Election 2020

[Guinevere]

Come on Crackpot -- You (and I mean the centrist/independent - this isn't a personal attack) don't know what the Democrats stand for? You don't know what an individual Democrat stands for? You didn't know what HRC stood for? I'm sorry, but that's just an excuse for refusing to vote for HRC for a million reasons that had nothing to do with her policies or the Democratic platform, or refusing to vote for any current Democrats because you know what they stand for and you don't like all of the answers. It's also sticking your damn heads in the sand about Trump. You and the lefties did it in 2016. Please please please please do not make that same mistake in 2020. We are not anybody but Trump, there are lots of great ideas, plans, policies available out there -- just read them, listen to a candidate, follow the legislation submitted by the party -- go read HR 1 from the Dems under Nancy Pelosi. There is more information out there than any one human can process. To claim otherwise is silliness.

[Big RR]

and remember CP, you are never going to agree with all of the positions of any candidate (I know I never have), but you have to look beyond the differences to what you share in common. and then consider the alternative in earnest. if you really think then that it doesn't make a difference who wins, then stay home or vote for whomever you want. `But if not, then don't punish the country because you have some disagreement with the democratic candidate--after all, most of those positions will be seriously tested/amended through the legislative process. But 4 more years of Trump?

FWIW, I wasn't the biggest fan of Hillary 4 years ago, and some the crap the DNC pulled really pissed me off, but not enough to be sanguine about the possibility of Trump winning. Now that we have seen what an absolute trainreck his presidency is, I can't see how anyone would want even chance of him winning next year.

[Guinevere]

I want to vote for Anastasia Occasional-Cortex. Why's she not in the picture?

Why oh why must you copy the repugnicrats and make fun of a young outspoken female? Disagree with her positions all you like, but there is no need to be condescending and snarky about her abilities.

God forbid you show her some actual respect. She wanted to make a change in the world and against heavily stacked odds she went out and put herself in a position to make those changes. She worked her ass off. And then, oh my god, she actually got elected. And then, oh my god again, she actually stood up for what she said she was going to stand up for.

She's done what many many others tried to do and failed miserably. She has a brain. To say otherwise is ignorant and needlessly mean.

Edit: typos.

[Big RR]

[Crackpot]

Three letters TPP.

The Democrats have largely faked on their explanation of domestic economic and trade policies so much so that it allowed Trump (and Bernie) to run wild with a mind numbingly simplistic isolationist trade policy. They still can’t admit the failure to prepare for the regional fallout due to businesses leaving while chasing cheap labor in markets. Heck the Democrats are so phobic of admitting any kind of error it leads to serious credibility issues.

[Crackpot]

And Guin did you happen to forget that Hillary couldn’t even be bothered to visit Michigan Wisconsin and Minnesota during the campaign?

[rubato]

Taking her age and relative lack of education about government into account AOC has done a remarkable job and only put a foot slightly wrong here and there. I'm looking forward to seeing her future career. She is not a party apparatchik and is focused on the big problems; poverty, inequality, health care and the environment. She isn't as sophisticated as Pete Buttagieg and far less than Kamala Harris but she gets attention and is a successful spokeswoman for her ideas.

HRC was a dishonest egotistical creep.

yrs,
rubato

[MajGenl.Meade]

Why oh why etc. etc. . . . needlessly mean.

Yeah, I agree with you. So what? I think it's a funny name and I invented it and it's mine which is what it is (along with a theory about brontosauruses). You lefties are getting so good at telling everyone else how (and what) to think and say that you've forgotten there's fun even in your brand of fundamentalism.

PS I've no idea what repugnicans say about AOC (though can guess from your post that it's not nice) because I don't see US news much, as evidenced by abysmally ignorant quiz scores. Mostly I read AOL's Trump-dump-of-the-day story and shake my head in despair.

[Guinevere]

Why oh why etc. etc. . . . needlessly mean.

Yeah, I agree with you. So what? I think it's a funny name and I invented it and it's mine which is what it is (along with a theory about brontosauruses). You lefties are getting so good at telling everyone else how (and what) to think and say that you've forgotten there's fun even in your brand of fundamentalism.

PS I've no idea what repugnicans say about AOC (though can guess from your post that it's not nice) because I don't see US news much, as evidenced by abysmally ignorant quiz scores. Mostly I read AOL's Trump-dump-of-the-day story and shake my head in despair.

Let's be clear - I didn't tell you what to say, only what not to say.

[Guinevere]

And Guin did you happen to forget that Hillary couldn’t even be bothered to visit Michigan Wisconsin and Minnesota during the campaign?

More on this later, but (1) you're again deflecting from the real issue, and (2) in no place above did I suggest HRC was a perfect candidate, and (3) WI was a HUGE screw-up, and (4) there were indeed trips to and appearances in MI and MN.

[RayThom]

Yo, Meade, have you tried google-izing Anastasia Occasional-Cortex?

In cyberspace I'd say it's a distinction without a difference.

Next thing you know, our porn star president, Diaper Don, will be using that moniker in an attempt to marginalize the Congresswoman even further.

[Big RR]

And FWIW, Meade, while I guin the thumbs up, I in no way wanted to prevent you from saying anything, although I think a silly play on a name like you posted is beneath you; and if you got more US news where you are, you'd see how a lot of people think that such silly plays on a name passes for discourse on the issues. I'd rather hear your opinion on what she says, than see how you can make her name into a mildly amusing (at best) word play. But that's up to you.

[Crackpot]

Guin

1) I gave answer to polices in the previous post
2) I didn’t say you did but she was the face of the party at the time
3) No argument there
4) My error there I should’ve checked my facts instead of relying on my memory (she was even in my home county). But she did run an absolute shit campaign in MI.

[Joe Guy]

I'm compelled to say that a silly play on a name is certainly not beneath me and I thought Meade's AOC quip was funny. It's not funny when our president does it, though. He's not supposed to be immature like me. When he makes up names or misunderstands meanings, his slipped in quip could sink a ship.

The Democrats better come up with a candidate that can win. At this point I don't see a candidate that I'd vote for if he/she weren't running against Trump. This election should be an easy one for a democrat to win but it appears to be the just the opposite now that we live in Bizzaro Trump world.

[RayThom]

Now, now, now, Joe, don't despair. Just remember:

[BoSoxGal]

I think this is relevant to insert here.

The Single Most Reliable Recession Indicator of the Past 50 Years Has Officially Started Blaring

If you believe the signals coming out of the bond market, it might be time to start counting down until our next recession.

As of this week, the U.S. Treasury yield curve has now been inverted for a full quarter—an incredibly dull-sounding turn of events that happens to be an unusually reliable warning sign that an economic downturn is on the way. The yield curve has flipped prior to each of the last seven official recessions over the past 50 years, without a single false-alarm during that stretch. If securities could talk, in other words, they’d be screaming bloody murder about trouble ahead.

When finance types say that the yield curve is “inverted,” what they really mean is that the typical order of the debt markets that prevails when the economy is healthy has been turned on its head. Usually, long-term U.S. government bonds offer higher yields than short-term ones, because buyers demand higher interest rates in return for locking up their money for greater periods of time. There are a few reasons why this is the case, but a big one is that the longer it takes to get repaid, the more risk there is that inflation will eat up your investment.

When the yield curve is inverted, however, the opposite becomes true: The returns on long-term bonds dip below returns on short-term ones. Again, there are many reasons that this could happen, but it’s generally interpreted as a sign that the market expects weak or nonexistent growth in the coming years, and very little inflation.

Nobody believes the yield curve actually causes a recession, mind you. It might encourage some business executives to cut back on investment or hiring, because they think a recession is in the offing. But mostly, an inversion is just viewed as a particularly telling gauge of the market’s sentiment.

Are markets always right? Of course not. But the yield curve has a remarkable track record as a leading indicator. It has predicted all of the recessions stretching back to the Eisenhower era, with just one false positive. That was in the mid-1960s, when the curve inverted briefly, and growth plummeted, but we didn’t quite go negative.

The yield curve first started to invert back in March, which led to a good deal of worried commentary. As one Wall Street Journal columnist put it: “The market’s most reliable recession indicator is finally flashing red.” So why is the news worth flagging now more than it was two weeks ago? As Duke University finance professor Campbell Harvey has found, the yield curve only seems to predict a downturn in growth once it has been inverted, on average, for a full quarter of the economic calendar. We’ve now reached that point, he says, based on two commonly tracked pairs of bonds. Yields on five-year Treasuries sat below yields on three-month bills for the entire second quarter of 2019; the average yield on 10-year Treasury bonds was also lower than the average yield on three-month bills during that period.

Harvey is the economist who first noticed the relationship between the yield curve and recessions back in the 1980s, so he’s considered an important authority on the subject. Even he cautions that it’s just one indicator, and that this time could always be different; after all, there have only been a handful of recessions over the decades, meaning we’re trying to predict the future based on a relatively small sample size of historical events. And if the yield curve is signaling a recession, we might have to wait a while for it to happen: It sometimes takes more than a year from the time yields flip for the economy to finally contract. Still, as Harvey put it, “The alarm’s gone off.”

[Bicycle Bill]

At one time we thought this was funny.
Today, it's beginning to sound more and more like an improvement.

-"BB"-

[MajGenl.Meade]

Let's be clear - I didn't tell you what to say, only what not to say.

[Lord Jim]

Gee, I guess nobody wanted to pass him the torch...

Good riddance:

Eric Swalwell expected to end presidential bid after failing to gain traction

(CNN)California Rep. Eric Swalwell is expected to announce Monday that he's dropping out of the 2020 race for president, according to a source familiar with his plans.

Swalwell is expected to make the announcement at a 4 p.m. ET news conference at his campaign headquarters in California, concluding a short-lived bid for the Democratic nomination that failed to gain any traction.

A spokesperson for Swalwell's campaign declined to comment.

Swalwell's expected exit from the 2020 race will make him the first candidate to drop out since the campaign began in earnest.

https://www.cnn.com/2019/07/08/politics ... index.html

The really good news about this, is that it makes Montana Governor Steve Bullock's inclusion in the second debates this month a lock...

Now if they could just lose Marianne Williamson (or Andrew Yang, I'm not picky) and make a space for MA Congressman and decorated Iraq war veteran Seth Moulton, (another serious candidate and center/left moderate liberal who deserves to get a hearing.)

[BoSoxGal]

Andrew Yang’s UBI proposal and other policies geared toward transitioning our economy away from older forms of work while robots and AI are taking over many of those jobs is an important conversation worth having in the debates. He belongs there far more than Marianne Williamson’s manifesting love to solve our problems.