'Murica! (84 Viewers)

[il brutto]

You mean the MSNBC and CNNs? lol right. super credible themselves.

No I don't mean the MSNBC or the CNN. Try WSJ, The Economist, BBC, Politico, Reuters and FT for example.

 

Buy on AliExpress.com

[Hust]

No I don't mean the MSNBC or the CNN. Try WSJ, The Economist, BBC, Politico, Reuters and FT for example.

Reuters & WSJ yes. Have them on speed dial in my favs. Politico is meh.

 

[Bjerknes]

Obviously I´m not a US citizen, so I´m just making an observation. I thought Biden won the first debate clearly. I initially thought race relations and Trump´s erratic behavior would make Biden win the election quite easily too.

But I´ve realized 2 things:
1. There aren´t enough white voters who care about race and minority issues to go against Trump
2. Money and low taxes are more important to people than Trump´s behavior

From a European standpoint our philosophy here in Norway f.ex is closer to Biden, actually he would still be considered quite conservative here. But you guys have a different culture and viewpoints which benefits a guy like Trump.

The election will be close though, but I think a lot of Trump voters are staying silent in these polls. We´ll see.

It depends on where the Trump voters are located. Obviously the hardcore Trump supporters who wear the hats and fly Trump flags in the middle of nowhere aren't staying silent, but then again, who knows if those rednecks are actually participating in the polls. I don't think many of them are because they don't care. Conversely, the non-redneck portion of the Trump vote that exists closer to the large cities remain silent for the most part for fear of backlash at multiple levels, including losing a job because someone thinks you're racist. People in Europe don't understand how bad it's gotten here in terms of being able to express political views without fear of backlash, especially from the left. So of course all of the polls have Biden leading; even everyone's favorite Nate SIlver takes all of the polls aggregated together but it doesn't mean anything, just like four years ago. That silence factor is probably even bigger now, but there's no way to quantify it.

The US does have a different culture and way of life, one that can't be compared to Northern Europe or frankly anywhere else in the world. Some things that work for Norway may not work for the US, and there's nothing wrong with that.

thats silly

No, it's not. I don't want someone who hasn't worked in business at all, doesn't understand it, and pretty much hates it, ruling over issues regarding the workplace and the already ridiculous amount of laws businesses have to abide by. It would be like putting the Proud Boys in charge of a women's rights group.

@Bjerknes how will market react if Trump wins, and how will it react if Biden wins. I expect Green Energy companies to go up if biden wins.

That's a good question, I tend to think the market will go up regardless long-term because Biden will unleash even more debt than Trump. Perhaps there will be a selloff before the election or if Biden wins in the short term due to tax uncertainty, but eventually I think equities will go higher. It's all debt-related, IMO.

I'd strongly recommend some of you the read some non-OANN/Breitbart news from time to time. Would probably give you a bit more realistic view on the world.

I watch CNN more than I read Breitbart. I've also been to all sorts of countries, ranging from Monaco to Nicaragua, and I don't even know what this has to do with anything.

But that's assuming we haven't lived in many parts of the country, just like you assumed we get our view of the world from Breitbart, who knows maybe we are much more traveled, cultured, and worldly than you think

Since we lean right we must be untraveled, uneducated morons. It's surprising how we even figured out how to find this forum -- surely it was by chance and nothing to do with the world or football.

 

[il brutto]

Reuters & WSJ yes. Have them on speed dial in my favs. Politico is meh.

There are a lot of decent sources for news that aren't quite as blatant with their bias and disregard for the truth as the two extremely shitty sources I mentioned in my initial post. Politico is perhaps slightly left leaning, but still a largely trustful source.

 

[Bjerknes]

No I don't mean the MSNBC or the CNN. Try WSJ, The Economist, BBC, Politico, Reuters and FT for example.

I'm not really impressed with the Economist either tbh. Highly Keynesian-leaning.

 

[il brutto]

I'm not really impressed with the Economist either tbh. Highly Keynesian-leaning.

They are British after all

 

[lgorTudor]

Did Biden give away Michigan on purpose or is he really that dense? Gonna be hilarious when the 'trustworthy' polls come out and Biden is still +8 in Michigan

 

[Juventus 32]

Was the best debate ever for Trump,he won it absolutely.

@Hust lel

- - - Updated - - -

Reuters & WSJ yes. Have them on speed dial in my favs. Politico is meh.

Add another one. I like the analysis.

https://spectator.org/slow-joes-oil-and-gas-code-red/

 

[il brutto]

Seems quite reasonable to have a plan to gradually move away from fracking and fossil fuels. In the US the transition period will probably be quite long anyways. Biden's fracking stance actually seems quite tentative compared to many other democrats.

 

[swag]

I thought Trump won that debate.

Debates? How quaint.

Even if you can pretend it's still 1960, most people have already voted.

 

[Hust]

when Democrats running for office distance themselves from the Democrat candidate for president 11 days before the election you know Biden got his ass handed to him in the debate.

 

[il brutto]

FREE MARKETS, but fossil fuels need to be subsidized.

 

[ALC]

FREE MARKETS, but fossil fuels need to be subsidized.

i think we should go back to using coal too. Because progress is bad

 

[Juventus 32]

 

[ALC]

 

[Enron]

FREE MARKETS, but fossil fuels need to be subsidized.

everything is subsidized, we’re a corporate welfare state. have been for a while.

 

[il brutto]

i think we should go back to using coal too. Because progress is bad

Coal is real. Subsidise the shit out of it.

https://theconversation.com/market-forces-are-driving-a-clean-energy-revolution-in-the-us-95204

 

[lgorTudor]

i think we should go back to using coal too. Because progress is bad

your women are burning coal and consider it progress so why don't you

 

[Bjerknes]

FREE MARKETS, but fossil fuels need to be subsidized.

They are also subsidized by keeping crude prices artificially high.

 

[il brutto]

everything is subsidized, we’re a corporate welfare state. have been for a while.

Trickle-down ecomomics