Kansas Crimson

Ok good.

Generally I wonder whether/to what degree the whole Ukraine thing will be as an issue in 24.

And maybe, for that matter, the whole East Palestine thing too.

But I like the thought that maybe they won’t be anything at all.

DCHawk1 wrote: ↑Tue Feb 21, 2023 11:55 am I think Biden's "strategy" on Ukraine (such as it is) is patently stupid.

No bro, you’re just another Russian spam bot.


(am I doing it right?)

I AM a Russian spam bot. This is common knowledge and has been for years.

ousdahl wrote: ↑Tue Feb 21, 2023 11:57 am (am I doing it right?)

Based on past performance, I'd guess you're probably not.

too bad RussianHawk (i think that’s right) isn’t still around

twocoach wrote: ↑Tue Feb 21, 2023 11:50 am

ousdahl wrote: ↑Tue Feb 21, 2023 11:04 am I’m not even sure this is something.

Is this something?

No, it isn't. But Trump wants it to be.

to be fair, it's at least something

with that something being, this gem!

ousdahl wrote: ↑Fri Feb 24, 2023 9:44 am

twocoach wrote: ↑Tue Feb 21, 2023 11:50 am

ousdahl wrote: ↑Tue Feb 21, 2023 11:04 am I’m not even sure this is something.

Is this something?

No, it isn't. But Trump wants it to be.

to be fair, it's at least something

with that something being, this gem!

Is there anything that he doesn't know better than everyone? His grandiose ego can't even walk into a damn McDonalds without claiming to know their work better than the employees. What an asshat.

https://www.mayoclinic.org/diseases-con ... c-20366662

Have an unreasonably high sense of self-importance and require constant, excessive admiration. CHECK
Feel that they deserve privileges and special treatment. CHECK
Expect to be recognized as superior even without achievements. CHECK
Make achievements and talents seem bigger than they are. CHECK
Be preoccupied with fantasies about success, power, brilliance, beauty or the perfect mate. CHECK
Believe they are superior to others and can only spend time with or be understood by equally special people. CHECK
Be critical of and look down on people they feel are not important. CHECK
Expect special favors and expect other people to do what they want without questioning them. CHECK
Take advantage of others to get what they want. CHECK
Have an inability or unwillingness to recognize the needs and feelings of others. CHECK
Be envious of others and believe others envy them. CHECK
Behave in an arrogant way, brag a lot and come across as conceited. CHECK
Insist on having the best of everything — for instance, the best car or office. CHECK

And yet, look how star struck that chick behind the register, and indeed the entire staff, all appear to be.

ousdahl wrote: ↑Tue Feb 21, 2023 11:56 am Ok good.

Generally I wonder whether/to what degree the whole Ukraine thing will be as an issue in 24.

And maybe, for that matter, the whole East Palestine thing too.

But I like the thought that maybe they won’t be anything at all.

Republicans would be stupid to make the train derailment in Ohio an issue in '24 as they played a large hand in deregulation that helped to lead to the event.

As for Ukraine, I wouldn't be surprised if we see Russia start to drag this out so it is still going on leading up to the '24 election so that the Dems look bad continuing to send money/aid to Ukraine. The GOP absolutely will make that an issue, as they should.

ousdahl wrote: ↑Fri Feb 24, 2023 10:09 am And yet, look how star struck that chick behind the register, and indeed the entire staff, all appear to be.

Normal people prove every day that they like to meet stars, even if they are scummy stars.

Yea.

And pretty sure rural rust belt Ohio, with an overwhelmingly majority-white demographic and not much education and median income of like $8 dollars a year, is pretty hardcore Trump country either way.

twocoach wrote: ↑Fri Feb 24, 2023 10:10 am

ousdahl wrote: ↑Tue Feb 21, 2023 11:56 am Ok good.

Generally I wonder whether/to what degree the whole Ukraine thing will be as an issue in 24.

And maybe, for that matter, the whole East Palestine thing too.

But I like the thought that maybe they won’t be anything at all.

Republicans would be stupid to make the train derailment in Ohio an issue in '24 as they played a large hand in deregulation that helped to lead to the event.

As for Ukraine, I wouldn't be surprised if we see Russia start to drag this out so it is still going on leading up to the '24 election so that the Dems look bad continuing to send money/aid to Ukraine. The GOP absolutely will make that an issue, as they should.

They will hammer (and rightfully so) that Biden said some of our Aid should go to funding Ukrainian pensions.....in the face of our own social security funds dwindling to nothing.

2023 Chicago Mayoral Election.
In 30 minutes I'm voting for someone who has no chance of winning. I'm voting less for her (Sophia King) than I am voting against those who I feel do have a chance.
I absolutely do NOT want Lightfoot, Garcia, Wilson, or Johnson to win. I won't be happy but I might tolerate Vallas winning.
This is what's nuts. My guess is no one gets 50.1% of the vote (needed so there isn't a run off).
My guess is no one gets 40% of the vote. In other words, whoever is elected Mayor, more than 59% of voters do NOT want that person to be their Mayor. To me, the system is broken.

Here is my prediction for today.

Vallas 30%
Lightfoot 18%
Garcia 17%
Johnson 16%
Wilson 14%
The rest 5%

Having more choices that people do want is a problem? That's an odd take.

Mjl wrote: ↑Tue Feb 28, 2023 7:56 am Having more choices that people do want is a problem? That's an odd take.

Better to have too many choices than too few choices in my opinion.

Ranked-choice voting.

Mjl wrote: ↑Tue Feb 28, 2023 7:56 am Having more choices that people do want is a problem? That's an odd take.

At the risk of someone who more people want doesn't win an election? Yes, I feel that's a problem.

BasketballJayhawk wrote: ↑Tue Feb 28, 2023 8:05 am

Mjl wrote: ↑Tue Feb 28, 2023 7:56 am Having more choices that people do want is a problem? That's an odd take.

Better to have too many choices than too few choices in my opinion.

All depends on what we are discussing and what are the repercussions.
Example.....

Let's say 23% of voting Chicagoans want Vallas, 22% want Johnson, 20% want Lightfoot, and 19% want Chuey. The remaining 16% are split between King, Buckner, Wilson, Sawyer, and Green.
The 16% that are split are very possibly (if not probably) going to end up costing either Vallas, Johnson, Lightfoot, or Chuey the election.
Of course it can also work in Vallas, Johnson, Lightfoot, or Chuey's advantage.
So maybe it is "fair"?
I just feel too many shit candidates does the CITIZENS no good. That's because I don't like any of the leading candidates and don't want them to be the city's Mayor. Seems many if not most Chicagoans agree with me.

RainbowsandUnicorns wrote: ↑Tue Feb 28, 2023 9:00 am

BasketballJayhawk wrote: ↑Tue Feb 28, 2023 8:05 am

Mjl wrote: ↑Tue Feb 28, 2023 7:56 am Having more choices that people do want is a problem? That's an odd take.

Better to have too many choices than too few choices in my opinion.

All depends on what we are discussing and what are the repercussions.
Example.....

Let's say 23% of voting Chicagoans want Vallas, 22% want Johnson, 20% want Lightfoot, and 19% want Chuey. The remaining 16% are split between King, Buckner, Wilson, Sawyer, and Green.
The 16% that are split are very possibly (if not probably) going to end up costing either Vallas, Johnson, Lightfoot, or Chuey the election.
Of course it can also work in Vallas, Johnson, Lightfoot, or Chuey's advantage.
So maybe it is "fair"?
I just feel too many shit candidates does the CITIZENS no good. That's because I don't like any of the leading candidates and don't want them to be the city's Mayor. Seems many if not most Chicagoans agree with me.

I definitely understand what you're saying.

I just don't think it's better to have a candidate in a 2 person race get 51% of the vote but half of their portion viewed them as the lesser of 2 evils.

I'd rather have as many people as possible be able to vote for someone they believe will do a good job, even if that means there are 7 candidates and the winner only gets 28% of the total vote.

RainbowsandUnicorns wrote: ↑Tue Feb 28, 2023 9:00 am

BasketballJayhawk wrote: ↑Tue Feb 28, 2023 8:05 am

Mjl wrote: ↑Tue Feb 28, 2023 7:56 am Having more choices that people do want is a problem? That's an odd take.

Better to have too many choices than too few choices in my opinion.

All depends on what we are discussing and what are the repercussions.
Example.....

Let's say 23% of voting Chicagoans want Vallas, 22% want Johnson, 20% want Lightfoot, and 19% want Chuey. The remaining 16% are split between King, Buckner, Wilson, Sawyer, and Green.
The 16% that are split are very possibly (if not probably) going to end up costing either Vallas, Johnson, Lightfoot, or Chuey the election.
Of course it can also work in Vallas, Johnson, Lightfoot, or Chuey's advantage.
So maybe it is "fair"?
I just feel too many shit candidates does the CITIZENS no good. That's because I don't like any of the leading candidates and don't want them to be the city's Mayor. Seems many if not most Chicagoans agree with me.

Seems like you’re just a strong advocate for ranked choice voting

Rank them most to least crappy

zsn wrote: ↑Tue Feb 28, 2023 8:48 am Ranked-choice voting.

^^^