Political Roundtable Part XXIX

[Kanyewest]

It seems to be one of those things we will not know on how a progressive would have done i.e how Bernie/Warren would have done in a head to head election with Donald Trump. It is possible that Bernie could win- I personally know a fair number of Republican supporters who supported Bernie and may have done better with blue collar workers. Warren would have been a great debator. Then again, it is entirely possible that seem more people would have been scared of Socialism (although Trump may have successfully attached those terms in Florida). Even the polls had Bernie at a similar level of support head to head against Trump as Biden, but it's certainly clear now that those polls cannot readily be relied upon to make any predictions.

True, we will never know. I was doubtful myself beforehand but am convinced now, though: Biden was needed. Republicans aren't really moving to the Democrats in any numbers that matter - it's actually working the other way around. The Democrats stand to bleed middle ground support, even if a lot of it is just people staying home in order to bet on youth voter turnout and imaginary Republicans flipping. The anger definitely plays well and that's where Bernie is popular and people will like Bernie the person better but when it comes how they see things and how they'll vote... that's just different.

Honestly, this is the big challenge for progressives at this point. People talk about it can't hurt to try but it really can if you basically concede to both houses and the presidency being Republican to try.

The reality is that it isn't just Republicans against this stuff. To get it to work there are two ways to go about it; either an absolutely massive electoral wave that is nowhere close to existing (they couldn't even get Bernie through the Dem nomination, for example) or the trojan horse it with internal policy controls that people don't notice.

I'm not happy about this reality but it's clearly the way things are. If the Dems do manage to flip the senate (still a slim chance), Kamala is VP and people lime AOC and Katie Porter start taking on more prominent roles, that would be about as miraculous as it could have possibly been on the progressive front.


Sent from my SM-G970W using RealGM mobile app

I have the opposite take. Biden was supposed to persuade crossover Republicans. There weren't any. Fortunately looks like the progressives turned out anyway, but for sustainable progress you're going to need them and black voters.

Biden really brought out black voters, God knows why, so if you want to give him credit, its for that. But we need progressive white voters too.

People are also asserting that Trump did better with African Americans/Hispanics than any candidate since George HW Bush. That being said, those figures may be distorted a bit since the exit polls are skewed heavily towards Trump supporters.

[Zonkerbl]

yeah exit polls are meaningless this year

[Pointgod]

yeah exit polls are meaningless this year

I think this early they’re meaningless but give it a couple of months and we should have a good handle on the polling.

[Zonkerbl]

McConnel's not going to block executive appointments is he? JFC.

Not feeling confident about the Senate races in Georgia. The reverend was running against a split Republican ticket. Ossof might have a chance (although I imagine the votes for the libertarian candidate will turn Republican) but the other race is probably going to be a bloodbath.

Oh, also. AOC up in twitter lecturing the Dems who ran a 90s campaign AGAIN about how they have zero digital presence and zero ground game. I mean, how do you explain the Republicans kicking the Dems butt over and over and over again despite being plainly in the minority? They're the party of rich people and they hire the best. Well, it might just be they have a billion dollar propaganda/entertainment industry that spreads messages of hate and fear. But you know that's part of it.

I don't know if AOC is right but Dems need to realize that being on the side of the majority is not enough when the minority has ten times as much money and power as you. They have to up their game. For example, utterly conceding facebook to the Republicans - idiotic.

[Pointgod]

McConnel's not going to block executive appointments is he? JFC.

Not feeling confident about the Senate races in Georgia. The reverend was running against a split Republican ticket. Ossof might have a chance (although I imagine the votes for the libertarian candidate will turn Republican) but the other race is probably going to be a bloodbath.

Oh, also. AOC up in twitter lecturing the Dems who ran a 90s campaign AGAIN about how they have zero digital presence and zero ground game. I mean, how do you explain the Republicans kicking the Dems butt over and over and over again despite being plainly in the minority? They're the party of rich people and they hire the best. Well, it might just be they have a billion dollar propaganda/entertainment industry that spreads messages of hate and fear. But you know that's part of it.

I don't know if AOC is right but Dems need to realize that being on the side of the majority is not enough when the minority has ten times as much money and power as you. They have to up their game. For example, utterly conceding facebook to the Republicans - idiotic.

This is what it looks like to be drunk with power. I can already tell you what McConnell will do with a Senate Majority. He’ll change the rules back so that all Federal and cabinet appointments require the 60 vote threshold and he’ll block appointments that aren’t right wing enough. He’ll also reinstate the 60 vote threshold for Supreme Court picks and if an opening comes up in the next 4 years Republicans will absolutely torpedo that appointment no matter how qualified they are. Tyranny of the minority and I hope that the further left side of the party will point fingers at the right direction not blame Biden when this happens

Read on Twitter

[Zonkerbl]

Ha, ha.

https://www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2020/11/09/933006651/pfizer-says-experimental-covid-19-vaccine-is-more-than-90-effective

No amount of intentional sabotage from Trump will be effective if we have a vaccine.

Pfizer also came out with a statement saying they were not part of Fast Forward or Time Warp or whatever it was called. Took zero money from the US govt.

[Wizardspride]

Read on Twitter

?s=19

[dckingsfan]

Read on Twitter

?s=19

Read on Twitter

[Ruzious]

Ha, ha.

https://www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2020/11/09/933006651/pfizer-says-experimental-covid-19-vaccine-is-more-than-90-effective

No amount of intentional sabotage from Trump will be effective if we have a vaccine.

Pfizer also came out with a statement saying they were not part of Fast Forward or Time Warp or whatever it was called. Took zero money from the US govt.

Fwiw, my microbiologist friend is very skeptical about Pfizer's vaccine. He says it's an RNA-based vaccine, and the FDA has never approved an RNA-based vaccine, because it gets into your cells and translates into protein for it to function - which apparently can cause many unforeseen things to happen. He says even if it's worked in clinical trials, he would be warry. All this stuff is way over my head, but with the pressure to come up with something fast, I want to know the risks before trying it.

[queridiculo]

Anybody else scared **** about the narrow margin of victory for the Democrats?

Historic turnout, yet here were are, with the vote essentially decided by around 250k votes, and a disappointing result in the race for house and senate seats.

On the other side we have a base that's more dug in than ever and will be ready to come out swinging during the mid-terms.

The DNC better figure out how to break that spell quickl, because 2.0 of what Trump started is going to be more cruel and definitely more vicious.

[dckingsfan]

Ha, ha.

https://www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2020/11/09/933006651/pfizer-says-experimental-covid-19-vaccine-is-more-than-90-effective

No amount of intentional sabotage from Trump will be effective if we have a vaccine.

Pfizer also came out with a statement saying they were not part of Fast Forward or Time Warp or whatever it was called. Took zero money from the US govt.

Fwiw, my microbiologist friend is very skeptical about Pfizer's vaccine. He says it's an RNA-based vaccine, and the FDA has never approved an RNA-based vaccine, because it gets into your cells and translates into protein for it to function - which apparently can cause many unforeseen things to happen. He says even if it's worked in clinical trials, he would be warry. All this stuff is way over my head, but with the pressure to come up with something fast, I want to know the risks before trying it.

I am not sure they are right with reason three. I think this is going to have to do more with trust of the FDA process than anything else.

https://www.statnews.com/2020/11/09/four-reasons-for-encouragement-based-on-pfizers-covid-19-vaccine-results/

[Ruzious]

Ha, ha.

https://www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2020/11/09/933006651/pfizer-says-experimental-covid-19-vaccine-is-more-than-90-effective

No amount of intentional sabotage from Trump will be effective if we have a vaccine.

Pfizer also came out with a statement saying they were not part of Fast Forward or Time Warp or whatever it was called. Took zero money from the US govt.

Fwiw, my microbiologist friend is very skeptical about Pfizer's vaccine. He says it's an RNA-based vaccine, and the FDA has never approved an RNA-based vaccine, because it gets into your cells and translates into protein for it to function - which apparently can cause many unforeseen things to happen. He says even if it's worked in clinical trials, he would be warry. All this stuff is way over my head, but with the pressure to come up with something fast, I want to know the risks before trying it.

I am not sure they are right with reason three. I think this is going to have to do more with trust of the FDA process than anything else.

https://www.statnews.com/2020/11/09/four-reasons-for-encouragement-based-on-pfizers-covid-19-vaccine-results/

Updated view from my microbiologist friend on the Pfizer vaccine - While there's a lot to be excited about, there are 2 unknowns because the test has been for less than 2 months - 1. Is there really long-term protection from the virus? 2. Are there long-term side-effects?

[FAH1223]

McConnel's not going to block executive appointments is he? JFC.

Not feeling confident about the Senate races in Georgia. The reverend was running against a split Republican ticket. Ossof might have a chance (although I imagine the votes for the libertarian candidate will turn Republican) but the other race is probably going to be a bloodbath.

Oh, also. AOC up in twitter lecturing the Dems who ran a 90s campaign AGAIN about how they have zero digital presence and zero ground game. I mean, how do you explain the Republicans kicking the Dems butt over and over and over again despite being plainly in the minority? They're the party of rich people and they hire the best. Well, it might just be they have a billion dollar propaganda/entertainment industry that spreads messages of hate and fear. But you know that's part of it.

I don't know if AOC is right but Dems need to realize that being on the side of the majority is not enough when the minority has ten times as much money and power as you. They have to up their game. For example, utterly conceding facebook to the Republicans - idiotic.

Read on Twitter

Read on Twitter

Read on Twitter

Read on Twitter

Read on Twitter

Read on Twitter

Read on Twitter

Read on Twitter

[pancakes3]

Fwiw, my microbiologist friend is very skeptical about Pfizer's vaccine. He says it's an RNA-based vaccine, and the FDA has never approved an RNA-based vaccine, because it gets into your cells and translates into protein for it to function - which apparently can cause many unforeseen things to happen. He says even if it's worked in clinical trials, he would be warry. All this stuff is way over my head, but with the pressure to come up with something fast, I want to know the risks before trying it.

I am not sure they are right with reason three. I think this is going to have to do more with trust of the FDA process than anything else.

https://www.statnews.com/2020/11/09/four-reasons-for-encouragement-based-on-pfizers-covid-19-vaccine-results/

Updated view from my microbiologist friend on the Pfizer vaccine - While there's a lot to be excited about, there are 2 unknowns because the test has been for less than 2 months - 1. Is there really long-term protection from the virus? 2. Are there long-term side-effects?

from what i've seen, it protects from the virus in the lungs, but doesn't kill the virus in the upper respiratory (throat/nose) so you can still spread it by sneezing/breathing.

idk what that means re: masks and reopening though. like, yes it's bad that it can still be transmitted but if everyone is vaccinated, is it moot?

[dckingsfan]

I am not sure they are right with reason three. I think this is going to have to do more with trust of the FDA process than anything else.

https://www.statnews.com/2020/11/09/four-reasons-for-encouragement-based-on-pfizers-covid-19-vaccine-results/

Updated view from my microbiologist friend on the Pfizer vaccine - While there's a lot to be excited about, there are 2 unknowns because the test has been for less than 2 months - 1. Is there really long-term protection from the virus? 2. Are there long-term side-effects?

from what i've seen, it protects from the virus in the lungs, but doesn't kill the virus in the upper respiratory (throat/nose) so you can still spread it by sneezing/breathing.

idk what that means re: masks and reopening though. like, yes it's bad that it can still be transmitted but if everyone is vaccinated, is it moot?

Seat belts and masks...

https://www.statnews.com/2020/11/10/covid19-masks-mandate-seatbelt-laws/

[Ruzious]

Kinda makes me nervous that Pfizer's CEO sold 62% of his stock on the day they announced the success of the vaccine. https://www.msn.com/en-us/health/medical/pfizers-ceo-cashed-out-60percent-of-his-stock-on-the-same-day-the-company-unveiled-the-results-of-its-covid-19-vaccine-trial/ar-BB1aU6iq?li=BBnb7Kz

[doclinkin]

Kinda makes me nervous that Trump has ousted Esper et al in the Pentagon and installed loyalists. Especially when his key disagreement with Esper came from the proposal to use troops on Amercian soil to quell domestic protests. If he could get away with it he absolutely would host a coup to retain power. He has no other proper option given what is facing him once he is no longer protected by the office and title.

[pancakes3]

Kinda makes me nervous that Pfizer's CEO sold 62% of his stock on the day they announced the success of the vaccine. https://www.msn.com/en-us/health/medical/pfizers-ceo-cashed-out-60percent-of-his-stock-on-the-same-day-the-company-unveiled-the-results-of-its-covid-19-vaccine-trial/ar-BB1aU6iq?li=BBnb7Kz

this is poor optics at best. even if it was in accordance with a predetermined plan adopted 2 months prior, it was still scheduled for the date of the announcement, which is effectively insider trading. the counterargument is that he didn't KNOW of the efficacy when the date was determine so it's not insider trading. he was simply gambling, but it's still a sale informed by information not available to the public.

but you're insinuating something a bit more sinister, that he's selling high knowing that the drug is no good, which means the stock will crash.

[Ruzious]

Kinda makes me nervous that Pfizer's CEO sold 62% of his stock on the day they announced the success of the vaccine. https://www.msn.com/en-us/health/medical/pfizers-ceo-cashed-out-60percent-of-his-stock-on-the-same-day-the-company-unveiled-the-results-of-its-covid-19-vaccine-trial/ar-BB1aU6iq?li=BBnb7Kz

this is poor optics at best. even if it was in accordance with a predetermined plan adopted 2 months prior, it was still scheduled for the date of the announcement, which is effectively insider trading. the counterargument is that he didn't KNOW of the efficacy when the date was determine so it's not insider trading. he was simply gambling, but it's still a sale informed by information not available to the public.

but you're insinuating something a bit more sinister, that he's selling high knowing that the drug is no good, which means the stock will crash.

My overarching concern is if he thinks there's a reason the vaccine won't be successful.

[doclinkin]

Kinda makes me nervous that Pfizer's CEO sold 62% of his stock on the day they announced the success of the vaccine. https://www.msn.com/en-us/health/medical/pfizers-ceo-cashed-out-60percent-of-his-stock-on-the-same-day-the-company-unveiled-the-results-of-its-covid-19-vaccine-trial/ar-BB1aU6iq?li=BBnb7Kz

this is poor optics at best. even if it was in accordance with a predetermined plan adopted 2 months prior, it was still scheduled for the date of the announcement, which is effectively insider trading. the counterargument is that he didn't KNOW of the efficacy when the date was determine so it's not insider trading. he was simply gambling, but it's still a sale informed by information not available to the public.

but you're insinuating something a bit more sinister, that he's selling high knowing that the drug is no good, which means the stock will crash.

My overarching concern is if he thinks there's a reason the vaccine won't be successful.

I think he gambled the stock price would never be higher than for the company that was first to announce. There will be other vaccines developed, and naturally there will be some complications side effects or drawbacks and lawsuits as there are for every new drug that hits the market.