Official LRC President Donald J Trump Thread

Sally Vix wrote:

This might be the end of Bernie ...

https://nypost.com/2020/02/25/bloomberg-plans-debate-attack-on-sanders-for-past-writings-on-rape-fantasies/

A top adviser to Mike Bloomberg said the former mayor would focus his attacks during Tuesday night’s debate on Bernie Sanders — including his bizarre writings from 1972 about women’s rape fantasies and kids fondling each other’s genitals.

“Bernie has loopy stuff in his background saying women get cancer from having too many orgasms or toddlers should run around naked and touch each other’s genitals to insulate themselves from porn?” Tim O’Brien told CNN’s “New Day,” prompting an incredulous anchor Alisyn Camerota to exclaim, “I’m sorry — what?”

“He has written about women’s rape fantasies, that hasn’t been surfaced. That’s the loony side of Bernie,” O’Brien replied.

The existence of the essay in the alternative newspaper the Vermont Freeman was first revealed by Mother Jones in 2015, when Sanders was making his first presidential run.

The Vermont senator, 78, was a regular contributor to the paper in the late 1960s and early 1970s and frequently wrote about sexual and cultural topics.

But it was the one essay from 1972 that caused the most controversy, despite Sanders’ later repudiation of his own words.

“Now, if children go around naked, they are liable to see each others sexual organs, and maybe even touch them. Terrible thing! If we [raise] children up like this it will probably ruin the whole pornography business, not to mention the large segment of the general economy which makes its money by playing on people’s sexual frustrations,” Sanders wrote.

He also shared his bizarre view of what goes on in people’s heads when they were having sex.

SEE ALSO

Bernie Sanders wins New Hampshire primary in razor-thin victory over Pete Buttigieg

“A man goes home and masturbates his typical fantasy. A woman on her knees, a woman tied up, a woman abused. A woman enjoys intercourse with her man — as she fantasizes being raped by 3 men simultaneously,” he wrote.

“Have you ever looked at the Stag, Man, Hero, Tough magazines on the shelf of your local bookstore? Do you know why the newspaper with the articles like ‘Girl 12 raped by 14 men’ sell so well? To what in us are they appealing?” he asked.

Sanders’ camp in 2015 dismissed the essay as something “stupid” Sanders wrote as a younger man and that didn’t reflect his views.

Campaign spokesman Michael Briggs called the essay a “dumb attempt at dark satire in an alternative publication” in an interview with CNN, saying it “in no way reflects his views or record on women.”

Briggs added: “It was intended to attack gender stereotypes of the ‘70s, but it looks as stupid today as it was then.”

Sanders will likely have a huge target on his back for the debate in South Carolina since emerging as the clear front-runner in most polls and winning the New Hampshire primary and Nevada caucuses.

Rigged for Hillary wrote:

Sally Vix wrote:

This might be the end of Bernie ...

https://nypost.com/2020/02/25/bloomberg-plans-debate-attack-on-sanders-for-past-writings-on-rape-fantasies/

A top adviser to Mike Bloomberg said the former mayor would focus his attacks during Tuesday night’s debate on Bernie Sanders — including his bizarre writings from 1972 about women’s rape fantasies and kids fondling each other’s genitals.

“Bernie has loopy stuff in his background saying women get cancer from having too many orgasms or toddlers should run around naked and touch each other’s genitals to insulate themselves from porn?” Tim O’Brien told CNN’s “New Day,” prompting an incredulous anchor Alisyn Camerota to exclaim, “I’m sorry — what?”

“He has written about women’s rape fantasies, that hasn’t been surfaced. That’s the loony side of Bernie,” O’Brien replied.

The existence of the essay in the alternative newspaper the Vermont Freeman was first revealed by Mother Jones in 2015, when Sanders was making his first presidential run.

The Vermont senator, 78, was a regular contributor to the paper in the late 1960s and early 1970s and frequently wrote about sexual and cultural topics.

But it was the one essay from 1972 that caused the most controversy, despite Sanders’ later repudiation of his own words.

“Now, if children go around naked, they are liable to see each others sexual organs, and maybe even touch them. Terrible thing! If we [raise] children up like this it will probably ruin the whole pornography business, not to mention the large segment of the general economy which makes its money by playing on people’s sexual frustrations,” Sanders wrote.

He also shared his bizarre view of what goes on in people’s heads when they were having sex.

SEE ALSO

Bernie Sanders wins New Hampshire primary in razor-thin victory over Pete Buttigieg

“A man goes home and masturbates his typical fantasy. A woman on her knees, a woman tied up, a woman abused. A woman enjoys intercourse with her man — as she fantasizes being raped by 3 men simultaneously,” he wrote.

“Have you ever looked at the Stag, Man, Hero, Tough magazines on the shelf of your local bookstore? Do you know why the newspaper with the articles like ‘Girl 12 raped by 14 men’ sell so well? To what in us are they appealing?” he asked.

Sanders’ camp in 2015 dismissed the essay as something “stupid” Sanders wrote as a younger man and that didn’t reflect his views.

Campaign spokesman Michael Briggs called the essay a “dumb attempt at dark satire in an alternative publication” in an interview with CNN, saying it “in no way reflects his views or record on women.”

Briggs added: “It was intended to attack gender stereotypes of the ‘70s, but it looks as stupid today as it was then.”

Sanders will likely have a huge target on his back for the debate in South Carolina since emerging as the clear front-runner in most polls and winning the New Hampshire primary and Nevada caucuses.

Crazy Comrade Bernie did himself no favors by praising Castro & angering the Cuban exile community. He should be tonight's punching bag at the debate.

kibitzer wrote:

kibitzer wrote:

In any case, the market is now showing a bounce and may end the day down only 2% or so.

Yikes. Wrong >again<. The Dow ends the day down 3.15%.

Still, I'm seeing this as a correction and not a crash. (And I hope I'm not wrong about *that*!) I deal with many finance professionals, including my spouse, and most of them have thought the market was seriously overvalued for the last year or more.* But it's a colossal game of chicken: No one wants to be the first to sell, when the market has been climbing for most of the last decade.

Now that selling has begun, however, a lot of folks are going to feel like they finally have "permission" to join in. And as often happens, some will overdo it. The bargain hunters will be cleaning things up by the end of the week, I suspect, and this correction BY ITSELF should have little or no effect on President Trump's re-election chances.

*There are reasons, in particular the stock buybacks after the tax breaks, for thinking that the market was actually only mildly overvalued. Price/earnings ratios are not the only ways of judging a market's valuation.

Racket wrote:

kibitzer wrote:

Yikes. Wrong >again<. The Dow ends the day down 3.15%.

Still, I'm seeing this as a correction and not a crash. (And I hope I'm not wrong about *that*!) I deal with many finance professionals, including my spouse, and most of them have thought the market was seriously overvalued for the last year or more.* But it's a colossal game of chicken: No one wants to be the first to sell, when the market has been climbing for most of the last decade.

Now that selling has begun, however, a lot of folks are going to feel like they finally have "permission" to join in. And as often happens, some will overdo it. The bargain hunters will be cleaning things up by the end of the week, I suspect, and this correction BY ITSELF should have little or no effect on President Trump's re-election chances.

*There are reasons, in particular the stock buybacks after the tax breaks, for thinking that the market was actually only mildly overvalued. Price/earnings ratios are not the only ways of judging a market's valuation.

This is in fact the 26th time that the market has had a 5% or greater correction since March 2009 (the bottom of the great bear market). Every single time has been pretty much the same narrative : stocks are overvalued, they've been going up for too long, and some global partner is fvcked right now so it's gonna hurt us.

Now I'm not saying the 26th time's the charm, but I doubt it. Rates are low here, but negative in Japan and Europe, and smart money left China's shores a long time ago. Investors are running out of places to park their money. The US remains for now safer than other options.