What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.

TRUMP TO INFINITY AND BEYOND HQ - The Great and Positive Place (13 Viewers)

This is going to be great TV now that the tables our turned and we get a turn to be faux rage drama chasers. Get your popcorn ready.  :lmao: :popcorn:
Blows my mind some are still championing this guy.  And they still try to call out Trump supporters in that thread.  

 
I'm pretty confident that Trump would win reelection fairly comfortably if he would delete Twitter and just avoid doing anything obviously stupid.  Instead he gets in name-calling contests with other candidates, and he pardons well-known white collar criminals and political sleazebags.  It's like he wants to lose.
But it's how he sees himself winning, and how many others see him as winning too.  If he were to stop "winning" in this way, many of his base would be less excited by him because he wouldn't be riling up the lefties and causing hysteria.

 
I see the Bloomberg ad with Obama footage all over it and find it funny there is no pushback from Obama. Secret deal in place? 

 
Bloomberg -  :tfp:

Democratic presidential hopeful Michael Bloomberg once claimed that black and Latino men “don’t know how to behave” at work 

Remember when Trump called Baltimore a “disgusting, rat and rodent infested mess". The media went nuts. Where's the Bloomberg outrage on CNN and MSNBC?

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Bloomberg -  :tfp:

Democratic presidential hopeful Michael Bloomberg once claimed that black and Latino men “don’t know how to behave” at work 

Remember when Trump called Baltimore a “disgusting, rat and rodent infested mess". The media went nuts. Where's the Bloomberg outrage on CNN and MSNBC?
I could be wrong but I don't see him getting this done.  Bloomberg just has so many past comments and actions that are at odds with the PC folks.  Bernie is going to have such a huge lead in delegates that if he can't get to a majority, he could be in the 40-45% range.  Then they have to decide if they are gonna run with Bernie or deny him the nomination.  

 
I see the Bloomberg ad with Obama footage all over it and find it funny there is no pushback from Obama. Secret deal in place? 
According to something I heard today Obama thinks that it may be necessary for him to reconcile the liberal and moderate elements in the Democratic Party after a candidate has been chosen. So for now he’s very cautious and won’t say a thing because he doesn’t want to alienate anyone. 

 
According to something I heard today Obama thinks that it may be necessary for him to reconcile the liberal and moderate elements in the Democratic Party after a candidate has been chosen. So for now he’s very cautious and won’t say a thing because he doesn’t want to alienate anyone. 
Tim is back!   :tebow:

 
I could be wrong but I don't see him getting this done.  Bloomberg just has so many past comments and actions that are at odds with the PC folks.  Bernie is going to have such a huge lead in delegates that if he can't get to a majority, he could be in the 40-45% range.  Then they have to decide if they are gonna run with Bernie or deny him the nomination.  
Your point about Bernie is a good one, but if Bloomberg can’t get it done i don’t think it will be because of this old comments- it will be because the centrists can’t unite behind one candidate. 

That being said there’s still a lot of time left to do so. 

 
Your point about Bernie is a good one, but if Bloomberg can’t get it done i don’t think it will be because of this old comments- it will be because the centrists can’t unite behind one candidate. 

That being said there’s still a lot of time left to do so. 
Bloomberg is toast. All his money cant buy his way out of these recordings of him going full blown stupid.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Your point about Bernie is a good one, but if Bloomberg can’t get it done i don’t think it will be because of this old comments- it will be because the centrists can’t unite behind one candidate. 

That being said there’s still a lot of time left to do so. 
That's true as well about uniting behind one candidate.  It reminds me of Rubio/Kasich/Cruz in 2016.  I voted for John Kasich so I remember it well.  I think the mistake people made in 2016 is the Rubio voter or Kasich voter automatically would vote for anyone but Trump.  I see this with Bernie in 2020.  Just because someone may be supporting Pete today, there's a statistically significant piece of his voters that would go to Bernie.  It's not zero like some want to say anymore than it was true in the Republican race in 2016.

I disagree on the time.  If they don't find a way to consolidate prior to Super Tuesday they will never catch Bernie in delegates.  They could potentially deny him a majority due to the proportionality of the delegates in each primary but he's going to have the lead come convention time unless it happens prior to Super Tuesday.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Troll less. 
I was responding to this post by Ivan K: 

3 hours ago, IvanKaramazov said:

I'm pretty confident that Trump would win reelection fairly comfortably if he would delete Twitter and just avoid doing anything obviously stupid.  Instead he gets in name-calling contests with other candidates, and he pardons well-known white collar criminals and political sleazebags.  It's like he wants to lose.
Perhaps you should give him the same advice rather than to those who respond to him. 

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Bloomberg -  :tfp:

Democratic presidential hopeful Michael Bloomberg once claimed that black and Latino men “don’t know how to behave” at work 

Remember when Trump called Baltimore a “disgusting, rat and rodent infested mess". The media went nuts. Where's the Bloomberg outrage on CNN and MSNBC?
Bloomberg has been a tire fire this entire time, anybody who watched him over the years as Mayor knew this. The only reason Democrats liked him was because of his anti-Trump ads. He was tough guy! It's hilarious Democrats fell for another Michael Avenatti thirst trap. 

 
That's true as well about uniting behind one candidate.  It reminds me of Rubio/Kasich/Cruz in 2016.  I voted for John Kasich so I remember it well.  I think the mistake people made in 2016 is the Rubio voter or Kasich voter automatically would vote for anyone but Trump.  I see this with Bernie in 2020.  Just because someone may be supporting Pete today, there's a statistically significant piece of his voters that would go to Bernie.  It's not zero like some want to say anymore than it was true in the Republican race in 2016.

I disagree on the time.  If they don't find a way to consolidate prior to Super Tuesday they will never catch Bernie in delegates.  They could potentially deny him a majority due to the proportionality of the delegates in each primary but he's going to have the lead come convention time unless it happens prior to Super Tuesday.
There’s a significant difference between this race and 2016: the Republican primaries are mostly winner take all while the Democrats are proportional. That means that Bernie can’t get the huge, overwhelming lead that Trump got after Super Tuesday. That’s why there’s still plenty of time. 

 
Bloomberg has been a tire fire this entire time, anybody who watched him over the years as Mayor knew this. The only reason Democrats liked him was because of his anti-Trump ads. He was tough guy! It's hilarious Democrats fell for another Michael Avenatti thirst trap. 
I think these assumptions are very premature. I should know: I made them in 2016 about Trump several times. I thought he would be done after he made racist and sexist comments over and over. And with the exception of the kitty tape, they were being made in real time. I was wrong. Republicans didn’t care. 

I don’t think Democrats will either. If they think he can beat Trump he will be the nominee and none of this will matter. But a lot depends on how he handles himself tomorrow night. If he struggles he’s probably doomed. But we will see. 

 
Bloomberg -  :tfp:

Democratic presidential hopeful Michael Bloomberg once claimed that black and Latino men “don’t know how to behave” at work 

Remember when Trump called Baltimore a “disgusting, rat and rodent infested mess". The media went nuts. Where's the Bloomberg outrage on CNN and MSNBC?
Those two aren't in the same ballpark in terms of insults to people.

 
There’s a significant difference between this race and 2016: the Republican primaries are mostly winner take all while the Democrats are proportional. That means that Bernie can’t get the huge, overwhelming lead that Trump got after Super Tuesday. That’s why there’s still plenty of time. 
It works both ways.  Once you have someone out to a lead it's also harder to catch up.  Below is 538's delegate estimates based on projected averages after Super Tuesday.  If this is remotely true, even if Sanders is at 35%, he's going to be almost statistically impossible to catch.  Bernie is always going to qualify to get some delegates in every primary.  He's not going to be sub 15% anywhere.  Now, maybe Nate Silver is wrong here, but if he's even in the ballpark, they have to kneecap Bernie's support prior to Super Tuesday.

Nate Silver

@NateSilver538

·

3h

Average projected delegates through Super Tuesday:

Sanders 608 (41% of delegates thru March 3)

Bloomberg 273 (18%)

Biden 270 (18%)

Buttigieg 157 (10%)

Warren 127 (8%)

Klobuchar 55 (4%)

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Your points are well taken. 

Well, if the Democrats go down this road, we’re most likely looking at another 4 years of Donald Trump. So I hope they figure that out. 

 
I think these assumptions are very premature. I should know: I made them in 2016 about Trump several times. I thought he would be done after he made racist and sexist comments over and over. And with the exception of the kitty tape, they were being made in real time. I was wrong. Republicans didn’t care. 

I don’t think Democrats will either. If they think he can beat Trump he will be the nominee and none of this will matter. But a lot depends on how he handles himself tomorrow night. If he struggles he’s probably doomed. But we will see. 
You mean the same Democrats and their supporters that have acted holier-than-thou for the past 3-1/2 years?

 
I think these assumptions are very premature. I should know: I made them in 2016 about Trump several times. I thought he would be done after he made racist and sexist comments over and over. And with the exception of the kitty tape, they were being made in real time. I was wrong. Republicans didn’t care. 

I don’t think Democrats will either. If they think he can beat Trump he will be the nominee and none of this will matter. But a lot depends on how he handles himself tomorrow night. If he struggles he’s probably doomed. But we will see. 
You also repeatedly locked horns with me for 2 years when I predicted Biden would be a total stinker. Don’t doubt me, Bloomberg sucks at this almost as bad as Biden and no self respecting Bernie supporter (that I know at least) would vote for him anyway.

 
Your points are well taken. 

Well, if the Democrats go down this road, we’re most likely looking at another 4 years of Donald Trump. So I hope they figure that out. 
Now, by the same token it's a plurality, not a majority.  Therefore, at the convention they could choose to stop Bernie.  But that would be a nasty situation I think you'd agree.  Especially if Bernie had a lead of say 5-plus points over the next closest candidate and he didn't get the nomination.  I don't think they (meaning the party, super delegates on the second ballot) would do that, but so many people feel that is likely that I have to doubt my own thoughts on that.  I also wouldn't discount him getting over 50% if enough people drop out soon after Super Tuesday.  I say all that not to be gleeful or pulling for Bernie, I'm actually on the opposite end of that.  But the numbers just appear to be in his favor.  Having a declared Socialist as a major party nominee with a non-zero chance of winning is honestly something I never thought I'd see in my lifetime.

 
You also repeatedly locked horns with me for 2 years when I predicted Biden would be a total stinker. Don’t doubt me, Bloomberg sucks at this almost as bad as Biden and no self respecting Bernie supporter (that I know at least) would vote for him anyway.
Quite a few left of center folks, myself included, have predicted the same for Biden all along.  My mantra has been that he was bad in 2007/8, and he hasn't aged like fine wine...odds are he's worse than he was and no reason to think he's improved.

Bloomberg is nowhere near as bad a candidate as Biden.  He's a competent business leader, seems to surround himself with good people and makes good strategic decisions.  We'll see how he does on the debate stage...but he's no Biden.  He may be a Trump-lite figure...someone who actually delivers on the business acumen Trump promised, but who has less of the red-meat-fling appeal Trump has.  While problematic, he has morals.  While he has a history of saying bad things, he hasn't said anything nearly as bad or voluminous as Trump.  

 
Bloomberg -  :tfp:

Democratic presidential hopeful Michael Bloomberg once claimed that black and Latino men “don’t know how to behave” at work 

Remember when Trump called Baltimore a “disgusting, rat and rodent infested mess". The media went nuts. Where's the Bloomberg outrage on CNN and MSNBC?
Here is the full context of the comments with the full quote:

“Democratic presidential hopeful Michael Bloomberg once claimed that black and Latino men “don’t know how to behave” at work as he promoted a multimillion-dollar initiative to help minorities gain employment during his tenure as NYC mayor, according to recently resurfaced video.

“There’s this enormous cohort of black and Latino males aged, let’s say, 16 to 25 that don’t have jobs, don’t have any prospects, don’t know how to find jobs, don’t know that the — what their skill sets are, don’t know how to behave in the workplace, where they have to work collaboratively and collectively,”

NY Post Story

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Now, by the same token it's a plurality, not a majority.  Therefore, at the convention they could choose to stop Bernie.  But that would be a nasty situation I think you'd agree.  Especially if Bernie had a lead of say 5-plus points over the next closest candidate and he didn't get the nomination.  I don't think they (meaning the party, super delegates on the second ballot) would do that, but so many people feel that is likely that I have to doubt my own thoughts on that.  I also wouldn't discount him getting over 50% if enough people drop out soon after Super Tuesday.  I say all that not to be gleeful or pulling for Bernie, I'm actually on the opposite end of that.  But the numbers just appear to be in his favor.  Having a declared Socialist as a major party nominee with a non-zero chance of winning is honestly something I never thought I'd see in my lifetime.
To be quite honest with you: as much as I don’t want Bernie to be the nominee, I could never support him being cheated by Superdelegates or some establishment group that didn’t represent the will of the voters. If such a thing happened I would find myself compelled to support Bernie against that sort of coalition. 

 
Buzzfeed just released a video of Bloomberg calling transgendered people "Its".
I am starting to understand Trump's appeal just a bit.

I completely endorse understanding, accepting, and granting full legal equality to transgendered people. I support the transgendered community wholeheartedly.

But I also find that it's a little gratifying, on some level, to own the libs and watch their heads explode.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Here is the full context of the comments with the full quote:

“Democratic presidential hopeful Michael Bloomberg once claimed that black and Latino men “don’t know how to behave” at work as he promoted a multimillion-dollar initiative to help minorities gain employment during his tenure as NYC mayor, according to recently resurfaced video.

“There’s this enormous cohort of black and Latino males aged, let’s say, 16 to 25 that don’t have jobs, don’t have any prospects, don’t know how to find jobs, don’t know that the — what their skill sets are, don’t know how to behave in the workplace, where they have to work collaboratively and collectively,”

NY Post Story
Full text doesn't make that any less damaging. It's pretty bad, even if it's done with an aura of benevolence. And the context is given by the staff writer, not Bloomberg himself.

 
Full text doesn't make that any less damaging. It's pretty bad, even if it's done with an aura of benevolence. And the context is given by the staff writer, not Bloomberg himself.
If this were said about poor white kids for a jobs program for rural Kentucky?

I work in a profession with lots of less skilled kids, no college. They have no clue about a real job. It’s pretty startling how poorly prepared some are. 

 
If this were said about poor white kids for a jobs program for rural Kentucky?

I work in a profession with lots of less skilled kids, no college. They have no clue about a real job. It’s pretty startling how poorly prepared some are. 
So are you excusing this racist comment?

 
So are you excusing this racist comment?
I don’t find this racist. At least what I have read.

It’s sadly true that our system has poorly equipped many poor people. All races. Bloomberg was talking about a program to train poor minorities for the stereotypical office workplace. 

 
Last edited by a moderator:
I don’t find this racist.
I agree. The quote posted above is a literally true statement. Truth should be an absolute defense to racism just as it is an absolute defense to defamation.

There are plenty of young people of all ethnicities who don’t have much in the way of skills, training, or experience that prepare them for an office environment. Black and Latino males aren’t specially exempt from that predicament.

“Black lives matter.”

”No, all lives matter!”

It’s so tedious. Yes, all lives matter, and yes, people of all ethnicities could use some better training in certain cases, but it’s okay to focus on subsections of the population from time to time who have been particularly disadvantaged.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
I agree. The quote posted above is a literally true statement. Truth should be an absolute defense to racism just as it is an absolute defense to defamation.

There are plenty of young people of all ethnicities who don’t have much in the way of skills, training, or experience that prepare them for an office environment. Black and Latino males aren’t specially exempt from that predicament.

“Black lives matter.”

”No, all lives matter!”

It’s so tedious. Yes, all lives matter, and yes, people of all ethnicities could use some better training in certain cases, but it’s okay to focus on subsections of the population from time to time who have been particularly disadvantaged.
Exactly. Well said.

 
I agree. The quote posted above is a literally true statement. Truth should be an absolute defense to racism just as it is an absolute defense to defamation.

There are plenty of young people of all ethnicities who don’t have much in the way of skills, training, or experience that prepare them for an office environment. Black and Latino males aren’t specially exempt from that predicament.

“Black lives matter.”

”No, all lives matter!”

It’s so tedious. Yes, all lives matter, and yes, people of all ethnicities could use some better training in certain cases, but it’s okay to focus on subsections of the population from time to time who have been particularly disadvantaged.
It's fine to focus on them. To say they, in general, lack skills to behave in a business setting would get others excoriated, though I agree with the overall sentiment. Lots of young people do lack the skills to behave in a corporate or business setting. 

 
It's fine to focus on them. To say they, in general, lack skills to behave in a business setting would get others excoriated, though I agree with the overall sentiment. Lots of young people do lack the skills to behave in a corporate or business setting. 
It was a program specifically for those young minorities. Why would he talk about whites, or asians, or other ethnicities there?

 
It was a program specifically for those young minorities. Why would he talk about whites, or asians, or other ethnicities there?
To focus on the negative, in general, or to put it the way he did was gauche. I'm not the one vociferously shouting him down, that's for certain. It's just a misstep. That said, if a Republican did it, oh my God to high heavens would that be something to talk about among the chattering classes. 

 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top