#48 | POSTED BY JEFFJ

So both Goat and Jeff self-selected not to live in cities. Huh.

I will leave that as a datapoint for everyone else to use to come to their own conclusions.

:)

Another big flaw in the "you vote against your own self interest meme" is that there is very rarely a candidate who represents everyone's self interests.

#36 | POSTED BY GOATMAN

If you agree with me on 9 out of 12 issues, vote for me. If you agree with me on 12 out of 12 issues, see a psychiatrist.

Ed Koch

Kind of like what the DR Left does constantly about Trump's kids....right?

#26 | POSTED BY RIGHTOCENTER

Ivanka should not be working at the White House. Neither should Jared. THAT is a decision that TRUMP made and that HE has control over.

As far as all her Trademarks being approved in China after Trump talks to the Chinese PM (or something like that). That is harder to say. Or it would be if she were not a White House employee. But, as it is, he SHOULD be telling her to drop all that stuff or put it in a blind trust. Not as father to daughter, but as employer to employee.

There is other general whining and bellyaching about how corrupt the kids are, but I don't see calls to investigate Trump over it or say that it should disqualify him for running for President like I currently see with Joe Biden. But, if you want to list where you think I have been unfair (by not commenting?) then feel free. I will comment now.

So, the only ones that are exempt are Eric and Don Jr. (and Tiffany and Barron, though no one really cares about them). And the only "ignorant bellyaching" I recall about them was about how much they travel and the bill the taxpayers have to foot for their secret service. I don't think they have any other jobs than the Trump Organization. And that is fair game because Trump broke with tradition and refused to put it in a blind trust.

What do you call it when someone claims to know another individual's best interests? Hubris and arrogance

#28 | POSTED BY GOATMAN

I have to agree with you there. Liberals complain about people voting "against their own interests", but the reality is that they don't understand their interests. You would think their "interests" would be economic security, safety nets, and opportunities for them and their children. But they don't want to reach for success. They would much rather elect someone who will tell them that their god-given success was STOLEN from them by XXX (immigrants, liberals, corporations, etc). If you think that someone is "voting against their interests", then you probably don't understand what their interests actually are.

Like all those farmers who are being hurt by Trump's tariffs. You think they are going to drop Trump? No... because they don't actually want "fairness" in trade. What they want is a hand-out. They want the government to guarantee them a good wage without having to actually go through the effort of learning to become competitive in the marketplace.

As far as people being "fkkking stupid"? Yeah... that is why fly-over country votes Republican. But it is not because rural people are inherently stupid, it is self-selection. The opportunities are in the cities, not the country. So, the smart people move to the cities to take advantage of the opportunities. The dumb ones are stuck where they are, trying to make do in dying towns. And the people from the city who can't cut it move into the country. We are creating our own Idiocracy. And that is the conservative base. That is who elected Trump.

Unlike Republicans, and apparently Tony, I don't believe in collective responsibility. You show me where Joe Biden did something inappropriate, and I will pile right on. I preferred Warren from the beginning and think she will end up winning the nomination, and would have regardless of this Ukraine BS.

But this Ukraine thing has actually given me more respect for Joe Biden, mainly because of one quote. Apparently, when Hunter Biden told his dad about the Burisma gig, Joe Biden said "Well, I hope you know what you are doing." That is it. Now that is a good parent. Unlike the, apparently, conservative helicopter parents making up the Republican party, he was not going to tell his adult son what to do. It is apparent that he thought it seemed a little sketchy, and probably could see where it might come back to bite him politically in the future, but he was willing to let his kid live his own life and, potentially, make his own mistakes.

I can't control my own relatives. I don't expect Joe Biden to control his. I always say, you can't control who you are related to, and you can't control how they are going to act, but you CAN control how you interact with them.

AGAIN... you show me what Joe Biden actually did wrong, and I am all for throwing the book at him. But I have seen zero evidence, or even believable conjecture, that he did anything wrong. Did Hunter Biden cash in on his last name? Maybe. Probably. Don't know enough to be sure, but that IS believable conjecture.

Is that "unseemly"? Yeah. It is when anyone does it. Though I do think it is rich that conservatives suddenly find it so distasteful considering that the last presidential nominee who wasn't born with a silver spoon shoved up his ass was Bob Dole. But that does not make me find it any less distasteful when Democrats do it.

But, what actual harm does it do? And what could actually be done about it? It doesn't hurt me that Burisma (supposedly) wasted $50k a month on putting a Biden on the board just for his name. Except I find it a little distasteful and "unfair". But what could you actually do to prevent it? Do we tell family members of politicians that they are no longer allowed to work while that politician is in office? Do we start giving them a stipend? Or is it only SOME jobs that you think they are not "allowed" to take? Who decides that? What is the penalty if they decide to take the job anyways?

There seems to be a lot of ignorant bellyaching on this thread. "Oh... it's not fair that they are able to profit off their names." You want to blame the politician, but the politician cannot prevent them from doing it. Give me an actual explanation of what Biden should have done DIFFERENTLY (based upon the evidence of what we KNOW happened, not based on conjecture of all the wrongs that you HOPE he did) and I will take it back.

But as it is, all I have seen is a bunch if idealistic whining.

Nobody seems to bat an eye when one group of blacks murders the fug out of another in one of our gloriously diversified democrat-run metro areas.

#10 | POSTED BY BERSERKONE

"Whataboutism" is a logical fallacy used to justify a position in an argument. You don't come out and say it directly, but the context demonstrates that you are defending this woman's murder by the cop.

Let me see if I am parsing your argument correctly here...

So, you are saying that it is just fine that a cop murders an innocent woman, BECAUSE she is black and black people murder "the fug out of another"? So, if this woman were white then this would be bad (because they don't murder "the fug out of another") but SOLELY BASED UPON THIS WOMAN'S RACE her murder by the cops is justified in your view.

Yep... typical racist conservative argument.

I thought race was a social construct

#9 | POSTED BY BERSERKONE

It is. One that you apparently use to dehumanize people of other races so to make yourself feel that them being murdered by agents of our government is OK.