Let's pretend for one moment that he does die before the election, just for the funsies. What happens then? Will the nomination revert to option number 2, aka Bernie Sanders? Or will his running mate automatically replace him just the way Vice-President is supposted to step in after the Big Man in the White House chokes on a piece of matzo? Does he even have a running mate yet?
US Joe Biden News Megathread - The Other Biden Derangement Syndrome Thread (with a side order of Fauci Derangement Syndrome)
- Iniciador del tema Borscht
- Fecha de inicio
-
🚨 On-and-off DDoS attacks. (July 25th: On-going connection issues.)
🧅 Tor is stable: https://kiwifarmsaaf4t2h7gc3dfc5ojhmqruw2nit3uejrpiagrxeuxiyxcyd.onion/ -
Want to keep track of this thread?
Accounts can bookmark posts, watch threads for updates, and jump back to where you stopped reading.
Create account
Getting tard comed
kiwifarms.net
- Registrado
- 17 de Dic, 2019
Yes and still do. Russia doesn't want Islamic fundamentalists causing trouble in their backyard. Syria being run by such people would lead to problems in Russia. So they make sure the current leader stays in charge and keeps things relatively peaceful. The US tried to change that and we see how well that works in places like Iraq, and Iran, and Libya.
Russia's not dealing with that shit.
- Registrado
- 6 de Mayo, 2019
They are allies.
Mister DNA
kiwifarms.net
- Registrado
- 9 de Ene, 2022
So let's say US government manages to arrange things so that some significant military asset and/or sizeable number of American troops gets attacked by the Russians and there are a non-trivial number of casualties. With domestic political polarization as stark as it currently is, would a Gulf of Tonkin-esque call to arms even work? I'm having difficulty imagining the American people coming around on the idea of a shooting war with Russia over anything less than a Red Dawn style invasion of the homeland. Hell, even then who knows.
- Registrado
- 17 de Dic, 2019
chill the fuck out, no one thinks Russia is big friendly bear
- Registrado
- 18 de Dic, 2019
- Registrado
- 31 de Ago, 2020
Eh, it requires burying the hatchet with MAGA and convincing them that a united front against Russia is the patriotic thing to do. All big asks, but those are the prerequisites. Which, IMO, can't be fulfilled when they keep calling anyone to the right of Mao Russian colluders.
- Registrado
- 17 de Dic, 2019
as someone else pointed out earlier, 80-90% of voters are always against war before it starts
only the people who profit want war
- Registrado
- 22 de Ago, 2016
I've said it before, abortion is the Republican version of gun control. Pushing gun control was one of the Dems' biggest strategic mistakes, because for people who support gun control, it's at best the 6th or 7th issue they vote on. They won't fail to turn out because a Dem candidate isn't doing enough on gun control. Meanwhile, for people who support gun rights it's often the 1st or 2nd issue, and they'll fight like hell against anyone who's against gun rights.
Most people who oppose abortion are voting Republican for a swath of other issues as well. They won't fail to turn out because a GOP candidate doesn't do enough about abortion. The people who support abortion rights will not only vote but donate and volunteer for the opponent of someone who legislates against it. If Roe gets overturned and all the states on that map ban it that's one of the things that could really swing the tide for the Dems even as disastrous as Joe's presidency has been.
Like you said, dismantling CRT and putting sane criminal justice policies in place are easy political wins. Much better to focus on those than abortion.
- Registrado
- 31 de Mayo, 2020
Because you're malding and doubling down on it with the TDS shit. Most people here have criticisms of trump, you're the only one constantly sperging about him though. It's like the HHH insisting that if you remotely support trump you want to fuck him.
- Registrado
- 17 de Dic, 2019
this is historically inaccurate and very anachronistic. the camps were if anything concealed from gentile Americans to calm down the possibility of agitation to let in more refugees. but the Allies didn't know that much until after liberation.
The U.S. Government Turned Away Thousands of Jewish Refugees, Fearing That They Were Nazi Spies
In a long tradition of “persecuting the refugee,” the State Department and FDR claimed that Jewish immigrants could threaten national security
When Did the World Find Out About the Holocaust?
Encyclopedia of Jewish and Israeli history, politics and culture, with biographies, statistics, articles and documents on topics from anti-Semitism to Zionism.
How the world discovered the Nazi death camps
When the Allies liberated the first camps, the ghastly images of what they found were not widely shared. The discovery of Ohrdruf marked a turning point
www.timesofisrael.com
But once Pearl Harbor happened Americans were ready to kick ass, especially people on the west coast who were preparing for a Japanese invasion.
The idea that WW2 was fought in any way to save Jews is 100% a Hollywood fiction. The idea of humanitarian war grows out of domino theory - first you convince people you have to kill their sons to save the world from communism, then when there's no more communism you convince people you can save the world from vague general evil shit by waging war. This concept is totally meaningless in 1942. No one was trying to sell WW2 to the American people by telling them about the camps, which they didn't even know very much about anyway.
Última edición:
- Registrado
- 11 de Ago, 2020
I think the Civiqs approval poll is fucking with the numbers.
If you care why I just focus on this poll: they report everyday so you can clearly see a continuous noisy trendline down for Ol' Joe, they break down approval by state, and it's a generic baseline that you need to start if you want to see trends. Also, switching polls midstream while using one baseline is unwise because comparing different methodologies may skew results so keeping the same probing method is good for testing.
I say this because when I checked on Civiqs a few days ago:
Not only do these numbers not exist when you look back at the time when the post was done, but the treadline was moved in various ways. I'll use the Riden with Biden Four for example. Net approval is still -22.
Maryland is approve+1 now, which I don't even believe because its been static for over a month while Democrat bastions like California and New York has only gotten worse for Joe in that month.
Massachusetts is now back to approve+7, which makes little sense that it could just puff back up. It could be noise, but time will tell.
Vermont is similar at Approve+7. Semi-similar demographics from MA, except whiter and more college educated. Still a far cry from the +2 that's now erased from the books.
The most damning thing is Hawaii. Hawaii is now Approve+4, signifying a large crack in Asian support since whiter states have only "stayed at +7" for the "fortified results." However, higher asain populations like California were not affected in the slightest. Don't have any idea what they did here.
I really don't know what their doing fudging the numbers like this (methodology wise, we all know why), but without significant movement in the other states, I think Civiqs is trying to keep up appearences for Joe. Remember that new push that "The media is so unfair to Biden" narrative that they created. These guys must've gotten the memo.
TLDR: What's his true approval rating then?
Lower than they tell you.
If you care why I just focus on this poll: they report everyday so you can clearly see a continuous noisy trendline down for Ol' Joe, they break down approval by state, and it's a generic baseline that you need to start if you want to see trends. Also, switching polls midstream while using one baseline is unwise because comparing different methodologies may skew results so keeping the same probing method is good for testing.
I say this because when I checked on Civiqs a few days ago:
I just read the numbers off the website, nothing more.
Not only do these numbers not exist when you look back at the time when the post was done, but the treadline was moved in various ways. I'll use the Riden with Biden Four for example. Net approval is still -22.
Maryland is approve+1 now, which I don't even believe because its been static for over a month while Democrat bastions like California and New York has only gotten worse for Joe in that month.
Massachusetts is now back to approve+7, which makes little sense that it could just puff back up. It could be noise, but time will tell.
Vermont is similar at Approve+7. Semi-similar demographics from MA, except whiter and more college educated. Still a far cry from the +2 that's now erased from the books.
The most damning thing is Hawaii. Hawaii is now Approve+4, signifying a large crack in Asian support since whiter states have only "stayed at +7" for the "fortified results." However, higher asain populations like California were not affected in the slightest. Don't have any idea what they did here.
I really don't know what their doing fudging the numbers like this (methodology wise, we all know why), but without significant movement in the other states, I think Civiqs is trying to keep up appearences for Joe. Remember that new push that "The media is so unfair to Biden" narrative that they created. These guys must've gotten the memo.
TLDR: What's his true approval rating then?
Lower than they tell you.
- Registrado
- 17 de Ago, 2018
Didn't Russia and some Islamic country have a conflict in medieval times?
No, before the Iranian Revolution.
- Registrado
- 17 de Dic, 2019
well I guess if by "some Islamic country" you mean a horde of steppe nomads and by "conflict" you mean "total brutal domination"
Mongol invasion of Kievan Rus' - Wikipedia
- Registrado
- 30 de Abr, 2016
They weren't Muslim until about 100 years later, but they remained Russia's brutal overlords for an additional 200 years after that.well I guess if by "some Islamic country" you mean a horde of steppe nomads and by "conflict" you mean "total brutal domination"
Mongol invasion of Kievan Rus' - Wikipedia
en.wikipedia.org
- Registrado
- 17 de Dic, 2019
this is true but I think that's what he means
- Registrado
- 17 de Ago, 2018
What were they? Romans?
- Registrado
- 30 de Abr, 2016
Muslim is a religious affiliation, not an ethnicity. They were Asian steppe nomads and worshiped steppe sky gods (Tengriism) until the 1310's.
- Registrado
- 17 de Dic, 2019
a mixture of ancient religious practices that don't write shit down and Buddhism, like Tibetans and like Mongolians today. Also probably some Nestorian Christianity. It's hard to say and anyone who says they know is full of it, we are working with very fragmentary evidence until the hordes actually create states in the 11th century. Once they do though the evidence gets richer and it's really interesting
Religion in the Mongol Empire - Wikipedia
the entire subject of religion in Central Asia is fascinating but also full of blowhards
- Registrado
- 4 de Ago, 2021
I think it’s fair to assume that the real number is like 1% approve
Basic Blonde Boy
kiwifarms.net
- Registrado
- 15 de Dic, 2021
SNL is just a television staple now. The older gens will continue to prop it up as something it is not anymore due to that. I guess since they used to go hard on the Clintons, they are seen as fair and balanced. The light jabs are also indistinguishable from the rest.
- Estado