Join In On The Action "Register Here" To View The Forums

Already a Member Login Here

Board index Forum Index
User avatar
Emissary
 
Posts: 3405
Joined: 12 Jun 2006, 2:01 am

Post 05 Sep 2016, 2:48 pm

Wait until the Donald has to respond to his first mass shooting or terrorist atrocity. You'll soon be harking back to the good old days of Obama...
User avatar
Statesman
 
Posts: 11324
Joined: 15 Aug 2000, 8:59 am

Post 05 Sep 2016, 2:49 pm

steve
Nope, I want to base it on reality, not popularity.


And what color is the sky in your world?

Without an objective metric of some sort this exercise is pointless.
User avatar
Administrator
 
Posts: 7374
Joined: 26 Jun 2000, 1:13 pm

Post 05 Sep 2016, 3:21 pm

Objectively, Mrs Clinton DID have classified material on her unauthorized server. Subjectively she says she was an idiot and didn't know what classified material is.
User avatar
Ambassador
 
Posts: 21062
Joined: 15 Jun 2002, 6:53 am

Post 06 Sep 2016, 5:01 am

Sassenach wrote:Wait until the Donald has to respond to his first mass shooting or terrorist atrocity. You'll soon be harking back to the good old days of Obama...


No.

I won't have to be lectured about how some "assault weapon" did this.

I won't be insulted by "We don't know the shooter's motivation" even after he's shouted it.

Will Trump, should he be elected, make me queasy? Sure, but I'll never wish we could have Obama back--not even if the biggest criminal to ever run for President wins.

No, not Trump. Hillary.
User avatar
Ambassador
 
Posts: 21062
Joined: 15 Jun 2002, 6:53 am

Post 06 Sep 2016, 5:02 am

rickyp wrote:steve
Nope, I want to base it on reality, not popularity.


And what color is the sky in your world?

Without an objective metric of some sort this exercise is pointless.


If you want a metric, find some time, post-election, when Obama had a 75% approval rating on a particular issue.
User avatar
Ambassador
 
Posts: 21062
Joined: 15 Jun 2002, 6:53 am

Post 06 Sep 2016, 5:17 am

bbauska wrote:Objectively, Mrs Clinton DID have classified material on her unauthorized server. Subjectively she says she was an idiot and didn't know what classified material is.


Either way, she should be disqualified from being POTUS.

Imagine the bumper-sticker: "Criminal or Incompetent, Hillary 2016"
User avatar
Adjutant
 
Posts: 3646
Joined: 17 May 2013, 3:32 pm

Post 06 Sep 2016, 9:33 am

The peccadilloes of Hillary are simply not comparable to having a con man with little or no requisite knowledge and experience in the White House. Rationalism has left the building. The fact is that there was a tremendous amount of hatred directed towards Obama before he had done anything to be mad about. Yeah, I do believe he should label terrorist acts inspired by Islam radical Islamic terrorism. I disagree with him on that. But is he doing what is necessary to combat Islamic terrorism? Yes. Has he kept America safe during his presidency? There have been some attacks but nothing like 9-11. Is he carrying the war to ISIS? Yes. Has the economy recovered during his presidency? Yes. Is the average person better off now economically than when he took office? Yes. Are deficits under control? Yes. Are military casualties much lower under Obama than in the previous eight years? Yes. So what exactly are people so mad about. And why are people so mad at Hillary? If it wasn't email it would be something else--you know that right?

We can work together to solve what are not unsolvable problems or we can pull apart. The white police officer should imagine what it's like to be a black man, a black man should imagine what it's like for a white police officer dealing with the black community that is suspicious of white police officers, the evangelical Christian should imagine what it's like for an atheist or gay or transgendered person and those groups should imagine what it's like for Christians whose views are mocked sometimes. Come together and solve problems. Come together and reach a reasonable compromise on things.

If someone is a Trump supporter and is a white male and has only a high school education, Trump is not going to magically solve their problems. Their essential problem is that a high school education is not good enough in today's globalized economy. Being a white male is not enough anymore. Get over it and compete like everyone else.

We live in a free country where someone from anywhere, male or female, any religion, whatever their color of their skin, can succeed if they have the intelligence and drive to succeed. You can think and say what you want. The 11 million illegal immigrants do not threaten that in the least nor does gay marriage, or the transgendered bathroom issue. These are ridiculous issues. Trump does pose an existential threat to our country. If people are going to be so concerned about such minor issues and risk our great country created by our ancestors, well, I just don't know what to say.
User avatar
Statesman
 
Posts: 11324
Joined: 15 Aug 2000, 8:59 am

Post 06 Sep 2016, 12:12 pm

freeman3
.
And why are people so mad at Hillary? If it wasn't email it would be something else--you know that right?


She has, after all, the second highest average approval rating of Secretaries of State since Gallop started polling the topic.
http://www.gallup.com/poll/184628/secre ... roves.aspx

I think her current unpopularity is the product of three things:
1) A concerted effort by some on the right to discredit her, no matter how thin the evidence.
2) A media that is either part of the effort (Fox, Brietbart, )
3) A woman who isn't particularly strong at handling quick response media relations or communications.

Trump BS'd the birther issue to the extent that he said he had detectives in Hawaii who had found "evidence"... And now "I don't talk about that anymore".
In any other nation I'm pretty certain that this would disqualify him from running for office. But the media let him run from this... and issue after issue after that...
If mainstream republicans had stood up to the total BS that was Birther and Obama is a muslim .... perhaps they wouldn't had had the Trump phenomenon.
Instead you have unbalanced, unsupportable nonsense like this
I can't think of a time when Obama has failed to take a partisan cheap shot instead of being a statesman

And you end up with Trump.
A fraud, a BSer, an ignoramace and a threat to stability and security for everyone.
He is an existential threat, supported by people who stopped caring about objective truths and evidence long ago. White working men will never get anything of benefit from a Trump administration. If they looked at his economic policies and understood them there's the first clue. But that would require reading...
User avatar
Administrator
 
Posts: 11284
Joined: 14 Feb 2000, 8:40 am

Post 06 Sep 2016, 12:22 pm

Thanks for being on the Conservative side Freeman, welcome aboard!
The peccadilloes of Hillary are simply not comparable to having a con man with little or no requisite knowledge and experience in the White House. Rationalism has left the building. The fact is that there was a tremendous amount of hatred directed towards Obama before he had done anything to be mad about.

But wait, the EXACT same thing could be said about Obama only 8 years ago. You supported him wholeheartedly, why the sudden change of opinion? If it didn't matter for him, why does it matter now for Trump? Obama had zero knowledge and experience in the White House (and zero business experience nothing but a limited run in the senate). And this hatred towards Obama is real and probably not fair but again, how is this different from the hatred of Bush 8 years ago?

Please do be honest and answer how these two situations are so different?
The two are exactly the same, yet it didn't matter for one and does for the other. You can dislike Trump all you like but please do give real reasons that apply equally if you want your view to mean anything to those reading.

Regarding 11 million illegals, again THANK YOU
of those EVEN MILLION, how many are attending public schools? How many have food stamps and/or welfare? How many get government benefits? Let's say less than 10% only and let's say they average a paltry $1000.00 in such benefits only. That's one BILLION dollars for less than 10% and getting only $1000.No, they don't affect us working folks at all!?
User avatar
Administrator
 
Posts: 11284
Joined: 14 Feb 2000, 8:40 am

Post 06 Sep 2016, 12:27 pm

RickyP
Believe it or not, while I do not agree with your opinions, I have no real problem with the reasoning! Those Freeman pointed out are flawed.
But one thing that is almost scary about your post Ricky,

You simply acknowledge Hillary's email fiasco and waive it away because it would "be something" so simply accept her incompetence and her obstruction of the law, ignore her ignorance and her lies simply because it would be "something else" anyways?

No, don't do that!
Acknowledge she screwed up, she screwed up BAD and she lied about it while she continues to do so. Call her out to come clean and accept her apology, fine. But do not simply accept her lies are acceptable.
User avatar
Statesman
 
Posts: 11324
Joined: 15 Aug 2000, 8:59 am

Post 06 Sep 2016, 3:04 pm

Tom
You simply acknowledge Hillary's email fiasco and waive it away because it would "be something" so simply accept her incompetence and her obstruction of the law, ignore her ignorance and her lies simply because it would be "something else" anyways?

First, your down to two choices Tom.... At least two with any genuine chance

I do not seek perfection from elected and appointed officials. That is impossible. Even for a Trudeau.
Clinton may be criticized for her foreign policy actions, although at the time she was very popular. Even Trump was generally supportive.(Until he wasn't. And then was. And then wasn't)

But there was not a major security breech at State as a result of her emails..
Her email fiasco is greatly exagerated. And only for political effect.
If she was so incompetent show us the actual negative results of her actions? The socalled classified information that she is said to have mishandeld involved scheduled phone conversations... Large deal.
She should never have used a private email account....
And the US classification system desperately needs an over haul. As does cyber security thru the government.


She takes heat for stuff that is regular course of action in Washington. She's paid for speeches after she enters private life. This is standard practice in Washington.( I attended Reagans first after he retired) In fact its expected that ex cabinet members get paid into retirement this way... But she takes heat.
She's accussed of meeting with donors to the Clinton foundation because of their donations. There is no actual evidence of this ever presented. Only innuendo.
but consider...
Every congressman and senator regularly take meetings with major political donors. They are expected to do the bidding of those donors. And regularly do...
So here are Washington politicians unable to prove a quid quo pro by Clinton.... where donations to the foundation are going to end Aids, and poverty, and elevate poor populations around the world...
Meanwhile they do the bidding of their poltiical donors as a matter of course... to fund political advertising.
Do you see the irony?
Or the irony of Trump Foundation paying Pam Bondi to end the prosecution of Trump University in Florida while Trump spews his innuendo and BS about the Clinton Foundation?
There are two standards.

If the standards for Trump had been higher in his birther period....there wouldn't be a Trump.
If the frauds of Trump University, The Trump Institute and his multi level health scam had been prosecuted aggressively there wouldn't be a Trump. Or maybe if the prosecution of his civil rights violations in the 70s had been pursued to apublic conclusion... Why do you think this was? Rigged system?

I think its tremendously funny that Trump is now using donations to his campaign to pay exorbitant rents at his properties, and pay exorbitant fees for his companies services...essentially screwing Republican donors...
And he's calling Clinton Crooked while the Clinton Foundation is saving lives around the world .
User avatar
Emissary
 
Posts: 1543
Joined: 15 Oct 2002, 9:34 pm

Post 07 Sep 2016, 9:02 am

Trump is really giving it to Hilary today in Philadelphia. I find it hilarious that three days ago the New York Times attempted to create reality by reporting on the front page that some poll showed Hilary will win the election by 82% to Trump's 14%. What's so amazing is that the the powers that be at the NYT allowed for this nonsense to be published. How embarrassing. A CNN poll that came out this week showed Trump ahead of the criminal. Which makes me wonder why anyone would desire being a part of the polling industry? What a joke.
User avatar
Administrator
 
Posts: 11284
Joined: 14 Feb 2000, 8:40 am

Post 07 Sep 2016, 10:58 am

Why is it a shock to think CNN is biased?
What I find funny is how liberals all agree FOX is conservative biased (I fully agree) but they seem to think most main stream (like CNN) is neutral and unbiased.

MSNBC leans heavy left
FOX leans heavy right
But few are really in the "middle" most certainly do lean left, it's the nature of the media in America, denying this is simply foolish.
User avatar
Statesman
 
Posts: 11324
Joined: 15 Aug 2000, 8:59 am

Post 07 Sep 2016, 1:24 pm

dag
I find it hilarious that three days ago the New York Times attempted to create reality by reporting on the front page that some poll showed Hilary will win the election by 82% to Trump's 14%
.

I think you are mistaken.
They were referencing their own blog, 538, which analyzes polling and has a number of models that predict the out come of the election. The percentage refers to, at the time of the analysis, the odds that either would win...
the odds change with every new poll they validate...
here:
http://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/201 ... id=rrpromo
User avatar
Statesman
 
Posts: 11324
Joined: 15 Aug 2000, 8:59 am

Post 07 Sep 2016, 1:27 pm

Worth considering...
compare the Trump Foundation with the Clinton Foundation...

The Question No One's Asking About the Clinton Foundation
http://www.motherjones.com/politics/201 ... ctual-work

DONALD TRUMP’S CHARITABLE GIVING CLAIMS SURE LOOK LIKE A SHAM
The real estate mogul has contributed hardly any of his fortune to his own foundation, which spends millions on society galas and institutions tied to friends and family.
http://www.vanityfair.com/news/2016/06/ ... ity-giving

Dag, why do you persist in calling H. Clinton "the criminal"?