward the larger half of the expected range (about 30%), it will be enough to swing the election to Trump without counting new defections. VargasMilan (talk) Thursday, 19:52, 20 February 2020 (EST)
That was some debate. Bloomberg "brought his wallet to a knife fight," as the pundits are saying. Take a look at what it did to the odds. Sanders soared from 40 percent to 51 percent. Bloomberg dropped from 32 percent to 22 percent. Warren jumped from 2 percent to 4 percent. PeterKa (talk) 20:44, 20 February 2020 (EST)
A lot more people are going to see Bloomberg's adverts than the debate. Bloomberg better work with some debate coaches before the February 25, 2020 debate. He needs to be less of a mini Mike in the debates and more of a Mighty Mouse.Conservative (talk) 22:30, 20 February 2020 (EST)
As long as Elizabeth Warren is in the race and at the debates, Michael Bloomberg will probably receive beatdowns. Bloomberg's past gives her a lot of ammunition. And given his attitude/personality and the amount of time left in the debate schedule, he probably will not become a much better debater in order to be spared beatdowns.Conservative (talk) 02:56, 21 February 2020 (EST)
The only hope for the remnants of alleged Democrat "moderates" now is Klo-butcher. Nevada is a caucus state. Klo-butcher is heir of Minneapolis Mayor Donald Frazier (of the McGovern-Fraser Commission) who saved the caucus system in primary elections (Minnesota is a caucus state). If Klo-butcher can't unify the Biden/Bootyboy/Bloomberg/Steyer elements behind her in the Nevada Caucuses to Stop Bernie, my fear is the elitist Democrat Superdelegates will use this failure to do away with the caucus system completely in future elections. RobSDe Plorabus Unum 07:44, 21 February 2020 (EST)

In unrelated news, the FBI has informed Bernie Sanders they are investigating possible covert Russian support for his presidential campaign. VargasMilan (talk) Friday, 18:43, 21 February 2020 (EST)

Oh, so the FBI changed its policy about publicly commenting on national security counterintelligence investigations. I must have missed that news item. RobSDe Plorabus Unum 16:28, 23 February 2020 (EST)
No, they just maintained their policy about secretly commenting on national security counter-intelligence investigations. VargasMilan (talk) Monday, 03:48, 24 February 2020 (EST)
It's a combination of two things: a tainted briefing by deep staters in the IC to Schiff's committee, then leaked by Schiff's staff with added spin for maximum effect.
The reason for this is simple: leaks of classified information from on oversight committee in the Legislative Branch are handled differently than internal leaks from the Executive Branch. It's a separation of powers issue; Legislative Branch officials are not necessarily bound by the same rules as Executive Branch officials are. Executive Branch leak investigators do not have the same authority to investigate congressional staff that they have in Executive Branch agencies. The result of classified Executive Branch material from Legislative Branch staffers can be quite sensational news headlines for Wapo and NYT with little or no follow-up investigation of its source . RobSDe Plorabus Unum 12:22, 24 February 2020 (EST)
Let's call it, "the legislative branch loophole". Misconduct by employees of the legislative branch are investigated by the Capital Police. The FBI must ask for permission or be invited in by the legislative branch to investigate a legislative branch employee.
Now, if a staffer leaks classified Executive branch material on the instructions of a Member of Congress, he or she has the protection of that member (See James Wolfe indictment). Even with overwhelming probable cause evidence the FBI/DOJ may have, prosecuting a Member of Congress for the mishandling of classified information obtained by the congressional oversight process, it leads to a constitutional separation of powers issue and potential crisis. This was case in the leaked Carter Page FISA application that gave birth to the Mueller investigation. Some of these issues were revisited in claims of Executive Privilege during the impeachment sham. Now Schiff and his deep states allies in the Executive Branch are playing the same game, again, with the "Russia favors Bernie" narrative. RobSDe Plorabus Unum 12:40, 24 February 2020 (EST)

The left is at risk of losing a ton of power around the world

At no point in my life have I ever seen the left at risk of losing so much power.

Trump will probably be re-elected. He will probably shift the SCOTUS even further right which would be a disaster for the left in the USA.

Bernie Sanders will lose much of his power when he is not elected to be POTUS.

Macron probably will not be re-elected and Germany is shifting to the right.

Even the communists in China risk losing power due to their mishandling of the coronavirus crisis.Conservative (talk) 00:28, 22 February 2020 (EST)

We need to maintain the proper perspective. People ask, "What has happened to the Democrat party since Obama left office?" That's not the right question. It was Obama who destroyed the Democrat party. Like Bernie and AOC, Obama was a subversive infiltrator since the day he entered politics in the 1990s, seeking to destroy the Democrat party and replace it with single party socialism. RobSDe Plorabus Unum 07:58, 22 February 2020 (EST)
Left of center organizations and moderate/conservative organization that are not careful about being infiltrated have a tendency to move leftward. For decades the Democrats have been creeping leftward. It is all a part of holding the ideologies of progressivism and/or evolutionism. Like Obama's view of homosexuality "evolved".
But with right-wing populism growing in the world, we are going to see more and more center and left of center organizations adopt more right-wing views. Often people don't like to be in the political wilderness with zero power.
If Obama did not come around, another person like him would have come around. Although Donald Trump might have ADHD to a certain extent, he is smarter than Obama overall and he is definitely more astute when it comes to business/economics. But Obama was articulate and he has a "racial shield" so some people were afraid to attack him. So he did get some things through, and he did manage to get some left leaning SCOTUS judges. So Obama did pave the way for Sanders.
But ultimately, Obama the progressive quickly shifted and his fundraising included big banks, etc. And he did the too big to fail corporate bailouts. Obama was a hypocritical politician who ultimately embraced neo-liberalism. And with the exception of ObamaCare and the SCOTUS judges, much of what he did is being erased by Trump. If Obama did not mock Trump at the correspondents dinner, maybe Trump would not have run in 2016. Conservative (talk) 17:02, 22 February 2020 (EST)
IMO, Bathhouse Barry and his transgender partner came in office 2009 having been "gay married" nearly 20 years earlier; his position "evolved" in his second term when won a mandate, stacked enough courts, and planted enough county registrars to come out of the closet. RobSDe Plorabus Unum 18:07, 22 February 2020 (EST)
I will tell you the same thing I told a friend of mine: Michelle Obama is a woman who had children. There is plenty to criticize about Barack/Michelle Obama about, calling Michelle a man/transgender is ridiculous.
Partisanship can warp people's thinking and the Michelle Obama is man/transgender notion is a prime example.
However, I would still like to have a document expert examine Barack Obama's long-form birth certificate! Given all the complicated tax forms and thick government regulations, just on that principle alone, Obama should have had to jump through that hoop given his love of the administrative state and big government!Conservative (talk) 00:14, 23 February 2020 (EST)
Looks like we gotta start the Obama body count article soon. [33] RobSDe Plorabus Unum 01:01, 23 February 2020 (EST)

Berniementum vs. Sleepy Joe Biden

Bernie Sanders decisively won the Nevada cause in the Democrat presidential primary. This probably shows he has momentum now.

Train moving.jpg

If Joe Biden had more humility and if his friends and family really cared enough about him to tell him unpleasant truths, Joe Biden would recognize he is not as mentally sharp as he used to be and should not be president of the United States. This is a sad state of affairs for Joe Biden.

Berniementum is going to hit Biden's presidential, Democratic primary candidacy like a runaway train by Super Tuesday or earlier. By that time, it might be too late for the more moderate Democrat presidential candidates to have a shot at winning the Democratic, presidential primary.Conservative (talk) 05:45, 23 February 2020 (EST)

RobS said black voters could revive Biden's corpse in South Carolina! VargasMilan (talk) Sunday, 06:03, 23 February 2020 (EST)
Syllogisms (deductions by analogies):
Premise: Nixon caused George McGovern to be his Democratic opponent.
Analogy: Nixon is to George McGovern as Trump is to Bernie.
Therefore Trump will try to make Bernie his Democratic opponent.
Premise: Sometimes a young branch flourishes from the root of a wilted tree.
Analogy: The Joe Biden campaign is to wilted tree as young branch is to South Carolina victory.
Therefore a South Carolina victory may flourish from the Joe Biden campaign.
Premise 2: Yet, when a young branch flourishes from the root of a wilted tree, it may only hasten the demise of the wilted tree.
Same analogy
Therefore a South Carolina victory may only hasten the demise of the presidential campaign of Joe Biden.
VargasMilan (talk) Sunday, 06:33, 23 February 2020 (EST)
Two points:
1. Joe Biden's South Carolina firewall may not hold.[34][35][36][37][38]
2. Even if Biden's firewall does hold, he is broke and a narrow South Carolina win may not be enough to obtain the necessary fundraising to compete on Super Tuesday - especially if Michael Bloomberg stubbornly sticks in the race and floods the zone with political advertising.Conservative (talk) 10:34, 23 February 2020 (EST)
Whites are the majority in the nation still. Given intermarriage, many Latinos self-identify as being White. The growth of Latinos has diluted the political strength of Blacks. There are Blacks who recognize their weakened position and some argue that if Biden can't even win the White vote, why should they support him anymore?
The amount of Blacks supporting Trump and leaving the Democratic Party has grown since 2016.
Bernie Sanders is doing better with Latinos and Blacks now.
RobS was wrong about the Black politician Kamala Harris being a formidable contender. She wasn't a formidable contender and has dropped out of the race. I was right that Harris didn't have the necessary likeability - especially given her former prosecutor past.Conservative (talk) 10:47, 23 February 2020 (EST)
As to Harris, DNC General Counsel and the middle man between Clinton and Christopher Steele, Marc Elias, was running Harris' campaign until November. In plain English that means, Harris was the DNC's official pick in 2019. When Elias quit, Harris quit. Elias was the bag man for the DNC who paid FusionGPS for the Steele dossier. RobSDe Plorabus Unum 16:55, 23 February 2020 (EST)

Bernie has "momentum"? Yes, in fracturing the Democrat party. Look at Chris Matthews. RobSDe Plorabus Unum 16:25, 23 February 2020 (EST)
Bernie Sanders now is similar to Donald Trump in his primary in 2016 in that Trump had a fractured opposition except for the insufficiently likeable Ted Cruz. Elizabeth Warren is even more unlikeable than Ted Cruz though.
One of the big differences is the Bernie Sanders is unlikely to be elected whereas Donald Trump at least had a decent chance to win given the unlikeability and incompetence of Hillary Clinton.Conservative (talk) 16:31, 23 February 2020 (EST)
Bernie was less than enthused to hear that he was Putin's choice from our beloved counterintelligence organs. The headline should read, Putin Wins Big in Nevada. And again, you have to look at participant rates to gauge momentum. Sanders isn't creating new voters; he's retaining loyalists from the machine he built 4 years ago and picking up a few regular Democrats. RobSDe Plorabus Unum 16:37, 23 February 2020 (EST)
Warren is toast. So is Biden, Klobuchar, and Steyer. There is a remaining contest between Buttigieg and Bloomberg, to see if Bloomberg can recover from ihs flopped entrance and pick up a few stragglers from Biden, Warren, etc. in the next two weeks. It's a two man race between Bernie and either Bootyboy or Bloomberg. Bloomberg has more money than Bootyboy. Most handicappers give the edge to Bootyboy, but the official Stop Bernie movement is behind Bloomberg. RobSDe Plorabus Unum 16:45, 23 February 2020 (EST)

Buttigieg was just a virtue signal nominee who never had a chance of winning. Many blacks are religious and don't agree with homosexuality. He was propped up in the beginning by homosexuals with extra cash because they have no children. And now he is funded by wealthy people in an age of populism. Conservative (talk) 17:21, 23 February 2020 (EST)

After Super Tuesday, it's a two man race between the frontrunner and a challenger. The contest right now is who will be the challenger, either Buttigieg, the people's choice, or Bloomberg, the establishment choice. The establishment wants to Stop Bernie with Bloomberg. RobSDe Plorabus Unum 17:42, 23 February 2020 (EST)
Elizabeth Warren knows she cannot win and she is not going to attack Bernie Sanders. Maybe she is hoping to be a SCOTUS judge of Bernie. And nobody else is going to land a knockout punch against Bernie. So Michael Bloomsberg has to knockout Bernie Sanders in the debate and defend himself against the machine gun fire of Elizabeth Warren. And let's face it, Bloomsburg has so much heavy baggage that he is a target rich debate opponent.
On top of this Michael Bloomsberg has to tranform himself in a very short amount of time into a great debater. I have 6 words for Michael Bloomberg that are taken from a movie: I wish you had more time.Conservative (talk) 19:37, 23 February 2020 (EST)
Warren is toast. To remain on the cutting edge, we shouldn't even be talking about her on MPR, or any other loser (Biden, Klobuchar, etc.) We should keep the public focused on the Sanders/Bootyboy/Bloomberg contest. RobSDe Plorabus Unum 19:46, 23 February 2020 (EST)
The nomination is already a one-man race. We don't need to cover any Democrat except Sanders. Hillary hates the guy, but her reasons are purely personal. She wants revenge because Bernie ran against her in 2016. Her supporters control much of the media, but that won't last. You don't go wrong with the grassroots by being the most left wing Democrat in the race. The media's hostility doesn't echo with primary voters, who don't care whether or not the candidate is a woman. If you did care, who would you vote for at this point? Bloomberg the only candidate who's got the money to challenge Sanders in the Super Tuesday primaries on March 3. Tuesday's debate is his last chance to come out swinging at Sanders. It's not going to happen. He understands that he won't be the nominee. Like Warren, he will play nice in the hope of being rewarded with a cabinet position or other consolation prize. PeterKa (talk) 21:06, 23 February 2020 (EST)
No way. I was told Biden would be out by South Carolina, and now look at him go! I'm willing to concede one candidate since you insist that you must be able to say how cool you were to have seen past the momentary conflicts to the big picture ahead of time: Tulsi Gabbard.
Tell me this: what if Biden wins big in South Carolina, gets whipped around like a slingshot toward Super Tuesday and he uses the momentum to score big as the underdog favorite? You'll have egg on your face trying to discuss the results, and worse, you had to put Conservapedia's reputation at risk to be a big shot. VargasMilan (talk) Monday, 16:57, 24 February 2020 (EST)
You may be right. Sanders' Castro gaffe, and Bloomy's inability to gain traction may have breathed life into Biden's Florida bid. Assuming Biden can win enough delegates to remain competitive after Super Tuesday and Florida, the question becomes can he make it to the convention without a heart-lung machine and respirator? The contest is becoming which geriatric can live the longest, Bernie, Biden, Bloomy or Warren? RobSDe Plorabus Unum 12:35, 28 February 2020 (EST)

You're leaving out the Superdelegate wildcard. If Sanders has only a plurality going into the convention, Superdelegates come into play. Additionally, if Bloomberg gains some footing in SC and Super Tuesday (anticipating Warren and Klobuchar's imminent withdrawls), the DNC may rig the rules to allow Superdelegates to vote on the first round. Whether the DNC would rig the Superdelegates for Buttigieg to Stop Bernie is debatable, but I think unlikely. RobSDe Plorabus Unum 21:58, 23 February 2020 (EST)
Pokeria raises an excellent point: the leftwing base is realizing that media crap spoon fed from MSNBC, WaPo, et al is unmitigated garbage - which not only exonerates Trump over the past four years but works to Trump's advantage now in 2020. We should not miss a beat in highlighting Sanders people criticizing Trump critics, like Chris Matthews, MSNBC, WaPo, the DNC, etc. etc. etc. RobSDe Plorabus Unum 22:16, 23 February 2020 (EST)

The more successful Joe Biden is in the South Carolina primary, the more likely a contested convention will be. That might be a disaster for Democrats and cause bitter feelings.

Each Democratic candidate has major weaknesses. It looks like a Trumpslide in 2020. Conservative (talk) 23:54, 23 February 2020 (EST)

SC is a test of Bernie's momentum - can he get SC blacks to join in a bandwagon effect. It's not so much a question of how much will Biden win by, but how much Sanders can divide the black base. RobSDe Plorabus Unum 00:16, 24 February 2020 (EST)
What I learned about the Black vote is that because they are a racial minority (race is a big predictor of people's votes still) they tend to be pragmatic surfers who want to catch the wave of voter sentiment so they can get the spoils of backing a winner. Kamala Harris would have been more of a trailblazer vote than a pragmatic surfer vote. Trump has shown he does things for the Black segment of society (jobs, prison reform, tax policies to create zones that foster economic activity in poor urban areas and increasing support to Black colleges) and a sizable portion of the population believe Trump is going to win. Hence, Trump is peeling off more Black votes.
From what I have heard, if Trump and the GOP manages to get 15% of the Black vote, the Democrats will be in the political wilderness for a very significant period of time.Conservative (talk) 07:32, 24 February 2020 (EST)
Blacks are very practical coalition builders. They may view Sanders as least racist. There is no emotional attachment to Biden - there may be an emotional attachment to Obama and the Democrat party that attaches itself to Biden bu no to him personally. Klobzilla, and the timing of this is quite curious, was outed as a racist by BLM & the NAACP. Warren cannot undo the damage of stealing affirmative action programs and its insulting to Blacks to think they are too stupid to see it. Bloomy and Bootyboy are DOA on Black's doorstep.
So Blacks see Sanders for who he is - a self-hating Jew who lied about his participation in the civil rights movement, Like Obama, Sanders wants to continue destruction of the Democrat party.
Trump's appeal is largely to working age male blacks. So the phenomena within the black community right now is debate over ending their collectivist mentality vs. individual rights, opportunity, and achievement. A classic Bernie vs. Trump scenario. Apathy and defections weigh in Trump's favor. RobSDe Plorabus Unum 10:29, 24 February 2020 (EST)

Trump arrives in India

Apparently Trump has more on his mind to worry about than just jet lag.

I had expected this trip to be a normal diplomatic excursion, but the New York Times opinion page has concluded that Trump is going to India to "find himself", so watch and see if at some point he bows down to some Hindu gods.

There's nothing like encouraging intelligent foreign-policy debate, that normally requires a degree of mental concentration, by flavoring Americans' perceptions of their President's overseas visit to advance their nation's priorities and the two nations' collaborations with each other with the hesitancy that comes from the prospect that 1. not only may he be about to convert, but 2. as a consequence of the fact that he's even contemplating such a strange and fundamental religious reversal, should we pay attention, we may become unwilling (okay, ex hypothesis some would be eager) witnesses fixated in watching him violate any number of primitive religious taboos and end up dividing masses of religious adherents on both sides of the world.

Although useful as dazzle camouflage to render Democratic presidential candidates' outrageous suggestions to appeal to primary voters seem less wild, we don't think our subsequent reports speculating further on Trump's inner conflict and the expressions of which that we anticipate will occur will actually cause a rift between the United States and India. But we probably ought to quickly import a lot more diversity immigrants from them just in case we need them to aid in healing and reconciliation, preferably H1B workers—and you thought there was going to be a downside to this! VargasMilan (talk) Monday, 03:35, 24 February 2020 (EST)

I doubt Trump is going to "find himself" or is contemplating Hinduism. Trump is probably attracted to religion that focuses on material prosperity and he attended Normal Vincent Peale's church as a young man. Peale was known for the power of positive thinking.
Trump is going to India for trade and also for national security reasons given the rise of China's navy.Conservative (talk) 09:32, 24 February 2020 (EST)
Vargas raises a good question. Does India qualify as a sh1thole country? It's got a screwed up environment and screwed up laws, but its people are highly educated and speak English. RobSDe Plorabus Unum 10:15, 24 February 2020 (EST)
I was satirizing the left-wing media's use of calculated phrases to try to separate Trump from his supporters by taking one of their phrases literally to the logical conclusions of what the author of the phrase was trying to insert in our subconscious minds.
It was on a news story on Trump's appearance on Saturday Night Live that I first read that those trying to satirize him mentioned how he was an extremely positive person. Trump's presidency is quite the testament to Peale's ideas and practices.
And Rob, you mean "its people who immigrate to America" are highly educated. VargasMilan (talk) Monday, 10:35, 24 February 2020 (EST)
Trump's arrival in India. RobSDe Plorabus Unum 11:04, 24 February 2020 (EST)

A pro-human Greta?

If nothing else, German teenager Naomi Seibt is prettier than the anti-human Swede Greta Thunberg. See "Meet the anti-Greta: A young YouTuber campaigning against ‘climate alarmism’." If global warming doesn't kill us, surely overpopulation or robot revolt will. In the liberal worldview, there are just too many ways for humanity to be wiped out to even hope for survival. So what's all the hysteria about? In the gospel according to Greta, we must lower carbon emissions, not so much because there is a chance of saving our worthless lives or civilization, but to punish humanity for our crimes against the planet. PeterKa (talk) 06:15, 24 February 2020 (EST)

That's not true. I mean: it makes liberals look bad. Did I say that out loud? I'm so confused. VargasMilan (talk) Monday, 06:31, 24 February 2020 (EST)

Donald Trump's 2020 electability vs. coronavirus

Presidents who have a robust economy do better in elections.

The Dow just dropped 1,000 points due to coronavirus fears.[39]

South Korea, Italy and Iran are now are beginning to significant coronavirus problems.[40]. The coronavirus could turn into a pandemic and the USA has a border with Mexico that is not as secure as it could be. In addition, the USA has had a lot of immigrants who travel abroad to visit family. And then there is business travel and tourism. A coronavirus pandemic could hit the USA before the 2020 election, but hopefully the upcoming spring/summer season will slow it down.

I thought a recent Black Pidgeon Speaks video on the implications of the coronavirus was probably unwarranted that was titled Trump DEFEATED in 2020 by #WuFlu Black Swan Event?, but now I am not so sure. But my guess is that the Democratic primary race is going to end in a train wreck and Trump will win in 2020.Conservative (talk) 10:44, 24 February 2020 (EST)

Why did the Deep State import the coronavirus to Nebraska, a red state, without Trump's authorization? RobSDe Plorabus Unum 10:51, 24 February 2020 (EST)
The coronavirus has grown in mainland China by about 0.5% a day for the past three days. The lethality rate has been reduced from 15% to 10% VargasMilan (talk) Monday, 12:10, 24 February 2020 (EST)
That's if you trust the underlying aggregate numbers from the CCP, WHO, and CDC. Unfortunately , the CCP, WHO, and CDC have already destroyed any confidence outside experts and the public have in their reporting.
The increases are largely credited to different screening methods and and changes in statistical methodology. According to the CDC's reporting, their numbers make no sense - either before or after evacuees were repatriated to the US.
Then there is the reported phenomena of the virus occurring in areas outside China among people who had no contact with visitors from China. RobSDe Plorabus Unum 12:55, 24 February 2020 (EST)

"And as he sat upon the mount of Olives, the disciples came unto him privately, saying, Tell us, when shall these things be? and what shall be the sign of thy coming, and of the end of the world? And Jesus answered and said unto them, Take heed that no man deceive you. For many shall come in my name, saying, I am Christ; and shall deceive many. And ye shall hear of wars and rumours of wars: see that ye be not troubled: for all these things must come to pass, but the end is not yet. For nation shall rise against nation, and kingdom against kingdom: and there shall be famines, and pestilences, and earthquakes, in divers places. All these are the beginning of sorrows." - Matthew 24:3-8

The name Trump! It has an end times ring to it. Like the word trumpet!Conservative (talk) 18:38, 24 February 2020 (EST)

You guys need to accept that the lion's share of the cases are in China, the cases are not growing and the cases are already 40% cured. VargasMilan (talk) Monday, 18:53, 24 February 2020 (EST)
Huh? Where do you get your info from. Italy has mass quarantine sites, Iran reports a 20% fatality rate, and South Korea is in the midst of an outbreak. RobSDe Plorabus Unum 19:04, 24 February 2020 (EST)
You are not parsing my sentence right. I'll have more information in a couple of hours. VargasMilan (talk) Monday, 19:32, 24 February 2020 (EST)
It's 7am in China, 500 new cases in the past 24 hours, 9% cumulative fatality rate. VargasMilan (talk) Monday, 20:05, 24 February 2020 (EST)
This seems to be the central clearinghouse for data. These are the CDC numbers which don't add up with other public information; for instance, NBC reported just this evening the official number was up to 35. RobSDe Plorabus Unum 21:22, 24 February 2020 (EST)

The Chinese leaders are godless communists, somewhat incompetent and China is a big country. Don't trust their coronavirus stats. There are indications that the Chinese numbers are fake. See: The numbers are fake.Conservative (talk) 22:27, 24 February 2020 (EST)

Oh, G-d. VargasMilan (talk) Monday, 23:15, 24 February 2020 (EST)
The wonders of science, huh? After scientists leak the 'novel' virus from a lab (according to the CCP), scientists accumulate scientific data by counting the number deaths from reported infections (reported infections determined by a statistical methodology that was changed weeks into the pandemic) from test kits which either do not exist or scientific technicians haven't been trained to use, to determine a fatality rate.
Thank God we have our best scientific minds looking for solutions, huh? RobSDe Plorabus Unum 23:33, 24 February 2020 (EST)
We get it. They created it, they had a rough start. It could even blow up again. But media-influencers, please don't "help" things by making political hay when a volatile communist regime is trying to manage a delicate crisis that dwarfs Chernobyl. Trump is leading the way on that. He offered an implied deal with the Chinese: concentrate all your efforts on fixing it, and I won't criticize you. They likely took up the deal, because they have now learned from Trump the first deal is the best deal. VargasMilan (talk) Tuesday, 00:26, 25 February 2020 (EST)
I agree. And it's a fine line avoiding fueling a panic. Unfortunately for the communist liberal media, and Trump-hating globalists, nobody believes media and federal government bureaucrats anymore. It looks like just another effort to kill off red state America while New York, Hollywood, and DC elitists (who worship at the altar of science) continue living the high life. RobSDe Plorabus Unum 00:36, 25 February 2020 (EST)
Thank you. VargasMilan (talk) Tuesday, 00:40, 25 February 2020 (EST)
China has a big problem on its hands. Now we have reports of people being cremated who aren't dead yet. Can it be 'scientifically' debunked? even if its not true, what difference does that make to 800 million people who fear being arrested and cremated alive for spreading rumors? RobSDe Plorabus Unum 01:52, 25 February 2020 (EST)
That report sounds too politically convenient. VargasMilan (talk) Tuesday, 14:33, 25 February 2020 (EST)
There have been reports of mediaeval-style quarantines and other types of excessive force to contain the spread of the virus as well. VargasMilan (talk) Tuesday, 14:44, 25 February 2020 (EST)
It sort of doesn't matter if its true or not, if people believe it to be true.
Here's another problem for both the CCP and the WHO: governments should want sick people to voluntarily come forward. Their actions thus far discourage that from happening. RobSDe Plorabus Unum 14:47, 25 February 2020 (EST)
Who, in 1943 and 1944, believed the rumors of Germans shipping by rail people to gas chambers and extermination camps? We're experiencing right now how government officials, media, and the public reacted then to first hand accounts we're receiving from Wuhan now. No one believed the truth or reality until it was over. RobSDe Plorabus Unum 14:51, 25 February 2020 (EST)
In 1943-1944, the fake stories of World War I German atrocities in Belgium were very much on people's minds. PeterKa (talk) 21:28, 26 February 2020 (EST)
The people of China probably don't know a lot about government action since China doesn't have a free press.
So how would they believe it to be true?
And if they DID know about government actions, they would know about those alleged larger government atrocities.
So they'll come forward, one way or another, and, once the disease is eradicated, China will have no motive for atrocities. VargasMilan (talk) Tuesday, 18:15, 25 February 2020 (EST)
The people aren't ignorant. They have a whole system to communicate outside official media, which no one believes anyway. A journalist, Chen Qushi, who was reporting on conditions in Wuhan disappeared a few weeks ago, according to NBC. He reported on the situation and criticized the CCP. He claims cab drivers are the best source of news. The way he describes it, this is the system all over China. That actually is what lends credence to the woman's cremation story in the above video - it occurs in a taxi cab.
In this 25 minute report Qushi describes how cab drivers are the main news source, among other subjects. Watch at least the final two minutes, if you can. It's heart-wrenching. RobSDe Plorabus Unum 02:38, 26 February 2020 (EST)

Coronavirus update

It's 9am in China: 400 new cases overnight; (7am - 7am), 40% of cases cured, 8% overall fatality rate. VargasMilan (talk) Tuesday, 22:36, 25 February 2020 (EST)

Wed Feb 25-26 (7am-7am): 450 new cases, 45% of cases cured, 8% overall fatality rate.

Thu Feb 26-27 (7am-7am): 300 new cases, 50% of cases cured, 7% overall fatality rate.

Fri Feb 27-28 (7am-7am): 400 new cases, 55% of cases cured, 6% overall fatality rate.

Sat Feb 28-29 (7am-7am): 550 new cases, 55% of cases cured, 6% overall fatality rate.

Sun Feb 29-Mar 1 (7am-7am): 200 new cases, 60% of cases cured, 5% overall fatality rate.

Mon Mar 1-2 (7am-7am): 150 new cases, 60% of cases cured, 5% overall fatality rate.

Tue Mar 2-3 (7am-7am): 119 new cases, 60% of cases cured, 5% overall fatality rate.

Wed Mar 3-4 (7am-7am): 139 new cases, 65% of cases cured, 5% overall fatality rate.

Thu Mar 4-5 (7am-7am): 143 new cases, 65% of cases cured, 5% overall fatality rate.

Note: China has not limited itself to posting data once every 24 hours; they have sporadically posted data more than once a day at irregular intervals. RobSDe Plorabus Unum 02:16, 26 February 2020 (EST)
Note: some of these aren't total "cures" but just recoveries. Because if coronavirus reaches its severe stages it can cause severe long-term lung damage. VargasMilan (talk) Friday, 08:40, 28 February 2020 (EST)
If the coronavirus is not a type of virus that gets dramatically lower in Spring/Summer, Italy shows that it could get into the USA. If Mexico is hit hard with coronavirus, the porous border might insure it gets into the USA.
America has an obesity problem and an aging population which makes it easier for the coronavirus to spread and be more lethal.
On top of this, there are a lot of Italian-Americans who visit Italy or have their relatives visit the USA. The same is true of Korean-Americans in terms of visiting South Korean or having South Korean visitors. An Italy or South Korea travel ban into the USA would be unpopular and I doubt the Trump administration is eager to do this in an election year.Conservative (talk) 14:05, 26 February 2020 (EST)
CDC has already mishandled the numbers, and feds have bumbled transport and housing of infected persons. The WHO is corrupt and useless, and Google censorship isn't helping, either. RobSDe Plorabus Unum 16:59, 26 February 2020 (EST)
China should have learned from SARs and fixed its wild animal markets situation. But culture often changes slow unfortunately. On top of this China's government mishandled the critical early stages of the problem plus has has a population that is overweight, aging and have a gender imbalance (men hit harder by coronavirus)[41].
Atheistic/leftist lifestyles/ideology definitely played a role. See: Atheism and leadership and Atheism and foolishness and Atheism and obesity and Atheism and health and Global atheism and aging populations and Atheism and women and Abortion and atheism and Dietary practices of atheistsConservative (talk) 17:23, 26 February 2020 (EST)
IMO, what is happening now is, China is faking that they have a handle on the problem in order to reopen factories becuz of the economic damage done just over the past 6 weeks. I'd expect more outbreaks in China in coming weeks as the outbreaks occur globally now, albeit Chinese outbreaks won't get the central media play they've had thus far. RobSDe Plorabus Unum 17:34, 26 February 2020 (EST)

The coronavirus situation has made China weaker going into phase 2 of the USA-China trade deal. It also weakens China centered globalism and the progress of their road and belt initiative. It also weakens the power of the communist party in China.Conservative (talk) 19:25, 26 February 2020 (EST)

I was at the Dollar store today. The shelves are half empty. What costs a dollar today will be $3-$6 in few weeks or months. RobSDe Plorabus Unum 23:43, 26 February 2020 (EST)
The earth is a Corona virus for a much larger living being beyond our comprehension. Now that I think about it, I still think sharing is good, but there are probably some things where it would be better if I kept them to myself. VargasMilan (talk) Thursday, 00:30, 27 February 2020 (EST)

Bernie is a Russian asset

Illustration of how the Barr DOJ can surveil the Bernie Bros' terrorist organization and the Putin-Sanders plot to destroy American democracy if a clean FISA reauthorization bill is passed on March 15, 2020.


The CIA leaks narrative spin to the Washington Post. The FBI leaks their narrative spin to the New York Times; and the State Dept. primarily uses CNN for the same purposes. This media distribution model is the one constant in an ever changing universe.
Today’s Club narrative was too predictable. Everyone who does not support the DC intel apparatchik immediately becomes a Russian asset. Now, “according to people familiar with the matter”, the Russians are trying to help Bernie Sanders: [42]

RobSDe Plorabus Unum 20:11, 21 February 2020 (EST)

I knew it all along! You're right: he doesn't seem the type; but we all know about mama's boys who end up committing terrible crimes. Did you see Psycho? And isn't it ironic a socialist might turn out to be a Russian asset? Like I said, we have to give our federal law enforcement officers credit for their impartial investigations into criminal activities of...inconvenient political figures. I fully expect Sanders to co-operate by suspending his campaign until this...curious matter can be resolved to the satisfaction of the career investigators who are pursuing the ramifications of this new evidence, wherever it leads. (h/t @AetiusRF idea for final sent.) VargasMilan (talk) Friday, 20:57, 21 February 2020 (EST)
Sanders may have to take a nativist and nationalist hardline to prove he isn't. RobSDe Plorabus Unum 21:18, 21 February 2020 (EST)
A hundred thousand globalists just dropped their teacups in horrified apprehension. VargasMilan (talk) Friday, 23:06, 21 February 2020 (EST)
I understand that the Feds have already discovered some pretty hair-raising things at Bernie's campaign with their illegal warrant. VargasMilan (talk) Saturday, 00:07, 22 February 2020 (EST)
Bernie's response to the allegation makes him sound like a true Patriot. He wants to build a wall to keep Putin out now that Putin has had the audacity to amend the Russian constitution to define marriage as between a man and woman. Bernie wants to defend our democracy by allowing prisoners to vote. My question: if Dylann Roof is serving 9 life sentences for killing Blacks in South Carolina, does he get 9 votes, one for each life sentence? RobSDe Plorabus Unum 08:18, 22 February 2020 (EST)
I personally am going to let Rob's observations speak for themselves, at least for now, but as a point of fact, Bernie claims that he was briefed about the Russian claim a month ago, and that the Washington Post strategically leaked it at a time to coincide with the Nevada primary. VargasMilan (talk) Sunday, 00:58, 23 February 2020 (EST)
Latest: Legacy media reports say the Bernie Sanders campaign has been struck down by the news and after the Nevada primary is still floundering in first place. VargasMilan (talk) Sunday, 03:15, 23 February 2020 (EST)
Two questions: (a) who leaked it to the Washington Post? (b) did the FBI briefers make out an FD-302 interview report after briefing Sanders as they did with Michael Flynn as part of their counterintelligence investigation? And a third question, since it appears the FISA Act will be reauthorized without any changes, has Barr's DOJ secured a FISA warrant yet to spy on the Sanders campaign organization in all 50 states under the three-hop rule, given that WaPo has provided the sufficient probable cause (per the Mueller Report) to investigate the Sanders-Putin plot to overthrow American democracy? RobSDe Plorabus Unum 11:52, 28 February 2020 (EST)

Andy's being denied access to raw data far from unique situation today, apparently

Miyakawa flowchart.jpg

Tsuyoshi Miyakawa @tsuyomiyakawa ·Feb 20
My editorial paper entitled, "No raw data, no science: another possible source of the reproducibility crisis". When I feel the results are too beautiful, I requested raw data before sending it out for review. 40 out of 41 did not send me the right data...Researchers are under pressure to publish papers in ruthless competition. What if researchers who produce beautiful results based on non-existing data win against the ones who struggle with true data? Unfortunately, that is what is happening in science nowadays, I am afraid. VargasMilan (talk) Monday, 11:41, 24 February 2020 (EST)

There are some puzzling aspects to your post. Since it's written in the first person, but presumably by Mr. Miyakawa, it sounds as though you are reporting an email that he sent to you personally. Is that the case? Can you provide the (redacted for confidentiality) email? Can you provide the paper ("No raw data ...") that precipitated this? Is this paper something that he, in an editorial capacity, sent out for review? Was it written by someone other than himself? Did he feel that his job required that he get review comments before he could approve the paper for publication? Did a lot of people fail to respond to his requests? What is a normal return rate on requests for review? (I know that, when I was in the business of doing this, the return rate was pretty low.)
We of course know that the "publish or perish" rat-race can lead to bad consequences, possibly including publication of results that were not properly vetted.
And finally, is Andy personally involved with this? SamHB (talk) 20:38, 24 February 2020 (EST)
For heaven's sake Sam, @tsuyomiyakawa is his Twitter handle; using that and actually clicking on the picture will tell you everything you desire to know and then some. VargasMilan (talk) Monday, 23:05, 24 February 2020 (EST)
Right. I got all that; I looked around, and found out about him. But the question remains: Of all the things that can go wrong in the pursuit of science, what is it about this that makes it noteworthy? Can you write an article about the problems that come up in science, perhaps putting harking in perspective? Is Mr. Miyakawa's case particularly noteworthy or illustrative? How widespread is the problem? How does it relate to other problems with science? Should there be an article tying all this together? SamHB (talk) 00:56, 25 February 2020 (EST)
It's about the reproduceability crisis, as the author said, an article about which I extensively posted on this very webpage years back, where I also made a point of addressing you with regard to the subject. VargasMilan (talk) Tuesday, 01:55, 25 February 2020 (EST)
This is the objection I raised on Conservapedia about a "scientific" paper years ago. Perhaps this deserves another entry in Conservapedia proven right, again?--Andy Schlafly (talk) 00:34, 25 February 2020 (EST)

The unexplainably fussy liberal society news commentator vs. Trump

"Such complex and contradictory apologia invite many questions. Why are these commentators focused on criticizing Trump's incivility and simultaneously undermining his claim to being politically incorrect? Why does civility coexist with the valorization of incivility? Why the urgent need to qualify and justify? To explain the paradox of commentators with liberated, incivil Ids demanding that Trump and his supporters refine their own Ids, we must return to sociology." —Hoyt Thorpe

VargasMilan (talk) Wednesday, 04:00, 26 February 2020 (EST)


"For their part, many of Trump's supporters experience a world dominated by a seemingly hypocritical unity of civility and barbaric identity group narcissism, where those with power and wealth celebrate the ethnic, sexual, racial, religious, national and gender particularism of specific groups (including, for example, the various contradictory forms of ethnic vulgarity, ostentatious sexual expression, sexually restrictive mores, and nationalism of each group) while at the same time demanding self-effacing respect, deference, tolerance, and restraint of Trump supporters. This no doubt feels similar to the way the old protestant, Nietzschean pathos of distance felt to emancipated Jews: a hypocritical and deceitful foil disguising the truth - an unwritten 'bargain' demanding social demotion.
"To heed liberal calls for civility is therefore experienced as a command to submit to the social superiority of a hypocritical liberal establishment. This leads us to a third factor underlying Trump's success: incivility and spite rituals effect social equalization. Trump supporters revel in their leader's spiteful profanation of the ruling class' civility rituals and strive to tear down the ritual social distance between themselves and the establishment. For every public 'Pocahontas', 'somebody's doing the raping', 'John Liebowitz Stewart', or 'blood coming out of her wherever', Trump punctures the sacralized narcissistic womb of an institutionalized victim group and thereby supplies his pariah supporters with another boost of emotional energy.
"Beyond Trump, the more unsettling conclusion following from Cuddihy's analysis is that the moral basis of our civil religion is arbitrary, reflecting nothing more than the self-protective rationalizations of a powerful and detached ruling class. Hiding behind the Christlike meekness of select identity and victim groups, the establishment projects a hypocritical show of civility and tolerance that legitimates their wealth, power, and most importantly for Trump supporters, social distance from the mob."—Hoyt Thorpe

VargasMilan (talk) Wednesday, 06:13, 26 February 2020 (EST)

liberal calls for civility -- Hahahaha, a day late and a dollar short. More like several decades late and few thousand dollars short. Especially when libs wasted the last three years of everyone's life spewing their hate. Any regular watcher of Saturday Night Live for the past 40 years has no excuse for not understanding Trump. Anyone who suffered through the Clinton and Obama upheavals has no excuse, either. RobSDe Plorabus Unum 11:44, 26 February 2020 (EST)

Obesity, aging populations, nursing shortages, coronavirus and pandemics

"Obesity, like other states of malnutrition, is known to impair the immune function, altering leucocyte counts as well as cell-mediated immune responses."[43]

China's obesity problem is making it harder to fight the coronavirus (see: China and obesity). In addition, it has an aging population (see: Global atheism and aging populations).

Much of the developed world has problems with obesity and aging populations. These issues make it easier for the coronavirus to spread and increase its mortality statistics.

As far as South Korea which has been hit by the coronavirus, "Almost 1 in 4 Seoul citizens are not just overweight, but obese. So reported Seoul Metropolitan Government last month with the release of a survey of more than 23,000 residents aged 19 and older."[44] South Korea also has an aging population. With a rapidly ageing population, low birth rates and young people who are increasingly shunning marriage, South Korea is in a population conundrum.[45]

The coronavirus has hit Italy. Thank God Italy has lower obesity rate than the rest of Europe.[46] But it has a history of bad governments that are quickly replaced. Italy also receives a lot of tourists. Italy does have an aging population too.

If the developed world does not start having children, a pandemic could hit developed world populations with many seniors and struggle to take care of them. On top of this there is a global nursing shortage.[47]

Hit the gym and eat fish oil too boost your immune system! Don't wait until it is too late.Conservative (talk) 04:41, 26 February 2020 (EST)

"Adults with influenza were more likely to be hospitalized if they were underweight (OR: 5.20), obese (OR: 3.18), or morbidly obese (OR: 18.40) compared to normal‐weight adults. Obese adults with H1N1 had a sixfold increase in odds of hospitalization over H3N2 and B (obese OR: 8.96 vs 1.35, morbidly obese OR: 35.13 vs 5.58, respectively) compared to normal‐weight adults. In adults with coronavirus, metapneumovirus, parainfluenza, and rhinovirus, participants that were underweight (OR: 4.07) and morbidly obese (OR: 2.78) were more likely to be hospitalized as compared to normal‐weight adults. All‐cause influenza‐like illness had a similar but less pronounced association between underweight or morbidly obesity and hospitalization."[48]Conservative (talk) 04:49, 26 February 2020 (EST)
A correction: The Italian government actually did a reasonably good job of trying to avoid the coronavirus problem, yet it failed anyways.[49]Conservative (talk) 05:45, 26 February 2020 (EST)
How is that possible? They eat good there. VargasMilan (talk) Wednesday, 06:43, 26 February 2020 (EST)
The Mediterranean diet is healthy. They must be active as well.Conservative (talk) 07:31, 26 February 2020 (EST)

Build the wall. Mexico and the coronavirus

"Coronavirus will arrive in Mexico within weeks: health specialist. People who suffer from obesity or allergy conditions are especially at risk." - Mexico News Daily.[50]Conservative (talk) 04:56, 26 February 2020 (EST)

Pro-Trump group runs anti-Biden ad in South Carolina

Bloomberg's collapse has been so rapid and so complete that it has created an opening for Biden to reemerge. Trump's ad men are already on the case. Obama and the Dems are up in arms over this ad, which slyly implies that Biden is an old style segregationist. Of course, it's a hugely unfair accusation. U.S. Senator Kamala Harris attacked Biden along the same lines, but even more viciously, during their debate. The media gave her a pass. Thinking of all the times Biden and the Dems have pulled the race card on Trump, I find it hard to feel much sympathy. PeterKa (talk) 03:11, 27 February 2020 (EST)

Bloomberg hasn't collapsed. He has a reputation for being a persistent fighter in the face of setbacks and he has a lot of money.[51]
Bloomberg will probably compete with Bernie. And if it there is a contested convention for Democrats, the superdelegates could tip the scale to the establishment and Bloomberg could be the nominee.Conservative (talk) 03:58, 27 February 2020 (EST)
Either way, you have to wonder about this "Biden's a racist" strategy. It's not likely that Biden will actually be the nominee. We could build up Biden and Bloomberg in the hope of preventing Sanders from cruising to the nomination on the first ballot. Then the superdelegates could shaft Bernie on the second ballot. The convention would dissolve in chaos. How great would that be? PeterKa (talk) 04:33, 27 February 2020 (EST)
Peter, Biden is there to promote comforting and lucrative negative stereotypes about white men in an attempt to counter the apathy of Democratic electorate and prevent envy toward the minority group that eventually gets the nomination. VargasMilan (talk) Thursday, 06:00, 27 February 2020 (EST)
At least the comically inept Biden campaign is back in the news. Now they've admitted that the candidate didn't actually get arrested on "the streets of Soweto trying to get to see [Nelson Mandala] on Robben Island,” as Biden has repeatedly claimed. They tell us that there was an incident in which Biden got separated from the rest of the delegation at the airport. The suggestion is that the poor man got confused between getting separated at the airport and getting arrested.[52] The fact that he wasn't actually arrested isn't even the biggest problem with the original story. Soweto is hundreds of miles away from Robbin Island. Biden must have been stringing together South African-related words. His mind is a Mad Lib. PeterKa (talk) 06:54, 27 February 2020 (EST)
The big question is how bad will Bernie get trounced by blacks in SC. Some polls have it at Biden 25% and Bernie 23%; others put it at Biden 35% and Bernie 13%. It's not a question of Is Biden racist?, SC illustrates blacks' trouble with socialism and the frontrunner Bernie. RobSDe Plorabus Unum 11:34, 27 February 2020 (EST)
Regardless of the result, the South Carolina primary will be remembered for the immortal words "I'm Joe Biden and I'm running for U.S. senate" and "If you like what you see, help me out; if not, you can vote for the other Biden."[53] So Electable Joe had a sudden flashback to 1972? It's clear why Biden got the VP job. It wasn't easy to find a big name politician who's dumber than Barack "I'm the only editor of Harvard Law Review who never wrote an article" Obama. PeterKa (talk) 20:32, 27 February 2020 (EST)
Interesting new development: Bernie's love of Castro makes Florida primary competitive; a SC win for Biden could propel him into Florida. Bernie will take CA; TX looks competitive at the moment. Klobutcher, Bootyboy, and Steyer are running on fumes and likely out after SC. Bloomy's not gaining traction anywhere. Who Beto backs in TX can help out, and Bernie's Cuba faux pas could breathe life into Biden in FL.
At this point in Bernie's life it's too late for him to repudiate Castro, communism, or Cuba. It is simply to much of the fiber of his inner being that made him the DNC frontrunner in 2020. The Florida primary could slow his momentum. RobSDe Plorabus Unum 22:06, 27 February 2020 (EST)
Hmm. Which will it be? The rapacious secular Jewish capitalist? Or the secular Jew who follows the secular Jew who said gentiles are rapacious capitalists too, so we need to dispense with capitalism altogether.
Maybe we can get these two to get together so they can cancel each other out. VargasMilan (talk) Thursday, 22:33, 27 February 2020 (EST)

Bernie Sanders is not a capitalist since he is merely a millionaire. Leftist la la land is such a joke.

The raucous Democratic presidential primary debate in South Carolina was just the tip of the chaos iceberg. The Democratic presidential primary convention is going to be a contentious trainwreck and the Bernie Sanders supporters are going to be sore losers after the superdelegates don't make Bernie Sanders the nominee. And get ready for Michael Bloomberg to rain down the heavy artillery of political advertising which will deny Bernie Sanders a majority of delegates and cause him to merely have a plurality of delegates.

And then Michael Bloomberg will be coronated king of the Democrats by the superdelegates!

Look up in the sky. It's a bird. It's a plane. It's Super Delegates! Faster than Biden's falling poll numbers. More powerful than Klobzilla. And able to dismiss a plurality of delegates with a wave of the hand!Conservative (talk) 04:04, 28 February 2020 (EST)

What the #($@#? You screwed up my analysis. Bloomberg is the rapacious capitalist. VargasMilan (talk) Friday, 04:10, 28 February 2020 (EST)
What a shame. Who knew Trump haters were so deeply divided? I was under the impression the entire planet was in opposition to Donald Trump and Nazism. How do you explain this now? RobSDe Plorabus Unum 10:09, 28 February 2020 (EST)
A big problem that Democrats face is that their candidates lack vetting. Because of "safe spaces", political correctness and having a friendly press, Democrats are not properly vetted. Biden's problems with Hunter Biden, the lack of scrutiny of Bernie Sanders by the press and Michael Bloomberg not being strongly scrutinized by the press, produces candidates with skeletons in their closets and candidates who can't take a punch.
It also produces candidates who don't really understand the issues and who can't make effective arguments. So they just scream out "billionaire", racist, misogynist, etc. etc. My guess is that Bernie Sanders doesn't understand economics/business very well so when he is challenged on who is going to pay for his policies, he is flat-footed.
One of the reasons why Trump is more successful than many of his predecessors is that he understands economics, business/negotiation better than past presidents who may have gone to politically correct universities, but fail to have much of an understanding of how the world actually works. Conservative (talk) 10:24, 28 February 2020 (EST)
As to Bloomberg, I'm not sure you can say he wasn't vetted by the media.
New York has two media markets - (1) is the center of national, MSM news media; Washington is a field office to New York based national media; (2) is the local New York media market. Both Trump and Bloomberg, a three-time mayor, are thoroughly well known in the local New York media market (as is Giuliani). Trump rose on the cover of scandal sheets like the National Enquirer. On shows like The View you see daily how New Yorkers cannot understand how America doesn't know the things about Trump they have been reading and hearing for three decades. As to Bloomberg, it is well known in New York how Bloomberg avoided opposition, protests, and being called a racist by Al Sharpton during Stop n Frisk; Bloomberg paid off Sharpton and other critics with donations to their non-profit causes to NOT actively oppose him. He's doing the same thing now - not just with huge media buys, but silencing critics with money, as well as hiring all the top-name political consultants and pollsters to either work directly for him, or at least not work for his opponents. New Yorkers are well aware of this cause the local media has exposed it over years; now the national, New York based media has to condense all these facts into a few days or weeks. Bloomberg has the professional media consultant class all paid off. Trump's a po' boy by Bloomy standards, and can't afford it. That essentially is Bloomberg's strategy and the main difference between Trump & Bloomy.
I'd attribute it more to the MSM not understanding, or despising, mainstream America more than saying these candidates weren't properly vetted. Bloomberg wasn't expressing just his own views about Midwesterners in his comments about the bathroom bill or farmers - it's the view most of the mainstream press has toward Deplorable America outside the NYC media market. RobSDe Plorabus Unum 11:00, 28 February 2020 (EST)

I largely retract my comment about Bloomberg not being vetted by the media. On the other hand, I don't think the media grills Democrats on the implications of their immigration stances and other stances. So when they show up for debates, they are often flabby.Conservative (talk) 18:16, 28 February 2020 (EST)

Which inevitable loser of the 2020 presidential campaign will win the Democrat presidential primary?

See also 2020 presidential election
Candidates for Democratic Presidential Nominee Who will win?
Chance of becoming
Democratic nominee
Candidate CA
End of
End of
End of
End of
End of
End of
End of
End of
End of
V. Pres Joe Biden Bid DE 28.5% 20.2% 23.6% 18.0% 19.2% 22.0% 29.9% 28.8% 33.1%
Mayor Michael Bloomberg Blo NY 7.3% 6.6% 14.1% 8.7%
Mayor Pete Buttigieg But IN 11.1% 8.3% 6.1% 5.1% 9.8% 17.4% 10.3% 2.7%
Rep. Tulsi Gabbard Gab HI 2.5% 1.4% 1.4% 1.4% 1.3% 0.7% 0.4% 0.3% 0.2%
Sen. Kamala Harris Har CA 12.5% 27.4% 10.8% 4.3% 1.8% 2.1%
Sen. Amy Klobuchar Klo MN 0.8% 0.7% 0.6% 0.5% 1.0% 1.7% 2.4% 1.1%
Sen. Bernie Sanders San VT 11.2% 7.5% 13.4% 7.8% 7.5% 11.5% 21.1% 37.2% 48.3%
Sen. Elizabeth Warren War MA 15.9% 21.5% 31.5% 46.7% 43.7% 18.9% 16.4% 6.5% 1.4%
Sec'y Hillary Clinton Cli NY 1.7% 1.5% 2.0% 5.7% 6.1% 5.3% 3.8% 3.0% 2.2%
Andrew Yang Yan NY 5.5% 3.3% 4.0% 4.4% 3.0% 3.1% 2.8% 1.5%
Candidates for Democratic Presidential Nominee Who will win?
Twitter followers
Candidate CA
as of
V. Pres Joe Biden Bid DE   03.6M:1 +19,000 +64,000 +45,000 +145,000 +27,000 +63,000 +133,000 +152,000
Sen. Cory Booker Boo NJ 04.4M:2 +28,000 +39,000 +9,000 +29,000 +6,000 +13,000
Mayor Pete Buttigieg But IN 01.2M:2 +72,000 +101,000 +26,000 +63,000 +34,000 +29,000 +41,000
Rep. Tulsi Gabbard Gab HI 00.6M:2 +34,000 +118,000 +27,000 +168,000 +11,000 +38,000 +25,000 +24,000
Sen. Kamala Harris Har CA 03.6M:2 +245,000 +119,000 +48,000 +109,000 +32,000
Rep. Beto O'Rourke O'R TX 01.4M:1 +4,000 +116,000 +24,000 +35,000
Sen. Bernie Sanders San VT 17.8M:2 +134,000 +264,000 +93,000 +286,000 +108,000 +155,000 +521,000 +845,000
Sen. Elizabeth Warren War MA 07.8M:2 +225,000 +273,000 +137,000 +289,000 +70,000 +77,000 +200,000 +295,000
Sec'y Hillary Clinton Cli NY 24.7M:1 +316,000 +123,000 +322,000 +83,000 +147,000 +549,000 +206,000
Andrew Yang Yan NY 00.5M:1 +48,000 +90,000 +29,000 +54,000 +152,000

A wider perspective

Transcending the 2020 election is the fact nobody is satisfied with the broken and faulty American primary process. It is not embalmed in the constitution. It's largely evolved by party tradition, and is regulated by a bi-partisan comprise between the two parties. As of 2020, it is structured to represent regions: Iowa caucus (Midwest), New Hampshire primary (Northeast); Nevada caucus (West); South Carolina primary (South). Then Super Tuesday is billed as the closest thing to a "national primary" of 22 states, with 1/3 of all delegates intended to propel a winner with momentum to convention (i.e., a candidate is supposed to be decided by Super Tuesday). GOP likes this arrangement; Democrats hate it. IA & NH are considered "too white", NV & SC have large minority constituencies. So the current schedule is supposedly rigged to provide some sort of "demographic balance" with a winner decided by Super Tuesday (IOWs, the Nevada caucus was added in recent election cycles theoretically to replicate the same effect on SC & Super Tuesday that IA & NH traditionally has on Super Tuesday).

Democrats couldn't be more clear - they want to do away with Iowa completely. However, by Iowa state law, Iowa mandates its caucus be held one week before any other state (It's on their license plates, First In The Nation, although Delaware actually was the first in the nation to ratify the constitution). The only way to undo that would be for Democrats to win a veto-proof Iowa legislature or a trifecta of House, Senate, & Gov. - even more unlikely now after the 2020 fiasco, cause Iowans are more convinced than ever that both state and national Democrats seek to disenfranchise their vote.

So 2020 is experimental, again. What Democrats have overlooked in their long term strategy is the flight of minorities from their party. 2020 will be telling in more than one sense. For my money, even if blacks and minorities flee the Democrats in unprecedented numbers, the DNC is still unlikely to abandon its longterm identity politics strategy. Only time will tell. RobSDe Plorabus Unum 21:51, 15 February 2020 (EST)

Aside, one other scenario to do away with Iowa would be for any and all future Democrat presidential candidates to refuse to campaign in Iowa at all, including not participating in any of its annual State Fair Straw Polls. Is it possible to do so? Yes. It would likely require DNC to amend its rules to disqualify as nominee any candidate from ever campaigning in Iowa. What would be the effect of such an action in all small states, if not nationwide on Democrat presidential hopefuls? Iowa is an exemplar of grassroots and states rights (in the true sense of the term, not the "racist" connotation Dems have created). Iowa has an informed electorate - something anathema to John Podesta's "uninformed and compliant electorate".
The 2020 schedule is a compromise between parties over identity politics - white people (IA & NH) go first, minorities ride the back of the bus (NV & SC). This was the Democrats' idea. Republicans agreed to it. Dems took the bait hook, line, and sinker. Flyover country is more convinced than ever that Dems despise them, and now a lily white field of racists, sexists, and bigots are begging NV Hispanics and SC Blacks for their vote. RobSDe Plorabus Unum 22:16, 15 February 2020 (EST)
One further minor observation: Note how the whiteboy Iowa caucus and New Hamphire primary occur on Tuesday, whereas the revolutionary Democrat Nevada caucus and South Carolina primaries are on Saturday. In the compromise between the DNC and RNC over primary scheduling, Democrats want to move to Saturday voting. RobSDe Plorabus Unum 11:44, 28 February 2020 (EST)