experchange > mac.system

Jeff-Relf.Me @. (01-01-70, 02:00 AM)
According to Wikipedia...

December 14, 2018, Judge O'Connor ruled that
The Affordable Care Act is no longer constitutional.

In December of 2019, the Fifth Circuit agreed that
the individual mandate was unconstitutional.

The Supreme Court accepted the case in March 2020,
but to be heard in the 2020-2021 term,
with the ruling likely falling after the 2020 elections.
Anonymous Remailer (austria) (03-03-20, 01:10 PM)
You know voting for Biden means you're stupid, right?
Dementia-Remailer (03-04-20, 02:34 AM)
In article <3a82ce4e066a49b81f0c1bfe940743a0>
"Anonymous Remailer (austria)" <mixmaster>
wrote:
> You know voting for Biden means you're stupid, right?


Did you know you could vote for Biden using your iPhone?
pjp (03-04-20, 03:44 AM)
In article <3a82ce4e066a49b81f0c1bfe940743a0>,
mixmaster says...
> You know voting for Biden means you're stupid, right?


I pity Americans only have two choices neither of which appears suitable
for the needed task at hand.
Ken Springer (03-04-20, 04:13 AM)
On 3/3/20 6:44 PM, pjp wrote:
> In article <3a82ce4e066a49b81f0c1bfe940743a0>,
> mixmaster says...
>> You know voting for Biden means you're stupid, right?

> I pity Americans only have two choices neither of which appears suitable
> for the needed task at hand.


Not true. You just never hear of the other candidates from the US
media. I just cast my primary ballot, and there are 6 (I think) primary
candidates on the Republican ballot.
pjp (03-04-20, 05:57 AM)
In article <8e317dbc-5a29-41bb-3241-0a6f6eea6242>,
wordworks says...
> On 3/3/20 6:44 PM, pjp wrote:
> Not true. You just never hear of the other candidates from the US
> media. I just cast my primary ballot, and there are 6 (I think) primary
> candidates on the Republican ballot.


What are you talking about? Doesn't matter what candidate they all will
never change that MONEY and maintaining control over all else is all the
US is really about. People are just a means to an end and treated as
nothing to be concerned about whenever need arises. You sow the seeds of
your own destruction but the whole world will pay for it when it finally
happens and becomes apparent.
Ken Springer (03-04-20, 06:17 AM)
On 3/3/20 8:57 PM, pjp wrote:
> In article <8e317dbc-5a29-41bb-3241-0a6f6eea6242>,
> wordworks says...
> What are you talking about? Doesn't matter what candidate they all will
> never change that MONEY and maintaining control over all else is all the
> US is really about. People are just a means to an end and treated as
> nothing to be concerned about whenever need arises. You sow the seeds of
> your own destruction but the whole world will pay for it when it finally
> happens and becomes apparent.


WTF???? That has nothing to do with your statement of there being only
2 choices in the US. Which is incorrect, and that is what I responded to.
blake (03-04-20, 11:06 AM)
In article <MPG.38c86f433f66e6e093>
pjp <pjpoirierislocated> wrote:
> In article <3a82ce4e066a49b81f0c1bfe940743a0>,
> mixmaster says...
> > You know voting for Biden means you're stupid, right?

> I pity Americans only have two choices neither of which appears suitable
> for the needed task at hand.


You would prefer your country to be run by a committee
consisting of Joe Biden, Mike Bloomberg, Bernie Sanders,
Elizabeth Warren and Pete Buttigieg?

Where did you say you lived again? Bizarroslovakia?
Anonymous Remailer (austria) (03-04-20, 12:11 PM)
In article <8e317dbc-5a29-41bb-3241-0a6f6eea6242>
Ken Springer <wordworks> wrote:
> On 3/3/20 6:44 PM, pjp wrote:
> Not true. You just never hear of the other candidates from the US
> media. I just cast my primary ballot, and there are 6 (I think) primary
> candidates on the Republican ballot.


There are many Democrat fools in California.

California - Democratic Presidential Primary
Updated: Mar 04, 2020 3:54am
Candidate Votes Percent
Bernie Sanders 744,399 31.6%
Joe Biden 518,143 22.0%
Michael Bloomberg 377,413 16.0%
Elizabeth Warren 287,470 12.2%
Pete Buttigieg 185,719 7.9%
Amy Klobuchar 91,973 3.9%
Tom Steyer 76,878 3.3%
Andrew Yang 26,675 1.1%

Republicans are much better informed, making wiser decisions.

California - Republican Presidential Primary
Updated: Mar 04, 2020 3:56am
Candidate Votes Percent
Joe Walsh 34,335 2.5%
Bill Weld 34,130 2.5%
Rocky De La Fuente 11,241 0.8%
Matthew Matern 8,117 0.6%
Robert Ardini 7,014 0.5%
Zoltan Istvan 4,152 0.3%
? *Donald J. Trump 1,262,097 92.7%
Nomen Nescio (03-04-20, 12:13 PM)
In article <MPG.38c86f433f66e6e093>
pjp <pjpoirierislocated> wrote:
> In article <3a82ce4e066a49b81f0c1bfe940743a0>,
> mixmaster says...
> > You know voting for Biden means you're stupid, right?

> I pity Americans only have two choices neither of which appears suitable
> for the needed task at hand.


Lol. Right. So we can be like the other stupid countries who
hamstring themselves with five-legged lefty ducks that never get
anything done.

We got one guy doing the job of 10 and he's doing it right. Go
Trump!
SC Tom (03-04-20, 02:43 PM)
"blake" <blake> wrote in message
news:a1f2
> In article <MPG.38c86f433f66e6e093>
> pjp <pjpoirierislocated> wrote:
> You would prefer your country to be run by a committee
> consisting of Joe Biden, Mike Bloomberg, Bernie Sanders,
> Elizabeth Warren and Pete Buttigieg?
> Where did you say you lived again? Bizarroslovakia?


If Pete and Bernie would run together, then they'd be ButtBern2020 :-)
chrisv (03-04-20, 03:36 PM)
Ken Springer wrote:

> pjp wrote:
>> I pity Americans only have two choices neither of which appears suitable
>> for the needed task at hand.

>Not true.


Is true.

>You just never hear of the other candidates from the US
>media.


Not true.

But, in the general election, it comes down to two, obviously. I
don't know why anyone would object to what pjp wrote.
Mayayana (03-04-20, 04:10 PM)
"Ken Springer" <wordworks> wrote

| > What are you talking about? Doesn't matter what candidate they all will
| > never change that MONEY and maintaining control over all else is all the
| > US is really about. People are just a means to an end and treated as
| > nothing to be concerned about whenever need arises. You sow the seeds of
| > your own destruction but the whole world will pay for it when it finally
| > happens and becomes apparent.
|
| WTF???? That has nothing to do with your statement of there being only
| 2 choices in the US. Which is incorrect, and that is what I responded to.
|

You don't think he's right? The Dem insiders
stole the primary last time and they're set to
do it again. Hillary's still fuming that someone
had the nerve to try to take her crown. That
scam was part of why Trump won. Progressives
watched as big money took over the Dem party
and then didn't bother to vote. They didn't like
Hillary and assumed Trump couldn't win, so they
decided to have a tantrum for the fun of it.

Biden's first fundraising event was
with bankers. People like to remember Obama
as great, but how much did he really do? He
killed more people with drones than Bush, Jr.

There can be valid criticisms of Sanders, but
either way he'll probably be blocked by big money.
Warren, inexplicably, decided to take the low road
of nasty, sexist attacks and shrill blaming, taking
herself out of the race. If she hadn't she probably
still would have, also, been blocked by big money.

So was there ever a chance it
wouldn't be Biden? Though I read that Bloomberg
is busy visiting and investing in super delegates,
with a strategy to steal the nomination through
bald-faced bribery. That wouldn't surprise me.
And if he does? Will progressives be so resentful that
they'll just let Trump win again? It's a mess. It looks
like the best case scenario will be to switch from a
psychopath to a career politician bought and owned
by big money. We'll go from having a lawyer for coal
as head of the EPA and an anti-education billionaire as
head of education, to "the same old thing". And we'll
be grateful that at least the active dismantling of
government by cynical, misanthropic industrialists has
been stopped.

I don't know where you get the idea that there
are lots of Rep choices. In my state there were
two. There's no reason for Reps to go out and vote.
Trump is the nominee. That's that. Anyone else running
is just a novelty. The only other option they had in
my state was a former governor
who's known for being a blueblood, enjoys
hunting on vast private forests reserved for
blueblood hunters, and never did much
of anything as governor. I have no idea why he
was running for president. Probably he just missed
being in the press. On TV yesterday he said his campaign
was doing well. I half expected his geriatrician to
catch him and take him off in a wheelchair.

I would agree, though, that pjp may not be seeing
the whole story. There's more going on than money
corruption. There's radical change happening due to tech.
(The movie Brexit is a dramatization of the same thing
in Britain.)
Rural people who used to believe whatever they heard
from the reasonably responsible mainstream media are
now being precisely targetted with propaganda on
social media and through extremist radio personalities.
Society itself has become anarchy. Basically, the
unthinking peasantry, who no one likes to admit still
exist, are being manipulated to gain control. Just like in
autocratic systems. It used to be that only the white
collar peasantry was manipulated so carefully, so it used
to be that people like Biden or the Bushes were the worst
case scenario. The white collar peasantry are at least
controlled by white collar moderates and academic
"thought leaders". They don't like to be controversial or
iconoclastic. They just like to be milquetoast conformists,
with a bit of fashionable abstruseness to show
that they're highbrow. They're the people who show off
their knowledge of the latest ethnic food fashion, but
go to the gym and buy a sugar-and-hydrogenated-oil
"power bar". They're peasantry intellectually. But those
people, at least, have enough sophistication not to be
fooled by the likes of Trump.

Oddly, this trend isn't talked about very much. There's
been reporting about Russia's influence. There have
been reports like the story of the man from Tennessee
who went to DC to save child prostitutes from Hillary's ring
that he'd been told was operating out of the cellar of a
pizza joint. But in general we're just not acknowledging
the power of tech and the organized efforts of the
people exploiting it to convince millions of people that a
mirage is real. We're not actually talking about the
implications. Why? I suppose the simple answer
is that we like to imagine that we can and do think for
ourselves.

It's interesting to contrast that with earlier times.
JFK managed to never let people see how physically
disabled he was and his affairs were kept secret.
FDR, similarly, maintained a public image in the media
and was worshipped by the populace. A simpler time,
with a greater moral consensus. Public perception
was more controlled, but not in such an anarchic way.
Ken Springer (03-04-20, 04:14 PM)
On 3/4/20 6:36 AM, chrisv wrote:
> Ken Springer wrote:
> Is true.
> Not true.
> But, in the general election, it comes down to two, obviously. I
> don't know why anyone would object to what pjp wrote.


Because what pjp said is fundamentally untrue. You have more than 2
choices, if you so desire. Just because 2 candicates are the most
popular by far does mean you only have 2 choices to vote for.
Ken Springer (03-04-20, 07:11 PM)
On 3/4/20 7:10 AM, Mayayana wrote:
[..]
> and then didn't bother to vote. They didn't like
> Hillary and assumed Trump couldn't win, so they
> decided to have a tantrum for the fun of it.


I didn't say he wasn't right. I am saying that his last comment has
nothing to do with his 2 choices statement, which is factually untrue.

But you have to understand why there are super delegates. There was a
good explanation on one of the news shows last Sunday. It's an attempt
at preventing another McGovern/Mondale/????? (I think there was a 3rd
one) disaster. Of course, the Republicans had a similar situation with
Goldwater.

I find it somewhat hypocritical that the rules Bernie supported in 2016
he now opposes.

Every organization has rules you follow. If you don't like those rules,
change them before the game starts, or don't participate.

> Biden's first fundraising event was
> with bankers. People like to remember Obama
> as great, but how much did he really do? He
> killed more people with drones than Bush, Jr.


It will always involve money, and always will. I suspect Obama had more
available intelligence to work with. It's a question that will never be
answered in the near future.

> There can be valid criticisms of Sanders, but
> either way he'll probably be blocked by big money.
> Warren, inexplicably, decided to take the low road
> of nasty, sexist attacks and shrill blaming, taking
> herself out of the race. If she hadn't she probably
> still would have, also, been blocked by big money.


If those two were truly honest with themselves and others, they'd be on
the Socialist ticket. Dems used to be pro business, you know.

[..]
> be grateful that at least the active dismantling of
> government by cynical, misanthropic industrialists has
> been stopped.


I have the advantage of time, here, Bloomberg has dropped out and will
be supporting Biden. Tom Steyer has also dropped out, but I don't know
who he is supporting.

[..]
> being in the press. On TV yesterday he said his campaign
> was doing well. I half expected his geriatrician to
> catch him and take him off in a wheelchair.


The number of choices will vary by state. If a candidate doesn't meet
an individual state's criteria to get on the ballot, or makes no attempt
to do so, it's not any party's fault.

I'm an unaffiliated voter in Colorado. As a result, I got both the R
and D primary ballots. I vote one or the other, not both. In total,
there were 23 candidates. Colorado also has early voting, so it was
possible to cast a vote for a candidate before that candidate dropped
out of the race before Super Tuesday.

For the R's, Trump will be the candidate. But in both a democracy or
democratic republic, the majority rules. Don't like the results of
that? Move.

> I would agree, though, that pjp may not be seeing
> the whole story. There's more going on than money
> corruption. There's radical change happening due to tech.
> (The movie Brexit is a dramatization of the same thing
> in Britain.)


Tech is a big problem. Especially with the ease of posting truly
erroneous information. Just like all versions of the media do, if you
take the time to watch/read both sides. Checking out all sides doesn't
mean you agree with them, just that you want to know what those sides
are saying, and want it be accurate.

He who stays in his own back yard, wallows in his own ignorance.

> Rural people who used to believe whatever they heard
> from the reasonably responsible mainstream media


I'm sorry to have to say this, but I'm not sure we have any "reasonably
responsible mainstream media" anymore. I've see too much erroneous
reporting from all of them. :-(

> are
> now being precisely targetted with propaganda on
> social media and through extremist radio personalities.


Personalities on both sides, sadly.

> Society itself has become anarchy. Basically, the
> unthinking peasantry, who no one likes to admit still
> exist, are being manipulated to gain control.


"Unthinking peasantry", the type of comment that pissed that particular
group that got Trump elected.

[..]
> "power bar". They're peasantry intellectually. But those
> people, at least, have enough sophistication not to be
> fooled by the likes of Trump.


"Highbrow"... Exactly what I see in your writing, my friend. Others
may use the word "elite".

[..]
> implications. Why? I suppose the simple answer
> is that we like to imagine that we can and do think for
> ourselves.


The child prostitute story actually made the national TV broadcasts.

I think part of the reason for not talking about the implications is we
don't teach people how to think critically or analyze situations. So
few think 2, 3, 4, or more steps down an issue.

> It's interesting to contrast that with earlier times.
> JFK managed to never let people see how physically
> disabled he was and his affairs were kept secret.
> FDR, similarly, maintained a public image in the media
> and was worshipped by the populace. A simpler time,
> with a greater moral consensus. Public perception
> was more controlled, but not in such an anarchic way.


Those were also different times, medically speaking. If either were
running today, their known conditions wouldn't be of that much concern
for me. Maybe, not at all.

Similar Threads