Scrutable

tom p wrote: ↑

Sun May 17, 2020 3:30 pm

dyqik wrote: ↑

Fri Apr 10, 2020 10:03 pm

Bird on a Fire wrote: ↑

Fri Apr 10, 2020 9:50 pm

Boris Johnson's got US citizenship hasn't he? Can't we just send him over there? He'd be in excellent spirits about it.

He gave it up to avoid a tax bill.

But he was (a) born there (b) white & (c) rich, so he could no doubt get it back in no time and be welcomed into the fold. Given how f.cked yankee politics is, he would be seen as a reasonably centrist candidate

There's a 14 year residency in the US requirement for the president, and hence for vice-president as well, so I don't think he'll be doing that.

dyqik wrote: ↑

Mon May 18, 2020 9:42 am

tom p wrote: ↑

Sun May 17, 2020 3:30 pm

dyqik wrote: ↑

Fri Apr 10, 2020 10:03 pm

He gave it up to avoid a tax bill.

But he was (a) born there (b) white & (c) rich, so he could no doubt get it back in no time and be welcomed into the fold. Given how f.cked yankee politics is, he would be seen as a reasonably centrist candidate

There's a 14 year residency in the US requirement for the president, and hence for vice-president as well, so I don't think he'll be doing that.

didn't know about that. interesting, and i wonder why 14 years & not, a multiple of 4 like presidential elections.

lpm wrote: ↑

Fri Apr 10, 2020 2:15 pm

Because he's gay in the most homophobic nation in the western world.

A sizable proportion of gays don't want him thanks, he's a conservative and dubious character with shady funding. Very much the straight persons gay.

plebian wrote: ↑

Tue May 19, 2020 9:50 pm

lpm wrote: ↑

Fri Apr 10, 2020 2:15 pm

Because he's gay in the most homophobic nation in the western world.

Very much the straight persons gay.

That's a meaningless and utterly stupid line. Being gay's a sexual orientation, not a lifestyle or political position. He f.cks men. He married one, too.

He's only conservative in the eyes of posturing DSA types more interested in primarying safe seats than winning against the Republicans, and frankly the disgusting attacks on him from more-queer-than-thou Sanders supporters - and a hell of a lot of hard left straights who used the exact same language - who obsessed over whether or not he kissed his husband properly on stage only made me more keen on him.

Don't be so naive thinking his sexuality isn't the biggest decision maker for straight voters. Don't be so disingenuous as to pretend a politicians sexuality isn't a huge political issue. Wtaf are you talking about?!

His policy positions are right of Biden, he's not a centrist and I don't like this.

I'm not going for him because he's not gay enough, I'm going at him for being a right wing corporate shill. No thanks.

If you are objecting to his policies, then drop the f.cking "straight persons gay" uncle-tom accusational b.llsh.t.

I think it's a bit naive to suggest that being gay lacks a political dimension. It probably shouldn't have, but as with all sorts of other oppressed groups a certain amount of politicisation seems to be forced upon people through necessity. This is true of both candidates and voters.

Buttigieg's sexuality has been toted as a point in his favour by his supporters, but he doesn't seem to have been overwhelmingly popular amongst gay voters in the way that, say, Obama was amongst black voters. I don't think that's any commentary on his sexuality per se, but rather that ISTM a sizeable proportion of the "gay community" (for want of a better term) has common political priorities that Buttigieg doesn't share.

That shouldn't be used to imply he's No True Scotsgay or whatever, but might impact how he's viewed as a representative of that community - which as first gay president he would be. Black people wouldn't have wanted Ben Carson as the first black president. A lot of younger feminists weren't keen on Hillary Clinton (and Thatcher is never held up as a feminist icon either). Identity politics, and the politics of identity, are complicated.

I don't think plebian was trying to be inflammatory or accusatory with the phrase "straight person's gay" but I can also see how it might not have been the best choice of words.

That's my understanding as a non-USian non-gay, anyway, based on talking to friends and general internet commentariat. But I don't want to put words in anyone's mouth and apologise if I'm off-base here.

Klobuchar seems to be the only high-profile name being vetted. Seems quite a likely pick.

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/biden-runn ... r-vetting/

Bird on a Fire wrote: ↑

Thu May 21, 2020 11:30 pm

Klobuchar seems to be the only high-profile name being vetted. Seems quite a likely pick.

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/biden-runn ... r-vetting/

Warren's quite a powerful figure and may be seen as a potential draw away from Biden (plus, an easy figure to hit for her claims of Native American heritage). Plus, as you can only work for one branch of the US government:
- If Biden wins Warren may be much more useful where she currently is.
- If Biden loses Warren is definitely much more useful where she currently is.

Those are all good points, but Klobuchar still sucks.

She has 0 votes on scrutable, how can she possibly be expected to win over voters in the few areas of the USA where it matters?

Bird on a Fire wrote: ↑

Thu May 21, 2020 11:30 pm

Klobuchar seems to be the only high-profile name being vetted. Seems quite a likely pick.

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/biden-runn ... r-vetting/

On paper it I think Duckworth is more likely. She had her legs blown off in Iraq. That’s a personal story that will be worth a few votes.

Being co-inventor of the Duckworth-Lewis method loses more.

Would raise that eligibility thing again, same as Ted Cruz - not born in the US, but almost certainly "naturally born" citizen.

lpm wrote: ↑

Fri May 22, 2020 7:51 am

Would raise that eligibility thing again, same as Ted Cruz - not born in the US, but almost certainly "naturally born" citizen.

Only among the headbangers I think. They had no problem with John McCain having been born outside the US to Us parents. Duckworth inherited her citizenship from her father, which counts as ft as I'm aware.

lpm wrote: ↑

Fri May 22, 2020 7:51 am

Would raise that eligibility thing again, same as Ted Cruz - not born in the US, but almost certainly "naturally born" citizen.

Ted Cruz was naturally born? Bollocks! He was clearly created in a lab by a mad scientist

Woodchopper wrote: ↑

Fri May 22, 2020 8:10 am

lpm wrote: ↑

Fri May 22, 2020 7:51 am

Would raise that eligibility thing again, same as Ted Cruz - not born in the US, but almost certainly "naturally born" citizen.

Only among the headbangers I think. They had no problem with John McCain having been born outside the US to Us parents. Duckworth inherited her citizenship from her father, which counts as ft as I'm aware.

They didn't like the way Obama was born in Kenya, though.

Bird on a Fire wrote: ↑

Fri May 22, 2020 1:37 pm

Woodchopper wrote: ↑

Fri May 22, 2020 8:10 am

lpm wrote: ↑

Fri May 22, 2020 7:51 am

Would raise that eligibility thing again, same as Ted Cruz - not born in the US, but almost certainly "naturally born" citizen.

Only among the headbangers I think. They had no problem with John McCain having been born outside the US to Us parents. Duckworth inherited her citizenship from her father, which counts as ft as I'm aware.

They didn't like the way Obama was born in Kenya, though.

Yes, his birthplace in Hawaii shouldn't have been an issue at all given his mother's citizenship.

Of course not. I assume the double standards split down the usual partisan lines.

Bird on a Fire wrote: ↑

Fri May 22, 2020 4:29 am

Those are all good points, but Klobuchar still sucks.

She has 0 votes on scrutable, how can she possibly be expected to win over voters in the few areas of the USA where it matters?

Being well known for being abusive to her staff probably doesn't help much either

EACLucifer wrote: ↑

Fri May 22, 2020 9:19 pm

Bird on a Fire wrote: ↑

Fri May 22, 2020 4:29 am

Those are all good points, but Klobuchar still sucks.

She has 0 votes on scrutable, how can she possibly be expected to win over voters in the few areas of the USA where it matters?

Being well known for being abusive to her staff probably doesn't help much either

I'm becoming increasingly concerned that the Democrats want to lose this election.

Bird on a Fire wrote: ↑

Fri May 22, 2020 9:29 pm

EACLucifer wrote: ↑

Fri May 22, 2020 9:19 pm

Bird on a Fire wrote: ↑

Fri May 22, 2020 4:29 am

Those are all good points, but Klobuchar still sucks.

She has 0 votes on scrutable, how can she possibly be expected to win over voters in the few areas of the USA where it matters?

Being well known for being abusive to her staff probably doesn't help much either

I'm becoming increasingly concerned that the Democrats want to lose this election.

I doubt picking the guy polling best against Trump as the candidate was a sign of them wanting to lose the election

Kinda pissed off about announcing they will pick a female VP candidate, though. Not saying they shouldn't, but would much rather female VP candidate was not burdened with the accusation that she was picked just to pick a female candidate.

I guess it's just hard to figure out how the campaign's doing at the moment. Obviously he's mainly intended to appeal to older and wealthier people, and none of the USians I know personally (away from this forum) fall in either category. The polling isn't enormously helpful as most voting doesn't matter and there's a load of other stuff going on right now that might affect things.

I honestly expected to see more from him right now. A quarter of the labour force is unemployed. It's the right time to be giving hope to the afflicted. Maybe I'm just missing the announcements amongst all the virus crap.

EACLucifer wrote: ↑

Fri May 22, 2020 9:31 pm

Kinda pissed off about announcing they will pick a female VP candidate, though. Not saying they shouldn't, but would much rather female VP candidate was not burdened with the accusation that she was picked just to pick a female candidate.

Not as pissed off as Andrew Yang was

I'm not sure there's much danger of accusations of tokenism (other than from the usual idiots, who would say it anyway) - there's been a lot of high-quality female candidates throughout the race, across most of the political spectrum. Assuming that the VP slot would go to someone else in the race (and it was obviously never going to be Sanders) the majority of plausible candidates were female.

It does suck for Buttigieg specifically (I don't think Yang had the experience to be an option for an old hand like Biden). It's clear that they want to go for some visible diversity to get away from the "old white man" image, which unfortunately means invisible kinds of diversity get less attention.

I honestly expected to see more from him right now. A quarter of the labour force is unemployed. It's the right time to be giving hope to the afflicted. Maybe I'm just missing the announcements amongst all the virus crap.

At this phase in the campaign Biden will be focusing upon raising money. That would normally mean a huge number of meetings with small numbers of wealthy people. (I’m not sure how it works these days). If he hits them now they can donate twice - once to his campaign to be nominated and again when he is the official nominee.

EACLucifer wrote: ↑

Fri May 22, 2020 9:31 pm

Kinda pissed off about announcing they will pick a female VP candidate, though. Not saying they shouldn't, but would much rather female VP candidate was not burdened with the accusation that she was picked just to pick a female candidate.

Maybe he'll pick Sarah Palin.

Millennie Al wrote: ↑

Sun May 24, 2020 1:31 am

EACLucifer wrote: ↑

Fri May 22, 2020 9:31 pm

Kinda pissed off about announcing they will pick a female VP candidate, though. Not saying they shouldn't, but would much rather female VP candidate was not burdened with the accusation that she was picked just to pick a female candidate.

Maybe he'll pick Sarah Palin.

I'd rather he pick Lisa Ann