World, Writing, Wealth discussion
World & Current Events
>
Want to talk about the 2024 election? Possible candidates? Platforms? Predictions?
J. wrote: "Yep, they're all a**holes.That's why I try to look at larger patterns.
I see an increase in moral decay in society. And I'm reminded of Augustus destroying the freedoms of the Res Publica to fig..."
The only think I have read about his policies is the anti-vaccination stand (I presume that is just COVID but raises questions on his scientific ability as much as Biden's alleged senility) and his ability to do 3 hr podcast interviews.
What else does he stand for and how much support does he have?
Can't see the Democrats not choosing Joe even if they'd rather have a younger fitter candidate. I appreciate he may be least worst just as Boris was here against Labour run by Corbyn although I hate the presedentialisation of UK politics. We elect MPs one of whom becomes Prime Minister not President, that applies to Johnson, Blair, Brown et al.
Philip wrote: "....I'm despondent on future of democracy......"Indeed, among Biden, Trump or Bibi for that matter, hard to notice inspiring leaders. A notion of "impeccable reputation" sounds like an anachronism from a different era. Many politicians wouldn't fly in the past when more folks saw some merit in values. Today - everything goes, as long as you belong to a certain camp...
Philip wrote: "Papaphilly wrote: "Philip wrote: "Then again a thrice married, sexual predator was elected. ..."Who was that?"
Thrice married - Trump
13 Children allegedly Boris
Any hope that neither of them d..."
Has Trump been convicted of sexual assault? Rape? Any sex crime at all?
Nik wrote: "Philip wrote: "....I'm despondent on future of democracy......"Indeed, among Biden, Trump or Bibi for that matter, hard to notice inspiring leaders. A notion of "impeccable reputation" sounds lik..."
I see it not as a by gone era, but now reported on when not in the past. JFK was womanizer and that was kept out of the papers because that was not seen at the time as important to policy.
That changed when Gary Hart ran for President and dared the press to show him out with his girlfriend. He baited and they showed up with the goods. Once the Rubicon was crossed.....
That last thought is depressing. It means that whenever a politician does something undesirable, it gets entrenched. After sufficient time, absolutely awful politicians are guaranteed. Then again, are we there or nearly there already??
Ian wrote: "That last thought is depressing. It means that whenever a politician does something undesirable, it gets entrenched. After sufficient time, absolutely awful politicians are guaranteed. Then again, ..."For me, it is not about people being people. It is really about the smirk when someone holds themselves up as better. Then comes the fall. I do not think politicians are particularly good people. Yet, I do not fault them for their synchronicity. Everyone has them. I fault them for holding themselves up as better and then act no better.
I'm so sick of Biden, and now he's running again, senile and incompetent as he is -- with the prospect of Kamala ascending to the presidency when he's declared incompetent. You think things are bad now?
Papaphilly wrote: "Philip wrote: "Papaphilly wrote: "Philip wrote: "Then again a thrice married, sexual predator was elected. ..."Who was that?"
Thrice married - Trump
13 Children allegedly Boris
Any hope that ne..."
Trump was found culpable of Sexual Assualt and defamation in a civil case. He claims he will appeal. He then repeated defamation and has been sued accordingly. See List in
https://www.goodreads.com/topic/show/... Message 168 for Trumps current legal list of cases and there are others especially in civil courts against his organisation.
Scout wrote: "I'm so sick of Biden, and now he's running again, senile and incompetent as he is -- with the prospect of Kamala ascending to the presidency when he's declared incompetent. You think things are bad..."Didn't you and others probably including me raise this as a possibility for this term? - Which has not happened.
How is a President declared incompetent? I presume impeached?
Philip wrote: "Scout wrote: "I'm so sick of Biden, and now he's running again, senile and incompetent as he is -- with the prospect of Kamala ascending to the presidency when he's declared incompetent. You think ..."Amendment XXV
Section 1.
In case of the removal of the President from office or of his death or resignation, the Vice President shall become President.
Section 2.
Whenever there is a vacancy in the office of the Vice President, the President shall nominate a Vice President who shall take office upon confirmation by a majority vote of both Houses of Congress.
Section 3.
Whenever the President transmits to the President pro tempore of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives his written declaration that he is unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office, and until he transmits to them a written declaration to the contrary, such powers and duties shall be discharged by the Vice President as Acting President.
Section 4.
Whenever the Vice President and a majority of either the principal officers of the executive departments or of such other body as Congress may by law provide, transmit to the President pro tempore of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives their written declaration that the President is unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office, the Vice President shall immediately assume the powers and duties of the office as Acting President.
Thereafter, when the President transmits to the President pro tempore of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives his written declaration that no inability exists, he shall resume the powers and duties of his office unless the Vice President and a majority of either the principal officers of the executive department or of such other body as Congress may by law provide, transmit within four days to the President pro tempore of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives their written declaration that the President is unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office. Thereupon Congress shall decide the issue, assembling within forty-eight hours for that purpose if not in session. If the Congress, within twenty-one days after receipt of the latter written declaration, or, if Congress is not in session, within twenty-one days after Congress is required to assemble, determines by two-thirds vote of both Houses that the President is unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office, the Vice President shall continue to discharge the same as Acting President; otherwise, the President shall resume the powers and duties of his office.
J. wrote: "Philip wrote: "Scout wrote: "I'm so sick of Biden, and now he's running again, senile and incompetent as he is -- with the prospect of Kamala ascending to the presidency when he's declared incompet..."Thanks for explanation - so in Scout's presumption I am presuming Section 4,. which i presume is also what is used when a President is unconscious e.g. having an operation.
Philip wrote: "J. wrote: "Philip wrote: "Scout wrote: "I'm so sick of Biden, and now he's running again, senile and incompetent as he is -- with the prospect of Kamala ascending to the presidency when he's declar..."Yes.
Philip wrote: "Papaphilly wrote: "Philip wrote: "Papaphilly wrote: "Philip wrote: "Then again a thrice married, sexual predator was elected. ..."Who was that?"
Thrice married - Trump
13 Children allegedly Bori..."
He was found guilty of exactly? Answer the question I asked and not provide a deflecting answer. You opened your mouth and now prove it or acknowledge you are wrong.
Philip wrote: "J. wrote: "Philip wrote: "Scout wrote: "I'm so sick of Biden, and now he's running again, senile and incompetent as he is -- with the prospect of Kamala ascending to the presidency when he's declar..."Yes and no.
This was discussed allot during Trump's Presidency. It is a way to remove albeit temporarily, the President when they cannot fulfill their duties, but refuse to do so voluntarily. Yet when they can resume their duties, they get them back. The key here is the two thirds majority of BOTH parts of Congress must vote to remove the authority of the President and it has to be in relatively narrow circumstances.
So an unpopular or incompetent President cannot be removed by this method. That has to be Impeachment and Conviction.
The 25th Amendment updates Article II of the Constitution. It clarifies what it takes to move this way. If I remember my history right, it was in response to the Kennedy assassination. So the idea was if a President having the proverbial stroke lives, but is incapacitated, then they can be removed until they are well enough to fulfill their duties again.
It is not nor ever contemplated to force out a President because he is an irritating ass, which was the problem with Trump.
Papaphilly wrote: "Philip wrote: "Papaphilly wrote: "Philip wrote: "Papaphilly wrote: "Philip wrote: "Then again a thrice married, sexual predator was elected. ..."Who was that?"
Thrice married - Trump
13 Children..."
Sorry P, I thought I had answered.
You are correct he has not been found guilty of a criminal sexual assault charge. No charge was filled by any prosecutor that I am aware of.
As I said he has been found culpable in a civil case of sexual assault and defamation but cleared of rape. Therefore on that juriy's verdict we can claim that he carried out a sexual assault and defamed Jean Carroll.
https://www.nytimes.com/live/2023/05/...
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2...
He has several trails in the calendar and more to be added; criminal and civil. In criminal, he is innocent until proven guilty as with any defendant with burden of proof on prosecution and reasonable doubt guiding the juries. In civil, he will have to defend to a lower standard of proof i.e. probability against plaintiff's claims.
If the US people and the Republican Party still believes he is a fit and proper person to run for President than that is there democratic right. My opinion carries no weight.
Philip wrote: "Papaphilly wrote: "Philip wrote: "Papaphilly wrote: "Philip wrote: "Papaphilly wrote: "Philip wrote: "Then again a thrice married, sexual predator was elected. ..."Who was that?"
Thrice married ..."
As I said, he was convicted of nothing. Calling him a sexual predator is cheap and wrong. It is this kind of name calling that people remember. It does not have to be right and that is the problem. As much as I cannot personally stand this guy, what has happened to him is unprecedented and relentless. People keep making things up and others assume it is right because he is so under their skin.
He was impeached under a lie and nothing happened to the liars. They knew from the start and that is unfathomable to me. Then the liars attacked the guy that wrote the report, but did not challenge either the truthfulness nor accuracy of the report.
So when it comes to Trump, I doubt every charge because it is always smoke and mirrors against him.
Thanks for that info in post 261, J. You always do your research. How about Section 3, where Biden states he's unable to do the job? Kamala becomes President. Very possible. What a nightmare. It seems that a vote for Biden is a vote for her. Can anyone imagine a scenario in which this could be anything but a disaster?
Biden is currently 80 years old, so he would start a second term at 81 and he has to live until 85 in one of the most stressful jobs around, assuming he is doing it properly. The probability of Kamala becoming President is pretty strong, if they win the next election.
Papaphilly wrote: "Philip wrote: "Papaphilly wrote: "Philip wrote: "Papaphilly wrote: "Philip wrote: "Papaphilly wrote: "Philip wrote: "Then again a thrice married, sexual predator was elected. ..."Who was that?"
..."
He lost a court case that found him culpable of sexual assault but not culpable of rape. Therefore a sexual predator, and with others listed in the evidence and giving evidence of previous actions not just Jean Carroll.
By his own audio statements he believes he can assault women with impunity because he is a celebrity, therefore a sexual predator.
He also lost on defamation grounds and then repeated defamation causing another suit from Jean Carroll
A jury of his peers found against him, but his defence team would have challenged any perceived prejudice in the jury.
Unclear why his sexual conduct is still open for debate. Of course he might appeal and he might win, if he actually launched an appeal which as far as I know he has claimed to be doing but not filled. Like he claims to have been approached by every top legal firm in the USA wanting to represent him. Apart from the ones I presume that have already quit.
Philip wrote: "Christie ranthttps://twitter.com/i/status/16723082..."
Chris Christie talking about character...LOL
Bridgegate: Two Former Aides to Chris Christie Convicted in Lane-Closure Scandal
https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/...
Chris Christie Closed New Jersey's State Beaches — And Then Went To The Beach
https://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-w...
I can keep going.
J. wrote: "Philip wrote: "Christie ranthttps://twitter.com/i/status/16723082..."
Chris Christie talking about character...LOL
Bridgegate: Two Former Aides to Chris Christie Convicted in Lane-Closur..."
I am from New Jersey. Believe me this guy is going nowhere. He could not get elected dog catcher now. He is there to tear down Trump.
Philip wrote: "By his own audio statements he believes he can assault women with impunity because he is a celebrity, therefore a sexual predator.He also lost on defamation grounds and then repeated defamation causing another suit from Jean Carroll
A jury of his peers found against him, but his defence team would have challenged any perceived prejudice in the jury.
......"
Let me see, as far as open for debate, maybe our laws differ. Sexual predator when not being used as a pejorative like you are doing actually means something in the law. For him to be a sexual predator, he had to be convicted of a crime. He has not and has never been charged with one either. For him to be considered a sexual predator, he has to be on a special list known here as Megan's law. He is not, nor has he ever. Maybe it does not matter to you, but it actually matters.
As for his statements, that does not make him a sexual predator either. You are taking his statement out of context and that is part of the problem. He was using it as an illustration of how celebrities get away with things normal people do not, using himself as an example. He also said he could go kill people in the street and get away with it. That does not make him a mass murderer either.
I live in the NYC area and Trump has been part of the public discourse for over 40 years. Long before he was part of the national debate, he was part of the NYC news cycle. He has said plenty of both stupid and mean things. Yet, not once was he ever accused of being either a racist or a sexual predator. It all started as soon as he ran for President. For the record, the NYC press can dig the dirt up on anyone if it exists and these people do not like him at all. What have they come up with? He is arrogant, nasty and drives people up the wall like no one I have ever seen.
FYI, all of the sexual stuff has not been proven and that should say something. Even his ex wife accused him of rape during their divorce until she received a better settlement and then recanted. You get it? It is and always has been about the money. He is rich and an easy target if for no other reason because he is so irritating and smug. I know this does not bother you, but think about why would someone wait 30 years, write a book and then sue? Jean Carroll is making money. How many more books do you think she sold. It was a win win for her. She wins in court she can crow and she has. She loses in court and she can claim she was victimized twice and still sell her book. mark my words, watch her book go back up the seller lists when the appeal is in court. This is about money.
FYI, think about this one, Johnny Depp was a wife beater until he was not. Won on appeal. Civil case.
As for Jean Carroll court case, living in the area, I understand a few things that you probably do not. Trump cast such a big shadow for so long in NYC and once he became a Republican, it was the final straw. This was simple payback for an irritating ass. It is not really about the case, but about wiping the smile from his smug face. He is appealing.
Phillip, My statements are not really aimed at you, but this is one of those truly appalling things people do that bother me. I have seen more than a few people falsely accused and lose everything because the lies told seem to take on a life of their own and the truth did not set them free. Especially the sex accusations.
Papaphilly wrote: "Phillip, My statements are not really aimed at you, but this is one of those truly appalling things people do that bother me. I have seen more than a few people falsely accused and lose everythin..."
I take your point P and refer to my point. He was found culpable of sexual assault and defamation in a civil case. (He would not be on Sex Register in UK either). I do fully understand the difference hence my use of word culpable rather than guilty although US dictionary definition has:
1. Responsible for a reprehensible act; culpable.
2. Found to have violated a criminal law by a jury or judge.
3. Deserving blame, as for an error.
The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, 5th Edition.
1 and 3 indicate guilty 2 does not.
In terms of 40 year history we could mention Cosby, Weinstein and others with long histories of predatory behaviour (Saville in UK was never convicted either). Just because someone gets away with certain behaviour for a long period does not mean they should get away with it forever or never be held to account. The fact that NYC failed to do anything earlier is an indictment of the prosecutors there.
Trumps next scheduled trail is Civil v Cohen next month.
As you said on Christie not a great candidate either but one of few Republicans at least making points against Trump.
In my opinion, the real legal problem Trump will have relates to the classified information he took away with him. The documents are presumably physical and still exist. That takes it away from a "he said-she said" type of approach
Philip wrote: "1. Responsible for a reprehensible act; culpable.2. Found to have violated a criminal law by a jury or judge.
3. Deserving blame, as for an error.
The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, 5th Edition.
1 and 3 indicate guilty 2 does not..."
Indicate not prove. It is a very low standard. It still does not make him a sexual predator.
Ian wrote: "In my opinion, the real legal problem Trump will have relates to the classified information he took away with him. The documents are presumably physical and still exist. That takes it away from a "..."Trump is going to have real problems with the documents, not because he had them, but I expect a lying to authorities type of case in the end.
You are stating facts, Papa, while Philip has no facts. A civil case is not a criminal case. Philip, think about the amount of effort that's been put into trying to prove Trump's criminal guilt with no results. Then think about the amount of effort that's been put into investigating Hunter, his laptop, his dad. Trump has been investigated by every applicable agency and not found guilty. The Russia charges have been proved to be a set-up by the FBI and others. When the same diligence has been applied to investigating Hunter as it has to investigate Trump, then you can talk about lack of indictments and proof of his criminal activity.
Not sure about the effort out into Trump. Let us wait and see what happens with the classified information Trump took with him when he left office.
Ian wrote: "Not sure about the effort out into Trump. Let us wait and see what happens with the classified information Trump took with him when he left office."This is a sticky situation in general. He had the documents. That is not the problem because everyone seems to have them. However, if they go after Trump really hard, then Biden has real troubles too because there will be calls for him too and he will be impeached over it. You can also rest that Trump makes this as loud as he can.
I don't really care at this point. If Democrats want to elect Biden as a surrogate for Kamala, so be it. I give up on people having common sense and will do the best I can to survive. I don't have that many years left anyway. What a freaking crazy world we live in.
RFK Jr appears to be an interesting man. Unlike so many modern politicians, whose opinions are predictable because they follow one of two cult-like doctrines, he seems to address each individual issue on its own merits. This quality could well give him a very broad appeal.
What are the feelings on Main St about him at the mo? Does he have a realistic chance of beating the wretch Biden? And is the MSM broadly supportive of him, open minded about him, or intent on doing a hatchet job?
What are the feelings on Main St about him at the mo? Does he have a realistic chance of beating the wretch Biden? And is the MSM broadly supportive of him, open minded about him, or intent on doing a hatchet job?
Beau wrote: "RFK Jr appears to be an interesting man. Unlike so many modern politicians, whose opinions are predictable because they follow one of two cult-like doctrines, he seems to address each individual is..."Most conservatives disagree with several of his positions, but we want him to stay in the mix. Some of us think that he'll divide the Dem vote and thus kill Biden's reelection chances. Others hope that he might move the DNC away from the Clintonista/Equity death cult that currently sets its agenda.
Given a fair shot, a brain damaged hamster would have a non-zero chance of beating Biden. In comparison, RFK Jr. should steam roll the codger. But he is not being given that fair shot. The DNC has set out a primary schedule that favors Uncle Joe and declared that there will be no Democratic debates.
As for the MSM, they have been whetting their knives on RFK Jr.'s vertebrae. Only the conservative leaning outlets have been giving him open air. That makes the MSM hate him even more.
Imagine Joe in a Democratic debate. A debate on any subject :-) Imagine him as president of the US again, feeble physically and mentally. Imagine Kamala as president. I imagine that people in other countries look at what's happening here and wonder if we've lost our minds.
Scout wrote: "....I imagine that people in other countries look at what's happening here and wonder if we've lost our minds...."Some do and unfortunately regarding both leading candidates
Thanks for the info, J. The MSM position doesn't surprise me. Same over here. Anyone who deviates from the Biden/ Clinton/ Blair wokey-cokey, happy-clappy globalist reinvention of the world position, whether they be left, right or centre is savaged.
Scout, great to speak to you again. I've monitored your posts across the threads recently and we are on the same page on many issues.
I don't think Americans have lost their minds. Yes, you have a dire President and a (politely does it) 'controversial' front running Republican candidate, who are both geriatrics, but most of us are in equally dismal positions. Next election, we will have a choice between 2 cheeks of the same arse. Both boring marketing-type men, who stand for nothing apart from the continuation of the wokey-cokey globalist status quo.
Oh for a British or American Viktor Orban :)
Scout, great to speak to you again. I've monitored your posts across the threads recently and we are on the same page on many issues.
I don't think Americans have lost their minds. Yes, you have a dire President and a (politely does it) 'controversial' front running Republican candidate, who are both geriatrics, but most of us are in equally dismal positions. Next election, we will have a choice between 2 cheeks of the same arse. Both boring marketing-type men, who stand for nothing apart from the continuation of the wokey-cokey globalist status quo.
Oh for a British or American Viktor Orban :)
For what it is worth, Beau, in NZ we have an election in October, and we have two leaders seemingly trying to be as unlike each other as they can, although by so doing they seem to be acting similarly. However, missing in action is policy of what they will actually do if elected. Hipkins (current PM) is doing everything he can to separate himself from the mess Ardern left for him.
Beau wrote: "RFK Jr appears to be an interesting man. Unlike so many modern politicians, whose opinions are predictable because they follow one of two cult-like doctrines, he seems to address each individual is..."He has about a snow ball's chance in Hell. If his name was Smith and not Kennedy, he would be a non-starter. At the same time, he is trying to break through and not being given any screen time to speak of and the DNC have set it up for only Joe to succeed.
As far as his policies, he is a conspiracist on lots of issues, especially COVID, military industrial complex, and the environment. he tends to the left on most issues. Interestingly enough, he claims to be a Constitutional absolutest and want "common sense" gun control, but also says he does not want to take guns from anyone. Has made claims the country is trying to hollow out the middle class for the rich.
I tend to see him as a younger version of Bernie Sanders.
A younger Bernie Sanders should not be totally written off, but it might take some sort of disaster for the DNC to come to its senses and look around for better candidates.
Ian wrote: "A younger Bernie Sanders should not be totally written off, but it might take some sort of disaster for the DNC to come to its senses and look around for better candidates."Right now the nation is in a state of change from Baby Boomers to Gen X/ Millennial leadership. This is not new for us and does remind me of 1968 which was truly torn up at the time also. Even with the times of change, there is no great new leadership for either side yet. I think the Republicans tend to have the edge right now, but they are also shooting themselves in the foot every chance they get. This will iron itself out in the next four years as the change completes.
Papaphilly wrote: "Ian wrote: "A younger Bernie Sanders should not be totally written off, but it might take some sort of disaster for the DNC to come to its senses and look around for better candidates."Right now ..."
Will that make Uncle Joe the last boomer in chief?
J. wrote: "Papaphilly wrote: "Ian wrote: "A younger Bernie Sanders should not be totally written off, but it might take some sort of disaster for the DNC to come to its senses and look around for better candi..."Actually I think he is a Silent Generation member.
I checked. You're correct. He really should be sitting in a rocking chair and complaining that they don't make good tapioca anymore.
Thanks, Papaphilly. V interesting. Likening him to a young BS helps me get an idea of where he fits in to the bigger picture.
Not even the most optimistic optimist could hope that Biden is still functioning by the late 2020s. The lack of competition suggests the Clinton machine wants Kamala in the White House, but doesn't think she could win a presidential election.
As you know, I'm a DeSantis fan but I remember someone (Barbara, I think) saying he's not all that and that he is a distinctly average communicator. This is now the impression I'm getting from across the pond. Over there, how is he now seen? Can he realistically hope to beat both the Orange Man and Biden?
Not even the most optimistic optimist could hope that Biden is still functioning by the late 2020s. The lack of competition suggests the Clinton machine wants Kamala in the White House, but doesn't think she could win a presidential election.
As you know, I'm a DeSantis fan but I remember someone (Barbara, I think) saying he's not all that and that he is a distinctly average communicator. This is now the impression I'm getting from across the pond. Over there, how is he now seen? Can he realistically hope to beat both the Orange Man and Biden?
Too bad I didn’t know what Rob knows before taking all those shots . Would appreciate a forewarning next time we are spared
Can't read the article, Philip, as it requires subscription.
Saw the first paragraph tho,
and immediately thought of J's MSM attitude to RFK Jr assessment.
Reminds me of the British MSM attacks on Corbyn, desperate to paint out that he was anti semitic. Say what you like about Corbyn, he doesn't have a racist bone in his body.
Clinton machine, NYT propaganda - likely nothing more. If not, get RFK on a live TV debate to explain himself. Or would that give him inconvenient publicity? Come on MSM, how about a right to reply to these accusations?
Saw the first paragraph tho,
and immediately thought of J's MSM attitude to RFK Jr assessment.
Reminds me of the British MSM attacks on Corbyn, desperate to paint out that he was anti semitic. Say what you like about Corbyn, he doesn't have a racist bone in his body.
Clinton machine, NYT propaganda - likely nothing more. If not, get RFK on a live TV debate to explain himself. Or would that give him inconvenient publicity? Come on MSM, how about a right to reply to these accusations?
World, Writing, Wealth
Books mentioned in this topic
The Anti-Federalist Papers and the Constitutional Convention Debates (other topics)The Federalist Papers (other topics)
The Anti-Federalist Papers and the Constitutional Convention Debates (other topics)
Hillbilly Elegy: A Memoir of a Family and Culture in Crisis (other topics)
Fear and Loathing: On the Campaign Trail '72 (other topics)
More...
Authors mentioned in this topic
J.D. Vance (other topics)Tulsi Gabbard (other topics)
Smedley D. Butler (other topics)
Robert Iger (other topics)
Larry Elder (other topics)
More...
Who was that?"
Thrice married - Trump
13 Children allegedly Boris
Any hope that neither of them darken the doors of democracy again?