Jump to content


Senior Members
  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Posts posted by J.C.MacSwell

  1. Is it to late for Andrew Yang’s Forward Party to at least threaten to run a viable candidate, if the DNC doesn’t?

    I don’t know who it might be, maybe some prominent Democrat, and maybe a prominent Democrat or Republican with them on the ticket. 

    And say they agree to step back if the Dems offer a viable candidate. 

    I’m assuming of course that Biden’s candidacy remains unviable, with no miraculous return to full health. 

  2. 13 hours ago, iNow said:

    Perhaps the better focus here is that your 30% suggestion isn’t even close. 40-48% favorables is the number and that can’t be wished away.

    Perhaps you need to focus on the definition of a base if you think Trump’s can be as high as 48 percent. 

    Fortunately it’s n where close. 

  3. 6 hours ago, iNow said:

    Please elaborate 

    The graphic doesn’t Trump’s favourability consistently between 45-48 percent. It only gets close to that once. 
    it doesn’t show what it is across the years. Just parts of 2022 and 2023. 
    It therefore doesn’t show what it was prior to impeachment or after conviction.  
    So whatever you based your statement on…it can’t be that graphic. 

  4. 57 minutes ago, CharonY said:

    I think this statement is a bit misleading as it seems to suggest that there is a large swath of people just waiting to drop Trump. 


    For reasons (generally self serving ones for Republicans) I already gave, it should be clear I wasn’t suggesting that. 
    As much as they would prefer someone else, they don’t think they could maintain support of his sizeable base without him, and without that they wouldn’t win.

    Apparently winning is more important to them than integrity…or they see the Democrat alternative as worse. 

    57 minutes ago, CharonY said:

    I think this statement is a bit misleading as it seems to suggest that there is a large swath of people just waiting to drop Trump. 


    For reasons (generally self serving ones for Republicans) I already gave, it should be clear I wasn’t suggesting that. 
    As much as they would prefer someone else, they don’t think they could maintain support of his sizeable base without him, and without that they wouldn’t win.

    Apparently winning is more important to them than integrity…or they see the Democrat alternative as worse. 

    1 hour ago, iNow said:

    Thankfully we don’t need to rely on our intuition and have actual numbers across polling agencies and across the years which consistently show him favorable around 45-48%… consistently, and it only goes up after impeachment and conviction. 


    Your PBS attachment doesn’t support your statement.

  5. I really don’t think it’s close to 50 percent. Might be as high as 30. The rest just want his base, that 30, and just want to win…or dislike some of the overcompensating woke politics of the Left even more.

    Of his base, that 30 or whatever it is, some just like that Trump can stick it to the Left in ways of one else can or is willing to. That’s Trump’s superpower. For some it might be the only thing they admire about him.

    The majority of Americans don’t want Trump. The vast majority don’t want Biden.

    Biden’s administration has succeeded in many ways above expectations. 
    Credit for that could be lost, along with the election, if he insists on continuing to run.

    He’s in no shape to make his own case.

  6. 5 hours ago, MigL said:

    I think we can all agree that J Biden is well past his 'best before' date, and not the best Presidential material.
    But that isn't the question.
    The question is should he be replaced  ?

    And that involves many other important questions.
    Does he want to be replaced ?
    Replaced by whom ?
    Will the media and MAGA spin it as an act of desperation from a losing party ?

    My personal choice would have been K Harris, IF, they had given her some exposure ( like Biden got under Obama ) during the last couple of years.
    Instead she was kept hidden and on low key assignments, so that she would not challenge Biden ??

    She is certainly sharp, and would have had some of the incumbent/name recognition advantage Biden has. But the Democrats didn't, so it'a all academic.

    either way, America, and the world, are in for a frantic 4 months, and the very real possibility of another sh*t-show Presidency ( or worse yet, dictatorship ).

    Not a fan of Harris but she certainly has the inside track. 
    I think she can win the election if she:

    1. Doesn’t make it about her personal race or gender. Those that care won’t change their vote.

    2. Doesn’t make it about her. No one cares if “that little girl” was her. She’ll have 4 years to make it about her if she wants to lose in 2028.

    3. She obviously needs to play politics but stop with the obvious lies. She can’t compete with Trump in a lying contest…She doesn’t need to “go high”, but stay out of the mud…that’s Trump territory. She doesn’t even need to exaggerate, just make it about Trump. Plenty to work with.

    4. Don’t commit to anything new just run on the Biden/Harris administration’s record and direction. She can sell it better than Biden and Biden can help…it’s his legacy and he’ll be getting an approval bump for bowing out and putting the country first.

    5, Don’t let Trump suck her into trading insults. Again that’s his territory and no one is going to out thin skin narcissist liar him. Keep a thick skin, make it about him where it’s demonstrably obvious, but otherwise make it about America not herself..Don’t be the little Adam Schiff that called wolf…unless the wolf is actually there to point out clearly.

    6. Don’t insult potential Trump voters as per Hillary. Nothing to be gained and some might stay home if not given the extra motivation to come out…and swing voters aren’t going to be impressed with it either.

    Just my $0.02…probably overpriced but I think she can, potentially, do better than Biden. She’s certainly already been vetted yet running close to Trump already. I think she can win if it’s about Trump…right now it’s about Biden and not in a good way. He has good days and bad but that ratio isn’t going to improve between now and November.

    No one but Trump’s base want Trump. They just want an alternative. Something other than weekend at Bernie’s….


  7. 1 hour ago, CharonY said:

    I am not entirely sure what you mean. With all things considered either his popularity is good enough to get into a dead heat despite all the disqualifying scandals or his base is large enough that it would not matter. 

    His approval to disapproval rating is 41.8 to 53:5 percent. 
    Biden’s is 37.3 to 56.8 percent. I expect it would improve considerably if he dropped out but America doesn’t want either of them.




  8. 5 minutes ago, swansont said:

    It’s not an example of a winning strategy. It shows that a candidate stepping aside because of some perceived millstone does not solve the problem.

    It will be this time if they win…

    Different circumstances 

    Different times

    Not saying it will be easy.

    But given Trump and his present lack of popularity outside his base…

    It damn well should be!

  9. 1 hour ago, swansont said:

    Yes, LBJ stepping aside worked out really well for the Democrats

    As per quote, very different circumstances..

    I doubt LBJ would have won if he had run again  His popularity was suffering because of the Vietnam war.

    It’t a shame Biden has declined. He would no doubt win against Trump if this was Biden circa 2020…though well passed his prime it seemed reasonable to give him the reigns for 4 years…not many are confidant in giving him another 4 now  




    That said, replacing him won’t be easy.

    Do they even have time to debate? In most democracies it would probably be yes. 

  10. 8 minutes ago, CharonY said:

    The ramifications are pretty bad and not only for the Jan 6 lawsuits.

    From Sottomayor's dissent:

    So for all intents and purpose it seems that the US has now executed a critical blow against functioning democracy. As step, no doubt, other countries will look at very carefully (and probably promptly find ways to emulate).

    This ruling seems to make Trump’s potential election significantly more dangerous. 

    As if it isn’t already dangerous enough…

  11. Not sure exactly what the “agenda” is, whether to help Trump win against Biden or lose to a potential replacement, but it hardly matters, IMO, for the sake of this thread…this GOP talking point is front and centre, could very well decide the election, and has been taken up by a sizeable number of Democrats…for good reason, again in my opinion. 

    in fact many top Democrats talking against replacement seem to be buying time to think of the best way forward, want to see Biden make the decision to step down on his own terms, simply prefer not to be seen as stabbing Biden in the back…or in some cases all three. 

    Some in fact, may have set Biden up for early exposure in an earlier than usual first debate. 

    I say lock all potential candidates up and don't let them out until they send a smoke signal to indicate they've picked a leader...

  12. 2 minutes ago, iNow said:

    Biden should use old age to his advantage, leverage his newly confirmed immunity re: exec actions as per SCOTUS decision today, and send Seal Team 6 to turn DJT into a wet spot.

    By the time they rethink their ruling and sort out whether or not it’s really truly okay for our prez to do this, Biden will be long deceased.


    As a bonus he can not just claim he was doing it in official capacity…but in the best interests of the country…

  13. Biden has done better than I expected, but let’s face it, he was nominated in 2020 with the expectation he could beat Trump in that election, with the hope he could last 4 years with his experience making up for his decline. 

    He made a selfish decision to run again. He’s declining, obviously, as expected. He will have good days and bad but going forward he will decline further. Expecting folks to vote for him in November just because the alternative is worse and not wanting to hurt his feelings doesn’t cut it.

    Anyone that would lend him their car should be criminally liable. Not that he, generally, needs those skills and the required presence of mind to run the country every second, but what he is asking, for an extension of 4 years starting still 6 months way, is substantially more than he is likely capable of living up to, possibly even living for. 

    Give him a set of clubs and a bag. If he can drive 50 yards without falling on his face, and then proceed to carry the bag and finish 18 holes as he implied in the debate then maybe the many Democrats asking him to step down should maybe rethink this, but otherwise he really needs to go. 

    He’s simply demonstrating poor judgement, and ego, over his country. 


  14. 10 minutes ago, dimreepr said:

    It takes vast amounts of energy to even get a second or so of actual fusion and how costly that energy is, in terms of cost to the planet.

    The money is better spent on something achievable in terms of clean energy.

    I'm not suggesting we entirely give up on the potential benefits, we mothball the project until the energy cost is not on the planet.


    Why don't we wait until we know how to do it successfully before doing any more R & D on it?

  15. 9 hours ago, sethoflagos said:

    Just a poorly worded afterthought. I intended to say that in the absence of a ram pump or equivalent, the only driving force to hand is the velocity head of the source.

    On the other hand a ram pump could use a waste flow head drop of a metre, say, to generate surge pulses of up to 15 bar or so albeit for a much lower flowrate.

    Okay. Thanks for the clarification.

  16. 10 hours ago, sethoflagos said:

    Yes, I'm well aware of how ram pumps work.

    But there was no ram pump in the system described, and therefore no means of channeling the input kinetic energy preferentially into the vertical output stream.

    Okay. I'm not sure what ram pump idea you were referring to, but it seemed you were implying their use was limited by velocity head.

  17. 8 hours ago, sethoflagos said:

    As for the ram pump idea, if the incoming velocity head was higher than the required lift, the flow would climb the bank of it's own accord.

    Ram pumps work. They can elevate water above that of the velocity head, just not all the water contributing kinetic energy.

    If velocity head was the maximum pressure harnessable by a water streams momentum, water hammer wouldn't be much of an issue.

  18. Just now, CharonY said:

    Well, the issue is that if there is no trial until election and he wins, the federal prosecutions are likely to go away.

    Even if, somehow, this doesn't hurt his election chances we to be relieved he wasn't found not guilty, or even hung jury  He would have had a field day with that.

  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.