I imagine they are listening to whoever is causing this ruckus and this announcement is meant to create some more chatter for them to hear prior to the meeting. They wouldn't have announced the meeting will be taking place tomorrow carelessly; the announcement is no doubt part of their strategic response.
Jon very clearly and explicitly said in his monologue that Biden is too old for the job and we should be worried about his mental state. And he wasn't joking when he said that either.
Biden accidently blurted out the word "Mexico" when he meant to say "Egypt". Oh wow, smoking gun proof that he has dementia.
I've been very clear that the dems should have had Biden step aside and hold a real primary to run a younger candidate. Not because Biden is losing it, but because the perception that Biden is losing it could cost him the election.
And Jon's not wrong.
But he's also a comedian, focusing on the absurd (cookiiiies TikTok) is what they do. Now calm your tits and chill, it was a joke.
__________________
-James
GO FLAMES GO.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Azure
Typical dumb take.
Last edited by TorqueDog; 02-14-2024 at 12:23 PM.
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to TorqueDog For This Useful Post:
House Intelligence Committee Chair Mike Turner has made information concerning a “serious national security threat” available to all members of Congress to review, the committee said on Wednesday.
While Turner and the White House remained vague on what the threat entailed, two sources and a US official tell CNN the threat is related to Russia. Multiple sources familiar with the intelligence characterized it as “very sensitive.”
One of the sources who has seen the intelligence confirmed that “it is, in fact, a highly concerning and destabilizing” Russian capability “that we were recently made aware of.” But House Speaker Mike Johnson later sought to soothe concerns about the unspecified threat, saying there is “no cause for alarm.”
Well this is slightly concerning. Something has come up today that could be posing a major security threat, likely to U.S./Western interests with regards to a "destabilizing foreign military capacity".
I think it might be the hypersonic missile that Russia launched against Ukraine a couple days ago. If the reports are true about that missile reaching Mach 8, US air defense systems cannot shoot it down or even detect it, which would be a threat to their national security.
Some of the follow-ups from the American statements say this is a "mid to long-term crisis", not an immediate one.
If I had to put my finger on it, it is space-based delivery capabilities for nuclear-armed warheads. Historically the VKS has been about defense capabilities. I suspect there is a new offensive tactic/weapon that could threaten the US or NATO that intelligence has unearthed. It may be relating to the GLONASS satellite systems in play too.
Some of the follow-ups from the American statements say this is a "mid to long-term crisis", not an immediate one.
If I had to put my finger on it, it is space-based delivery capabilities for nuclear-armed warheads. Historically the VKS has been about defense capabilities. I suspect there is a new offensive tactic/weapon that could threaten the US or NATO that intelligence has unearthed. It may be relating to the GLONASS satellite systems in play too.
Maybe they're getting serious about climate change?
Does the GOP still deny it BTW? Or has that particular ship sailed at this point?
I think it might be the hypersonic missile that Russia launched against Ukraine a couple days ago. If the reports are true about that missile reaching Mach 8, US air defense systems cannot shoot it down or even detect it, which would be a threat to their national security.
That would make sense, but it also seems like something you would want to keep on the low-down.
I thought as first it might have had something to do with the report yesterday from Estonia's intelligence service suggesting that NATO countries implement war time economic measures to match Russia. Apparently they have reason to believe Russia will be attacking the Baltics. Sweden also added "preparing for war" to their school curriculum the other day after the government told the public to be prepared. To be fair, it was also mentioned that this is the 3rd time that Sweden has done this since the end of WW2. While not being an aggressive country, they are known for being really well prepared for conflict.
The Mach 8 missile thing makes sense though. I didn't hear about that and it would be a major concern.
__________________
"A pessimist thinks things can't get any worse. An optimist knows they can."
No offense but you come across as someone who gives 0 ****s if Trump wins, and you make spiting the DNC the purpose of your life.
Or maybe, just maybe, democracy should be based on voting in someone that actually represents what you want.
Voting for the lesser of two evils means you're still participating in a system where you condone genocide and foreign military interventionism. Both candidates are morally bankrupt, one just happens to be a fascist while the other is only right of centre.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by MrMastodonFarm
Settle down there, Temple Grandin.
The Following User Says Thank You to PsYcNeT For This Useful Post:
Okay, but YOU are not voting, unless I somehow missed when you moved to the States, so it doesn't matter at all what YOU are looking for in an American president.
That's the thing about this thread that drives me insane. Canadians are constantly judging American candidates based on Canadian political values. Here's the thing, these guys represent what most Americans want, for better or worse. Whether that's a good thing is fine to debate, but to suggest that Americans aren't getting representatives for what they want is horse####.
The problem is that a lot of Americans seemingly want a lot of terrible things. Looking into why is probably a more important question to answer, rather than arguing that the whole system is corrupt and undemocratic. It's certainly not a perfect country or system by any stretch, but it's still a functioning democracy for now.
Here's the thing though...one current candidate would continue maintaining it as a democratic country, giving the hope for better outcomes in the future. The other would work to destroy democratic institution and elections, making it an autocracy, where he would be president for life. One is a feeble candidate who is past his best before date, and the other is an existential threat to the constitution of the country.
It's a pretty easy ####ing choice if you truly value democracy as much as you say you do.
__________________
"You know, that's kinda why I came here, to show that I don't suck that much" ~ Devin Cooley, Professional Goaltender
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Cali Panthers Fan For This Useful Post:
Okay, but YOU are not voting, unless I somehow missed when you moved to the States, so it doesn't matter at all what YOU are looking for in an American president.
That's the thing about this thread that drives me insane. Canadians are constantly judging American candidates based on Canadian political values. Here's the thing, these guys represent what most Americans want, for better or worse. Whether that's a good thing is fine to debate, but to suggest that Americans aren't getting representatives for what they want is horse####.
....
.
You're completely right about this and something that I have to remind myself about constantly. I'm not an American, I'm Canadian with Canadian values and sensibilities which on the surface align fairly well with most American's but may not when you scratch beneath the surface.
Half of my greater family is American and we get along very well - unless the discussion drifts to the unmentionables - religion, abortion and firearms, then things get a bit dicey. Most of my family loathed the former guy, but that may come from the fact that they're all from Oregon. My experience working with people from Texas was different - much different.
But as a citizen of a western democracy I can do what I can to raise awareness of the ongoing threat to the very existence of the most important democracy of our time.
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Terradude For This Useful Post:
Okay, but YOU are not voting, unless I somehow missed when you moved to the States, so it doesn't matter at all what YOU are looking for in an American president.
That's the thing about this thread that drives me insane. Canadians are constantly judging American candidates based on Canadian political values. Here's the thing, these guys represent what most Americans want, for better or worse. Whether that's a good thing is fine to debate, but to suggest that Americans aren't getting representatives for what they want is horse####.
The problem is that a lot of Americans seemingly want a lot of terrible things. Looking into why is probably a more important question to answer, rather than arguing that the whole system is corrupt and undemocratic. It's certainly not a perfect country or system by any stretch, but it's still a functioning democracy for now.
Here's the thing though...one current candidate would continue maintaining it as a democratic country, giving the hope for better outcomes in the future. The other would work to destroy democratic institution and elections, making it an autocracy, where he would be president for life. One is a feeble candidate who is past his best before date, and the other is an existential threat to the constitution of the country.
It's a pretty easy ####ing choice if you truly value democracy as much as you say you do.
Mods you better start policing this thread to only allows opinions from people who live in the US and/or can vote in their elections in absentia
It will never happen, but I wonder if there is any precedent for a sitting president to turf his VP running mate. Harris turned out to be a dud, and they might assuage the fears of Biden not surviving his term by replacing her.
__________________
From HFBoard oiler fan, in analyzing MacT's management:
O.K. there has been a lot of talk on whether or not MacTavish has actually done a good job for us, most fans on this board are very basic in their analysis and I feel would change their opinion entirely if the team was successful.
The Following User Says Thank You to Fighting Banana Slug For This Useful Post:
Or maybe, just maybe, democracy should be based on voting in someone that actually represents what you want.
Voting for the lesser of two evils means you're still participating in a system where you condone genocide and foreign military interventionism. Both candidates are morally bankrupt, one just happens to be a fascist while the other is only right of centre.
If you don't admit the following, you're either lying or being deliberately obtuse:
- One of either Biden or Trump will win the upcoming election and will therefore be the president in 2025 (barring some major unforeseen event before then).
- There are immense, very important differences between Biden and Trump.
- American voters have in their hands an opportunity to prevent Trump from re-entering the White House. Failure to act on this opportunity is... to borrow your phrase... morally bankrupt.
Sure, ideally, voting should be about voting for what you truly want. But when a third of the country you live in is outright fascist, and enough people are willing to vote alongside the fascists to get lower tax rates... you have to realize that you aren't in an ideal situation, and you have to do what you can to stave off the fascists. Otherwise, you allow the rise of something that is much worse than what you have now, and you'll never be able to vote in something better in the future.
If you don't admit the following, you're either lying or being deliberately obtuse:
- One of either Biden or Trump will win the upcoming election and will therefore be the president in 2025 (barring some major unforeseen event before then).
- There are immense, very important differences between Biden and Trump.
- American voters have in their hands an opportunity to prevent Trump from re-entering the White House. Failure to act on this opportunity is... to borrow your phrase... morally bankrupt.
Sure, ideally, voting should be about voting for what you truly want. But when a third of the country you live in is outright fascist, and enough people are willing to vote alongside the fascists to get lower tax rates... you have to realize that you aren't in an ideal situation, and you have to do what you can to stave off the fascists. Otherwise, you allow the rise of something that is much worse than what you have now, and you'll never be able to vote in something better in the future.
The reality is, Biden ####ed up. He's allowed the Republicans to do what they've been doing for the last 15 years, and allowed them to drag the Overton Window further Right.
Another notch in the ratchet, and further disillusionment of voters under 40. I don't disagree that a vote for Biden is better than a vote for Trump, but I don't think that's enough motivation to get people to vote for him when they're watching their tax dollars pay to dismember children
Eh let’s not get all nationalistic about American politics on a Canadian hockey forum. If you’re that concerned about Canadians having an opinion you’re in the wrong place.
As far as this election goes I got a secret for you: it doesn’t matter. Oh everyone has been convinced it matters, they may even truly think it matters, but big picture it does not matter. To the vulnerable population in the US? Oh it matters for sure. But for most of us? Straight white males with a decent income? lol your life will not change in any meaningful way at all regardless of who’s elected. I understand the moral outrage at one side and heck I participate in it often but to think the fabric of reality will be unwoven because on bought and paid for politician wins instead of the other? Get outta here. Businesses will function, stockholders will get paid, economies will continue to roll, and that’s not going to change.
An interesting side effect of the increased polarization of American politics is the binary choice demands by each team. I can prefer one pile of crap to a separate pile of crap but demanding I love one of those steaming piles unconditionally over the other is a dumb ask. It’s reasonable to have the stance that I would rather not have to jam my hands into any piles of poo whether it’s from a donkey or an elephant.
There’s nothing more undemocratic than demanding party fealty in all matters because the other party is scary. Asking for more from a politician than “don’t be the other guy” shouldn’t be something that is derided it should be celebrated.
The Following User Says Thank You to ResAlien For This Useful Post:
As far as this election goes I got a secret for you: it doesn’t matter. Oh everyone has been convinced it matters, they may even truly think it matters, but big picture it does not matter. To the vulnerable population in the US? Oh it matters for sure. But for most of us? Straight white males with a decent income? lol your life will not change in any meaningful way at all regardless of who’s elected. I understand the moral outrage at one side and heck I participate in it often but to think the fabric of reality will be unwoven because on bought and paid for politician wins instead of the other? Get outta here. Businesses will function, stockholders will get paid, economies will continue to roll, and that’s not going to change.
Bill? Is that you?
Jokes aside, I disagree with you pretty substantially. Voting for Obama made a HUGE difference in the lives of people who had never had healthcare before.
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to SutterBrother For This Useful Post:
I don't disagree that a vote for Biden is better than a vote for Trump, but I don't think that's enough motivation to get people to vote for him when they're watching their tax dollars pay to dismember children
What do you think Americans use as their priorities when actually deciding who to vote for? Because I have a sneaking suspicion as stated very strongly by Cali Panthers Fan that the things you pay attention to and the things the general population of the United States does are not anywhere close to the same.
__________________
-James
GO FLAMES GO.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Azure
Typical dumb take.
The Following User Says Thank You to TorqueDog For This Useful Post:
