tassojunior

You don't read very often then. Europe has been ahead of the US in the R-factor a couple weeks at least. I can't find it but the last couple days I saw the R-factor in the US had fallen under 1.0 (it's headed back up probably) , while in Europe it was over 1.4 in several of the biggest countries (and headed further up in Europe alarmingly in a big 2nd wave). Merkel always said the R-factor was most important and we had to get it under 1.0. You can try to find the current R factors if you have time. I don't. Reuters and the Guardian seem to have the best graphs and stats. I'm surprised they don't have the R-factor prominently: https://graphics.reuters.com/world-coronavirus-tracker-and-maps/ https://graphics.reuters.com/HEALTH-CORONAVIRUS/USA-TRENDS/dgkvlgkrkpb/index.html Anyway France with 12% of our population has 25% as many new cases in that first story today. Twice our new infection rate. Europe probably just went into the 2nd wave faster than we did as our new case rate is up 15% in the past 2 weeks now. https://www.geopoliticalmatters.com/2020/05/coronavirus-what-exactly-is-r-and-how.html?m=1 https://amp.ft.com/content/121c2f30-9f69-11ea-ba68-3d5500196c30?__twitter_impression=true

@stevenkesslar and that 's why Amy McGrath and Joel Ossoff are going down in flames while Charles Booker and Stacey Abrams would be winning. Losing to the most personally obnoxious person in America says you're even worse. And depending solely on the extreme repulsiveness of Trump as a policy, and as a strategy, is stupid. As obnoxious as he is, he has policies and his followers are highly motivated. But there is zero except hatred for Trump personally, the optics, to motivate people to vote for the Dems to get rid of him. (Good luck in 2022 and 2024 if that succeeds). People are motivated by policies. 70% need and want single-payer healthcare, UBI, an end to endless wars, ranked-choice direct elections, free speech, privacy from government and corporate surveillance, compassionate and sane immigration, an end to police brutality and police militarization, an end to cancel culture and identity politics, etc. There's really a lot more consensus on issues than politicians realize. People may not be ready for revolution, but they want sensible change.People are really over personalities and if the Dems don't offer more than the status quo, just without Trump, motivation for Dems is going to be fleeting, if it doesn't vanish before November. There's no law that says people have to vote, even though mail-in has made it extremely easy this year. (Having an almost-dictatorial presidency instead of a parliamentary system is bad enough without our undemocratic mess voting for it and the half of people who refuse to care about the importance of it's rigged election).

Not until there'a a vaccine or I know I have immunity otherwise. I'm not headed anywhere the hospitals and medical care are worse than here until then. Much of western Europe or Canada maybe when travel starts. Until then Florida's wide open and fine for sex in the sun.

Europe now has worse corvid stats than the US.

The KHive is more bold and doing a lot more damage this year to the ticket than the Clintonistas were in 2016 (hard as that is to believe). Kyle's been one of their main targets. Establishment Dems are so incredibly stupid and arrogant. Even Biden needs to stop attacking progressive ideas in "defense": And let’s remember: The relatively small group of people who are genuinely worried about socialism are not a large set of persuadable voters -- more typically, they are hard-core Trump supporters. The people who are persuadable are young voters and disillusioned voters who need to be energized and mobilized. Kicking Sanders and progressive voters doesn’t help accomplish that. https://www.dailyposter.com/p/biden-should-stop-dunking-on-the If people are looking for scapegoats for why the Democrats lose before they attack progressives they should remember this:

Bad news today from Lancet of a study showing US overall still has less than 10% immunity (Although New York State is over 1/3 immune !) The graphs and tables are strange (immunity in 45% of those under 45 for example). No national herd immunity before a vaccine. https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(20)32009-2/fulltext NYT summary: Under 10 percent of Americans have coronavirus antibodies, a study finds. Less than 10 percent of people in the United States have antibodies to the coronavirus, suggesting that the nation is even further from herd immunity than was previously estimated, according to a study published on Friday in The Lancet. The study looked at blood samples from 28,500 patients on dialysis in 46 states, the first such nationwide analysis. The results roughly matched those of an analysis to be released next week by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, which found that about 10 percent of blood samples from sites across the country contained antibodies to the virus. Dr. Robert R. Redfield, the director of the C.D.C., was referring to that analysis when he told a congressional committee this week that 90 percent of people in the country were still vulnerable to the virus, a C.D.C. spokeswoman said.

All but 2 Democrats today voted not to wait until January, but to confirm Trump's pick for Federal judge for Virginia. (Just like Pelosi pushed through every penny that Trump asked for in the budget). If this drama was on Netflix I'd give it a thumbs-up for superb acting. No new administration has made any real changes since 1932, so when Biden says "We will change nothing", don't expect much except better optics..

Sorry but i'm having to deal with WebOS on my new LG tv until my laptop is connected to it or I'm on my phone long enough to draft. Haven't figured out any cut and paste on this LG but Warren actually has a good article on how the 1% owns more than the bottom 90% of the US now. (We bougies in the other 9% are tolerated for the time being. They could probably manage 95% with 4% what with AI now). If you were unaware McDonnell-Douglas, Boeing, Microsoft, Google, Goldman-Sachs, Time-Warner, Citigroup, Facebook, Amazon, and a very few other international corps and their major owners pretty much run the show, including the entertainment of a "two-party system", I won't try to convince you. Our "leaders" they pay don't get W-2's. They get $50 and $100 million dollar mansions around the country and $250,000 "speaking fees" (often for speeches never given). But in DC all the thousands of lobbyists (and strategists) know who the big boys are. It used tto be certain politicians were "owned" by this group or corporation or another. Now that it's more concentrated financial power, almost everyone's subserviant to the same few. My friend Jon the Koch lobbyist funnels to both Dems and GOP now. He's pushing hard for Biden now because they think the "centrist liberal" Dems are better Republicans than the Trumpists are and more likely to get conservative things (like wars) done. It's not personal against Trump, it's just business.

Burn everything down ! or maybe bitch about it over brunch Just minutes ago this "Wake the Fuck Up" march passed by my house. The police escort had to wait 15 minutes while half the revolutionaries ran into Trader Joe's to buy snacks when they passed it. To a centrist liberal "burning it down" = bitching at brunch. Same as when avocado toast or mimosas run out. It's like living in the show "Portlandia". Who needs Netflix when you live in this comedy.

@stevenkesslar On the other board well over a year ago I said that I had heard Kamala was the party owners' firm decision as next party nominee, that the primaries were a formality. The theme of the DNC to Republicans in 2020 is, "Take our party, it's yours." and the motto is "We won't change a thing". The charade of democracy and choice gets pretty thin.

It does indeed suck to know that both parties are evil and stupid and corrupt. Things were nicer when I still believed in Santa Claus and the Easter Bunny vs the BoogeyMan, in God vs. the Devil. Sometimes you have to grow up and recognize from experience an obviously too-smart cynical tactic for what it is and when I'm subjected to one it turns me off the candidate or group using it. Honesty and candidness wins me over and I personally think it is the best "tactic" or strategy. Hopefully more candidates will adopt this devious strategy.

There are plenty of candidates on the left who don't only stick to the politically correct and cross ideological boundaries (and get shit from the party establishment for doing so). Joe Rogan 100% backed Bernie. Trump, Bannon, and half the GOP Congress were infatuated with Tulsi. Yang draws support from the left and right equally. So long as someone is honest and respects common people they're going to have an advantage over crooks and elitists. That's how rare honest people are and how esteemed they are now. and btw- AOC can hold her own unlike our glass-jawed nominees:

@stevenkesslar AOC is still regional/ethnic but Bernie/Warren/Tulsi/Yang showed it's not hard to become national. I think Bernie is just about proposals and policies and that's it. No personalities. I flirted with Warren as a female Bernie even though I was suspicious about why she simply said she had every policy of Bernie's but didn't back him in 2016 (people warned me). After the Clintonista attack it became obvious others were right. She had been set up in the primaries solely to be a foil to Bernie and split the progressive vote as much as possible. IF she had withdrawn before Super Tuesday and endorsed Bernie who she claimed to agree with 100%, Bernie would have very possibly won. Obviously the DNC programmed that strategy very precisly all the way through. The trouble is it was so obvious in the end it just soured people on the Democratic Party. Sometimes you can be too smart and too clever too obviously. Which is why honesty and candidness is usually the best policy now. People are too smart for the games and manipulation. But the tactic of harassing and threatening the losing side after you win is a lot worse this year than 2016 and would ordinarily be political suicide if Trump weren't so immensely unpopular. The Dems are spending all their time attacking the reformers and people who advocate for policy change rather than recruiting voters. Last person that worked for was Stalin.

And I understand it's just normal dirty politics but don't think the Wicked Witch of the Northeast, the Snake, will ever again be acceptable again as an alternative to reformers. This is how the establishment got rid of Bernie. She better get a good job as a reward because she'll be primaried out otherwise:

and Jimmy Dore finally had enough of the KHivers threats yesterday and went on a George Carlin rant: They cry about the pimple but not the bag of chips they ate for 8 years lol great Trump/Obama comparison

duplicate

lol. You're adamantly saying the same things I am and making them sound opposite. The time-honored, successful, traditional way of uniting a political party for the general election is putting #2 in as VP (or a close surrogate}. The reason that would not work this year (unlike 2016) is that Kamala is the president chosen by the country's owners but the people didn't like her so Biden had to be put in as a placeholder. Of course the DNC kept any reformers out as VP in 2016 also. Clinton/Sanders, Clinton/Warren, or Clinton/Gabbard would have won very easily. They decided they would rather lose than give those people power (or even respect) in the party. The problem is the young people and Latinos (they prefer over "Latinx") you speak of overwhelmingly support those reformers and it's hard enough to make a U-turn for a general and support those you've opposed all year even when your person is on the ticket as #2 and you're honored in the party. But when your favorite bloggers are threatened online routinely by surrogates of the ticket in the general and you are aware you are very unwelcome in the party, it's hard to get any enthusiasm to vote, even against Trump. And enthusiasm counts as much as preference in the US where about half don't participate. I live in the middle of Millennial central in DC and what I noticed is while the RBG store ( a women's political store) on the block had lines for T-Shirts the Trader Joe's up the block (the Grand Central of Millennials) was plastered with Jo Jorgenson? placards. Even up on U Street the Black Millennial central there were plenty of placards to save Go-Go but zero for the ticket. During the primaries the discussion was Sanders vs Tulsi vs Yang (with a very few Warrens). Now there's just stylish indifference. I read that in Latino areas, especially in Texas, it's even worse. Maybe the DNC surrogates online are making threats against and crude vulgar jokes about Latinos and Latinas online too so they know how unwelcome they are. Florida is complex on the "Latino" front because there they are equally Cuban, Central American, and Puerto Rican, with a good group of South Americans too. Most Cubans and South Americans are pretty wealthy. Puerto Ricans are more wealthy than Central Americans. Usually. They divide politically more economically than ethically. Texas, like most of the US, is almost pure Central American/Mexican. Certainly with Texas polling close this year it's obvious that Bernie would have probably been formidable in the EC with a NY/CA/TX combination. Either Bernie or Warren would have probably picked Castro as VP for that reason. And Latinos are , by far, our biggest minority now @ 20% (and growing fast), They deserve a turn in the presidency.

Emhoff is owned by and owns a lot of Silicon Valley and Hollywood. I expect a Harris administration just to add Facebook and Google to the Wall Street owners of the country (with heavy Chinese influence). It's the Chinese Century now and China usually is #1 for a thousand years at a time. They made it pretty clear that if Bernie or Tulsi or Yang were the Democratic nominee, Biden and Harris would have voted for Trump.

@stevenkesslar and this is how you get Americans to vote against their own interests; divide them by identity politics, political correctness, cancel culture, race, religion, sex, etc. Man does it work well in the US ! How about a 1-issue candidate or a referendum simply based on everyone gets a $2000/mo check for life paid for by a tax on Wall Street and bank transactions and on people making over $1 Billion a year of a % necessary to fund it. It would win over 70% easily and would get equal (probably unanimous) support in Black ghettos, Latino barrios and Trump trailer parks. and that is why the corporate media has to convince people other issues divide them and are more important. The corporate media manufactures consent among the people for the oligarchy by convincing them what issues are important.

If Arizona really is in play, then the good news is that the Dems can lose both Pennsylvania's 20 votes and Florida and still win with exactly 270 votes with AZ. To me AZ being more (D) than Pennsylvania (or even (D) ! ) is hard to imagine. Virginia's shift and Colorado's shift to Democratic states I understood. But other than a lot of seniors, I don't get it. (I've always said the Dem's #1 target this year should be taking Seniors from the GOP). As the SCOTUS fight becomes a culture war on abortion, PA may be at special risk and Arizona could be critical for 270.

@stevenkesslar just a quick note, I don't have to look for one in a place like West Virginia, there's a clear one in West Virginia: On November 6, 2018, Ojeda was defeated in the general election by 12 points, winning 44% of the vote to Miller's 56%. For Democrats, this was a 32-point improvement in performance from the previous election, where the Democrat won only 24% to the Republican's 68%.[31] According to FiveThirtyEight, Ojeda outperformed his district's partisan lean by 25%, the strongest showing for a non-incumbent https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Ojeda and remember JFK spent half his campaign in West Virginia and carried West Virginia with his biggest margin. What we better off don't understand is that the underclass cares a hell of a lot less about social issues than we do even though the rich try to divide them off with social fear and hate. Their relative poverty means most to them, from the Black public housing ghettos to the Trump trailer parks. They uniformly know they have the short end of the stick and resent the rich and the elite equally. As the American middle class gets poorer and poorer the "have-nots" are a big majority. Give them a reason to vote (ie: $)(cash) and they will. That may well be why Trump is struggling with Social Security/Medicare recipients this year. Cash $$.

The generational change you aren't getting is that Millennials and Gen Z's want common sense workable solutions, especially where there's 70+% public support (that's called consensus-something we lost a while ago). They are 100% not interested in Democratic Party politics or Republican Party politics or Whig Party politics. Those 70+% consensus issues sometimes work against Democratic Party positions too. And it's not even just a US thing, left-populists are against corporate liberals worldwide as being the voice of the elite and find like economic cause with the right-populists who also unfortunately are often too xenophobic and racist in their otherwise justified anti-globalism/nationalism. But as a Trumpist Marine told me when I suggested guillotines on Wall Street: "Chop, Chop, When do we start?" Economics should be 95% of politics but in the US we're indoctrinated into thinking superficial social issues are what matter most. I'm pretty certain that the average working-class African-American would more appreciate a $15 minimum wage and national healthcare than the word "Black" being capitalized and a couple statues being removed. Better yet, for them and everyone else in the working class, a $2000/month UBI per person. Talk and symbolic actions are cheap. Show us the money. But the old "centrist" (ie: right-wing) Democrats are stuck in the '70's with Clinton triangulation. They think "consensus" means being Republican-lite (or pure Republican in 2020). Be exactly like the other side ("Won't change a thing") and that must be consensus so you win ! Except 70+% of the people don't agree with the policies they want being ignored. Maybe the Dems can revert to their original name of the Democratic-Republican Party; that'll get them. The pure economic fact is that the "triangulation" works very well financially for the party leaders. Plenty of "speaking fees" and multiple $50 million mansions and lake houses around the country for those Big-D Democrats. Small-D democracy doesn't pay so well for them. No wonder they can be so vicious in keeping reformers out of the party at all cost. And again, the traditional way to unite a political party and win is to take the 2nd place side as VP and bend over backwards to unite the party. That has always been the #1 rule of presidential elections. The surest way to lose is like Goldwater, tell the losing side to fuck off and get out of "my" party. That's the Democrats' 2020 strategy. Maybe Trump is so horrible it will work. This year. In summary: Democrats don't lose because they don't appeal to Republicans enough. They lose because they are too much like Republicans and don't appeal to educated and independent young voters enough.

It was sudden. RBG just conducted (!) a wedding in a park close to my house 3 days ago. Surprisingly Trump keeps an official "SC candidate" bio list: https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefings-statements/additions-president-donald-j-trumps-supreme-court-list/ If T-rump wins and he's smart (lol) he should put Ted Cruz on the Court. Within a week he'd have 8 more vacancies to fill. AAMOF if he nominated Ted Cruz 70% of Senators would probably vote to confirm him in 15 minutes before Trump could change his mind. Just to be rid of Cruz. Sen.Tom Cotton would probably be the easiest to confirm as there is still a Senatorial comity among members. Politically Carlos Muniz now on the Florida Supreme Court or Barbra Lagoa (also FL Latino) or Bridget Bade (AZ) would work well for election votes in swing states. I don't think it would be easy for Trump to get a confirmation before the election, but whether he wins or loses, lame ducks in the Senate after Nov 3 (like hopefully Susan Collins) will vote however their future income prospects warrant. This changes the election a lot as it puts the abortion issue on center stage and that's a huge issue in Pennsylvania and Wisconsin.

Wasn't it last election when Hertz found thousands of ballots in one car returned by a Broward County election worker a week later? Broward's incompetence in printing the ballots with Nelson's name on a seperate page from the rest of the ballot probably cost Dems 1 Senate seat. Never underestimate Broward's startling incompetence ability. and a pro-Dem summary by Nate today:

The Dems just put out a vid of long lines in Fairfax County on 1st day of early voting. Upscale suburban DC, it went for Clinton by 63%. Unfortunately, to me these people look very much more like Trump voters than D's. (But then I'm obviously not buying the rich Republican suburbanites shifting to (D) strategy ). and the UM supermarket survey (a 100% predictor until 2016 was way off) predicts 48% to 47% (D) win. https://www.aljazeera.com/ajimpact/trump-biden-consumers-win-november-200918163124196.html