Kansas Crimson

lobster wrote: ↑Wed Feb 12, 2020 1:02 pm Youtube is a source for determining what people want. Look at the like/dislike ratios and comments. You can pretend it's not, but you're just ignoring reality.

Wikipedia was pretty bad when it was new, but it has grown into a decent starting point. It often provides links to better sources.

Things change. People don't sell horses anymore.

lobster wrote: ↑Wed Feb 12, 2020 1:02 pm
Things change. People don't sell horses anymore.

jhawks99 wrote: ↑Wed Feb 12, 2020 1:06 pm

lobster wrote: ↑Wed Feb 12, 2020 1:02 pm
Things change. People don't sell horses anymore.

They do where I live. Really expensive horses.

chiknbut wrote: ↑Wed Feb 12, 2020 1:06 pm

lobster wrote: ↑Wed Feb 12, 2020 1:02 pm Youtube is a source for determining what people want. Look at the like/dislike ratios and comments. You can pretend it's not, but you're just ignoring reality.

Wikipedia was pretty bad when it was new, but it has grown into a decent starting point. It often provides links to better sources.

Things change. People don't sell horses anymore.

LOL.

jfish26 wrote: ↑Wed Feb 12, 2020 10:56 am

twocoach wrote: ↑Wed Feb 12, 2020 10:52 am

jfish26 wrote: ↑Wed Feb 12, 2020 9:48 am

I think Pete is the focus groups. I don't think he has a serious policy bone in his body, and I don't think he has the institutional bona fides to even understand what needs to be done.

He seems like a terrific high-energy, high-minded VP to run alongside someone with real chops.

If Donald Trump can figure out wharneeds to bedine despite firing all respectable advisors and instead choosing to surround himself with clowns, then Pete or anyone else running can figure out what needs to be done by hiring competent advisors.

I dont worry about any of the top Dems being able to "figure it out". Policy writers are hired.

I don't follow this example; Trump cannot figure out what needs to be done, because he has zero use for anything that is not directly beneficial to him. To the extent he's getting anything done from a policy perspective, it's because people with agendas are filling the void where his should be.

twocoach wrote: ↑Wed Feb 12, 2020 1:19 pm

jfish26 wrote: ↑Wed Feb 12, 2020 10:56 am

twocoach wrote: ↑Wed Feb 12, 2020 10:52 am
If Donald Trump can figure out wharneeds to bedine despite firing all respectable advisors and instead choosing to surround himself with clowns, then Pete or anyone else running can figure out what needs to be done by hiring competent advisors.

I dont worry about any of the top Dems being able to "figure it out". Policy writers are hired.

I don't follow this example; Trump cannot figure out what needs to be done, because he has zero use for anything that is not directly beneficial to him. To the extent he's getting anything done from a policy perspective, it's because people with agendas are filling the void where his should be.

I hate Trump more than most but he has technically managed to accomplish some things. Whether I approve of what they are and their impact long term is another conversation. But let's not lie and say he hasn't gotten anything done.

lobster wrote: ↑Wed Feb 12, 2020 12:00 pm So many people playing obtuse because they don't want lobster to right about anything.

Youtube is by far the most important site. If it wasn't, then why have all the news stations created their own Youtube channels? Listening to podcasts has far more benefits than reading or watching the news can offer. It's tiresome, so I'll let those of you who are behind decide if you want to keep selling horses.

The bottom line is, Youtube is as close to an unbiased, honest view of public opinion that we have. Very similar to IMDB, you will most of the time be able to get an accurate reading on what is popular, and more importantly, what people WANT.

Trump was extremely popular on Youtube in 2015 and 2016. I doubted this would have an effect and I was wrong. I'm not going to underestimate the power of the platform again. He remains pretty popular on Youtube in 2020.

Yang -- DChawk got it right when he mention Yang actually was running on something. He was eventually forced out, but he would still make a great VP for Sanders. Yang was very popular on Youtube, but maybe not as much as Sanders.

Sanders -- extremely popular on Youtube, and that is why I think he's got the best chance. He also is running on something (whether you hate it or not). I think he's in the lead right now, but things can change.

Warren -- too much like chikin in that she spreads a false narrative of feminism / women's rights b.s. She's not all that popular on Youtube. It also makes her look worse when she's complaining about the rich, yet she made over 400K a year as a professor. She's too much part of the establishment and people can see through her b.s.

Pete - he's gay and young. That's it. No chance.

Biden -- he is running on nothing. No chance.

Gabbard -- was quite popular on Youtube, but ultimately, they thought she was too dangerous and pushed her out. However, she destroyed Kamala Harris, and that's fantastic news. We are fortunate Harris is out.

Chikin -- so sad you try to kick a man when his wife has cancer. I would like see how you would cope in that situation. But you got the story wrong, as there was a lot more to it. If I had the choice to be Chikin or Peterson, I would rather be the guy who's wife is dying of cancer. At least Peterson knew how to raise his daughter so that she didn't grow up hating men. But to do that, you must first be a man.

lobster wrote: ↑Wed Feb 12, 2020 1:23 pm

twocoach wrote: ↑Wed Feb 12, 2020 1:19 pm

jfish26 wrote: ↑Wed Feb 12, 2020 10:56 am

I don't follow this example; Trump cannot figure out what needs to be done, because he has zero use for anything that is not directly beneficial to him. To the extent he's getting anything done from a policy perspective, it's because people with agendas are filling the void where his should be.

I hate Trump more than most but he has technically managed to accomplish some things. Whether I approve of what they are and their impact long term is another conversation. But let's not lie and say he hasn't gotten anything done.

Good to see someone here actually using their brain.

twocoach wrote: ↑Wed Feb 12, 2020 1:19 pm

jfish26 wrote: ↑Wed Feb 12, 2020 10:56 am

twocoach wrote: ↑Wed Feb 12, 2020 10:52 am
If Donald Trump can figure out wharneeds to bedine despite firing all respectable advisors and instead choosing to surround himself with clowns, then Pete or anyone else running can figure out what needs to be done by hiring competent advisors.

I dont worry about any of the top Dems being able to "figure it out". Policy writers are hired.

I don't follow this example; Trump cannot figure out what needs to be done, because he has zero use for anything that is not directly beneficial to him. To the extent he's getting anything done from a policy perspective, it's because people with agendas are filling the void where his should be.

I hate Trump more than most but he has technically managed to accomplish some things. Whether I approve of what they are and their impact long term is another conversation. But let's not lie and say he hasn't gotten anything done.

lobster wrote: ↑Wed Feb 12, 2020 1:26 pm Well, if you read what I actually wrote, it would help...

jfish26 wrote: ↑Wed Feb 12, 2020 1:35 pm

twocoach wrote: ↑Wed Feb 12, 2020 1:19 pm

jfish26 wrote: ↑Wed Feb 12, 2020 10:56 am

I don't follow this example; Trump cannot figure out what needs to be done, because he has zero use for anything that is not directly beneficial to him. To the extent he's getting anything done from a policy perspective, it's because people with agendas are filling the void where his should be.

I hate Trump more than most but he has technically managed to accomplish some things. Whether I approve of what they are and their impact long term is another conversation. But let's not lie and say he hasn't gotten anything done.

I think we're saying the same thing, different ways. His administration has gotten some things done. He doesn't personally give a flying fuck about anything but himself, so what matters more to him is the adulation of his donor class.

lobster wrote: ↑Wed Feb 12, 2020 1:02 pm

Things change. People don't sell horses anymore.

jfish26 wrote: ↑Wed Feb 12, 2020 1:35 pm

twocoach wrote: ↑Wed Feb 12, 2020 1:19 pm

jfish26 wrote: ↑Wed Feb 12, 2020 10:56 am

I don't follow this example; Trump cannot figure out what needs to be done, because he has zero use for anything that is not directly beneficial to him. To the extent he's getting anything done from a policy perspective, it's because people with agendas are filling the void where his should be.

I hate Trump more than most but he has technically managed to accomplish some things. Whether I approve of what they are and their impact long term is another conversation. But let's not lie and say he hasn't gotten anything done.

I think we're saying the same thing, different ways. His administration has gotten some things done. He doesn't personally give a flying fuck about anything but himself, so what matters more to him is the adulation of his donor class.

twocoach wrote: ↑Wed Feb 12, 2020 1:48 pm

jfish26 wrote: ↑Wed Feb 12, 2020 1:35 pm

twocoach wrote: ↑Wed Feb 12, 2020 1:19 pm
I hate Trump more than most but he has technically managed to accomplish some things. Whether I approve of what they are and their impact long term is another conversation. But let's not lie and say he hasn't gotten anything done.

I think we're saying the same thing, different ways. His administration has gotten some things done. He doesn't personally give a flying fuck about anything but himself, so what matters more to him is the adulation of his donor class.

He'll sprinkle enough droppings over the masses from the huge scoop of this nation's future wealth that he is stealing to try to keep them content enough to give him another 4 years in the vault. Then after he gets out of office (and then jail) he will continue to fleece his flock with paid speeches and appearances and tacky Chinese-made garbage for sale on his websites for decades.

twocoach wrote: ↑Wed Feb 12, 2020 1:37 pm

lobster wrote: ↑Wed Feb 12, 2020 1:26 pm Well, if you read what I actually wrote, it would help...

"Unbiased source of public opinion" is exactly the same as saying "biased news source". When you move from reporting the news to giving your opinion on the news then it is the very definition of bias.

DCHawk1 wrote: ↑Wed Feb 12, 2020 2:53 pm

I think you're missing the point on Trump. You're not alone, of course, which explains why so few people in politics seem equipped to address him as a phenomenon, even NOW.

"Donor class" is irrelevant. Indeed, the traditional donor class serves as his personal foil. That which he does consciously is done specifically with the intention of jabbing his thumb in the eye of the "donor class."

That doesn't mean that he doesn't have donors or that he doesn't do things to accommodate them. He does. But his motivations are different from those of a traditional politician -- for better AND worse.