| FORUM | ARCHIVE |                    | TOTAL QUIZ RESULT |


  New Posts New Posts RSS Feed - will dems self-destruct?
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Events   Register Register  Login Login


Welcome stranger, click here to read about some of the great benefits of registering for a free account with us and joining us in our global online community.


will dems self-destruct?

 Post Reply Post Reply Page  12>
Author
Vanuatu View Drop Down
Administrator
Administrator
Avatar

Joined: 24 Feb 2015
Location: New England
Status: Offline
Points: 1921
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Vanuatu Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Topic: will dems self-destruct?
    Posted: 03 Apr 2019 at 02:06
Originally posted by pikeshot1600 pikeshot1600 wrote:


All the Repub/Trump noise about steel mills opening all over the country and coal mines opening and all the jobs  and so on is just background noise.  No one thinks that is happening.  A populist ex-Democrat and current convenient Republican, Mr. Trump has cast himself as a great white hope and that is about all there is to any popularity he has.
Our local economy is good. Numbers don't lie but fair enough just as Obama's administration skewed the numbers , so could Trump's. I'm not imagining the increase in jobs for people in the trades as we say. Our local economy is banging. 

Quote Even Republican White evangelicals, who are supposed to be Christian in outlook and practice, support him by something like 87%.  What they approve of is that their president doesn't like swarthy foreigners.  There isn't much else involved.
Quote
Legal swarthy is fine we'll take em. Especially if they are willing to work, and we know they are. I wish every person in central and south american could have a decent legal status that allowed them to eran and assimilate. Hell Yes! And bring some enchiladas for me!
[quote]  Media conspiracy theorists stoke fear and resentment; they are ready to buy into the M.S.M. being "enemies of the people" because of ratings and the effect on their income.  Don't ask them about public policy because they really don't care.  These days he who can manipulate media and form supporters based on fear and hate has a great advantage.

Not exactly news there pikeshot1600 Wink. No silent coup. 

All that stuff about POTUS's disengagement in office; his disinterest in policy and in national security concerns will be difficult to overcome by "Medicare for all" and free university.  Trump has shown he can get at what he wants by not paying a price for anything.  The "Wall" is just a finger to his opponents and its isn't costing him anything; it energizes his "base.".  

All his Mar-a-Lago buddies got actual tax cuts, but they vote too I guess. Big smile

Probably did get tax cuts, everyone did. It was less weekly deduction and you didn't get the return that you expected. 
I suspect the wiser action on the border is a physical barrier. The threats are manifold. Why not have a migrant facility on the Mexican side? We should be humanitarian, get the WHO to meet the basic needs ..but over there not in US. 
Why hasn't the US government established a better relationship with Central and South America? As far I can see it's been the absence of reliable government on their part. And now it's this horrendous kill fest in these countries. Not to mention our participation in the destruction of the lungs of the plant, destroying estuaries in South America?

Why can't the Democrats get behind a candidate who cares about the planet? Solyndra was $500 million dollar flop. All we have to do is look at Germany and how they are using solar but no one in mainstream parties will touch that rail.


Edited by Vanuatu - 03 Apr 2019 at 02:09
“The United Nations is the biggest joke of this century. If each one is trying to assert his own rights there, how can there be a United Nations?” UG Krishnamurti
Back to Top
Sponsored Links


Back to Top
franciscosan View Drop Down
WorldHistoria Master
WorldHistoria Master


Joined: 09 Feb 2015
Location: Littleton CO
Status: Offline
Points: 10106
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote franciscosan Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 02 Apr 2019 at 14:03
Romney seems to be considering a run against Trump.  He hasn't said that, but one can see it.  I am not sure that Trump is someone who deserves loyalty, because for him it is a something that he demands, but does not care to give.  Not saying he will, not saying he won't.

We are in la-la land now, folks, standard expectations are out the window, and they have been since the W. Bush administration (when Barack Obama became ascendant).

Of course, the democrats came into trouble when Hillary Clinton became the "obvious" choice because of how all the superdelegates owed the Clinton's power structure.  I wonder if Trump switched to Republicans because the superdelegate system was designed to prevent someone like him (an outsider) from running.  I thinK the democrats have fixed the problem, they're good at "fixing" things, like their new bid to get rid of the electoral college.  Why bother to play within the rules when you can change them in your favor.  Of course civilization is based on a bet that it is more profitable to play the game, than it is to beat your opponent profusely on the head and shoulders.  That is one thing that scares me, the democrats are playing up to the rabble, and the Republicans are playing up to a (different) rabble.  My concern is that in trying to win, both will loose.
Back to Top
pikeshot1600 View Drop Down
King
King


Joined: 22 Jan 2005
Status: Offline
Points: 5080
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote pikeshot1600 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 02 Apr 2019 at 11:25
Originally posted by Vanuatu Vanuatu wrote:

Originally posted by pikeshot1600 pikeshot1600 wrote:

T

Comment above concerning Mitt Romney as a Repub candidate is probably best ignored.  He is a dead politician too.  Once you lose on the national level, your are no longer a serious figure in leadership.         
The comment on Romney wasn't about him running for POTUS. He just won a senate seat after gaining Trumps' support and now resumes back biting Trump.

That's politics.  It is highly unlikely that Romney will be a credible primary challenger, but who knows what will happen in the next 12 months.  There may be an "asset bubble" close to bursting, and when the inevitable recession follows, that may be in the middle of the election year.
Back to Top
Vanuatu View Drop Down
Administrator
Administrator
Avatar

Joined: 24 Feb 2015
Location: New England
Status: Offline
Points: 1921
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Vanuatu Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 02 Apr 2019 at 08:05
Originally posted by pikeshot1600 pikeshot1600 wrote:

T

Comment above concerning Mitt Romney as a Repub candidate is probably best ignored.  He is a dead politician too.  Once you lose on the national level, your are no longer a serious figure in leadership.         
The comment on Romney wasn't about him running for POTUS. He just won a senate seat after gaining Trumps' support and now resumes back biting Trump.
“The United Nations is the biggest joke of this century. If each one is trying to assert his own rights there, how can there be a United Nations?” UG Krishnamurti
Back to Top
pikeshot1600 View Drop Down
King
King


Joined: 22 Jan 2005
Status: Offline
Points: 5080
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote pikeshot1600 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 02 Apr 2019 at 04:59
Originally posted by Windemere Windemere wrote:

That statement about no longer being a viable leadership candidate once you lose at the national level is probably true in most cases, but there are exceptions. Richard Nixon overcame his loss to John Kennedy to defeat Hubert Humphrey.
I wouldn't say Mitt Romney is quite dead. But I doubt he could mount an effective challenge to Trump. I think that Bernie Sanders did significantly better in 2016 than anyone expected him to. I think he'll actually improve this time around, too, but it still won't be enough to overcome Trump.  Trump's much-vaunted tax-cut didn't amount to a hill of beans for working-class people (It came to a tax savings of perhaps $150 per year for those who didn't itemize and took the standard-deduction) but they are still hoping that he'll come through for them in a second term. But Sanders' message of Medicare for All is resonating with more and more people,  and it will stay in the forefront.



Interesting comments.  The juggling act of tax cuts and benefits for all has a mutually exclusive quality that will always be difficult to reconcile.  In the US at least, no politician with a functioning brain is going to favor tax increases.  There is no upside to that (of course there is no upside to cutting spending either, but that is all another argument).

All the Repub/Trump noise about steel mills opening all over the country and coal mines opening and all the jobs  and so on is just background noise.  No one thinks that is happening.  A populist ex-Democrat and current convenient Republican, Mr. Trump has cast himself as a great white hope and that is about all there is to any popularity he has.  

Even Republican White evangelicals, who are supposed to be Christian in outlook and practice, support him by something like 87%.  What they approve of is that their president doesn't like swarthy foreigners.  There isn't much else involved.  Media conspiracy theorists stoke fear and resentment; they are ready to buy into the M.S.M. being "enemies of the people" because of ratings and the effect on their income.  Don't ask them about public policy because they really don't care.  These days he who can manipulate media and form supporters based on fear and hate has a great advantage.

Aside from all that, the Democrats don't have anything to counter Trump's celebrity status in the media age.  He is not really a politician.  He is a professional personality and a showman.  O.J. Simpson and Michael Jackson showed how celebrities are Teflon-coated in many respects.  

All that stuff about POTUS's disengagement in office; his disinterest in policy and in national security concerns will be difficult to overcome by "Medicare for all" and free university.  Trump has shown he can get at what he wants by not paying a price for anything.  The "Wall" is just a finger to his opponents and its isn't costing him anything; it energizes his "base.".  

All his Mar-a-Lago buddies got actual tax cuts, but they vote too I guess. Big smile




Edited by pikeshot1600 - 02 Apr 2019 at 06:30
Back to Top
Windemere View Drop Down
Consul
Consul
Avatar

Joined: 10 Oct 2007
Location: U.S.A.
Status: Offline
Points: 310
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Windemere Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 02 Apr 2019 at 03:15
Originally posted by Vanuatu Vanuatu wrote:

Quote
This also puts 3rd party candidates at a serious disadvantage in the electoral college. The electoral system  favors the 2 mainstream political parties. There's no need for the winner to have an absolute majority (51% or more) of votes. If one candidate gets 34% of the popular vote, another gets 33%, and a third also gets 33%, the first candidate will get 100% of that states' electoral votes.   
Hi Windemere

What are your thoughts on the front runners DNC who have announced their candidacy?

Can you see Gillibrand or Booker or Harris winning a Primary?

Jill Stein was a much better candidate than any of these democrats, says I. Yet as you suggest quality does not matter where the mainstream parties or media is concerned.

Thanks for your reply. There are so many Democratic candidates coming out of the woodwork now, that I can't keep them straight. I actually don't know anything about Gillibrand or Booker or Harris. I'll have to wait for the debates. Jill Stein has been running for stateoffices in Massachusetts for years. She represents the Green/Rainbow Party, and she has a small but loyal constituency. She knows she has no chance of being elected. I think her main goal is to keep the Green/Rainbow issues in the forefront of the public. She knows she won't have to fulfill any promises, so she has some freedom to be a bit more idealistic than otherwise. I think she's less practical than Bernie Sanders, but she strikes me as more down-to-earth than Elizabeth Warren. But the media loves drama, and Warren will appeal to them more than Stein.


Edited by Windemere - 02 Apr 2019 at 03:16
Dis Aliter Visum
"Beware of martyrs and those who would die for their beliefs; for they frequently make many others die with them, often before them, sometimes instead of them."
Back to Top
Windemere View Drop Down
Consul
Consul
Avatar

Joined: 10 Oct 2007
Location: U.S.A.
Status: Offline
Points: 310
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Windemere Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 02 Apr 2019 at 03:07
That statement about no longer being a viable leadership candidate once you lose at the national level is probably true in most cases, but there are exceptions. Richard Nixon overcame his loss to John Kennedy to defeat Hubert Humphrey.
I wouldn't say Mitt Romney is quite dead. But I doubt he could mount an effective challenge to Trump. I think that Bernie Sanders did significantly better in 2016 than anyone expected him to. I think he'll actually improve this time around, too, but it still won't be enough to overcome Trump.  Trump's much-vaunted tax-cut didn't amount to a hill of beans for working-class people (It came to a tax savings of perhaps $150 per year for those who didn't itemize and took the standard-deduction) but they are still hoping that he'll come through for them in a second term. But Sanders' message of Medicare for All is resonating with more and more people,  and it will stay in the forefront.




Edited by Windemere - 02 Apr 2019 at 03:18
Dis Aliter Visum
"Beware of martyrs and those who would die for their beliefs; for they frequently make many others die with them, often before them, sometimes instead of them."
Back to Top
pikeshot1600 View Drop Down
King
King


Joined: 22 Jan 2005
Status: Offline
Points: 5080
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote pikeshot1600 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 02 Apr 2019 at 02:29
Will dems self-destruct?  Probably.  The Democrats may have to give up on 2020, and will have to groom candidates for future elections.

With the stable of possible candidates for POTUS they may not be able to do otherwise.  It is difficult enough to defeat an incumbent at most any level of political office in the US.  With the GOP spinning the "end" of Russiagate, it could be that Mr. Trump has a leg up on re-election.  

Republicans appear to be oblivious to the degree of corruption in the highest offices these days.  One must assume they don't care as long as POTUS is anti-immigration.  The populist has his issue that resonates.  The Dems don't.  Of course that could all change in a year, but don't bet on it.

The traditional Democrats (Joe Biden, etc.) are mostly dead politicians.  Biden and Hilary Clinton can forget about 2020.  They are too old anyway.  The new Congress is populated by too many inexperienced and inconsequential personalities rather than serious potential candidates.  Amy Klobuchar; Warren; Gillibrand et. al., and crazy old guys like Bernie Sanders - and young guys like Beto O'Rourke - are not serious contenders (IMHO).

The president elected in 2020 will not be a woman - too many bad effects from Clinton.  It will not be a Black man - that experiment is too recent and unfortunately polarizing.  If the Repubs don't challenge Trump in primaries, it looks like a 2020 horse race he might win again.  The Electoral College is a minority party political asset.  

Comment above concerning Mitt Romney as a Repub candidate is probably best ignored.  He is a dead politician too.  Once you lose on the national level, your are no longer a serious figure in leadership.         


Edited by pikeshot1600 - 02 Apr 2019 at 02:31
Back to Top
Vanuatu View Drop Down
Administrator
Administrator
Avatar

Joined: 24 Feb 2015
Location: New England
Status: Offline
Points: 1921
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Vanuatu Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 28 Mar 2019 at 00:28
Originally posted by franciscosan franciscosan wrote:

Colorado liberal governor has pushed forth a bill saying that Colorado's electoral college delegates will be given to those who win the [national] popular majority, even if the state goes the other way.
Jeez, Is this an idea whose time has come? It sure don't feel right. Certainly can see why the DNC hates the electoral college but I think its fair :)

Quote Jared Polis is a gay Boulderite (people's republic of Boulder), who is rich and buys his elections, his first election was for school board and he spent a million on the campaign.  Liberals only mind the buying of campaigns if they are not the one's doing it.

Massachusetts is full of democrats who always vote the party line. Maybe it's a Kennedy thing I don't get it at all. Ted Kennedy used to show up in town every couple years and people went nuts for it, just love those sons of bitches. Joe Kennedy was a treasonous criminal and all their empire built on bootlegging. Doesn't matter, democrats can't lose here. (R)Gov Bill Weld was a fluke, he might be running POTUS 2020.

Quote Co Governor Hickenlooper is a nice guy (moderate), but I can't see him making it on the national stage, Senator Bennett is a bit of a carpet bagger.  Someone who came to Colorado to make it politically, because he couldn't do it where he came from.
Sounds like Mitt Romney, that man has always seemed dishonest and disloyal. Even after licking Trump's boots to get his endorsement for the Senate and winning, he says Trump hasn't "risen to the mantle of the office." 
What office would that be, Mitt? The one you will never win?
“The United Nations is the biggest joke of this century. If each one is trying to assert his own rights there, how can there be a United Nations?” UG Krishnamurti
Back to Top
franciscosan View Drop Down
WorldHistoria Master
WorldHistoria Master


Joined: 09 Feb 2015
Location: Littleton CO
Status: Offline
Points: 10106
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote franciscosan Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 23 Mar 2019 at 11:31
Colorado liberal governor has pushed forth a bill saying that Colorado's electoral college delegates will be given to those who win the [national] popular majority, even if the state goes the other way.

Jared Polis is a gay Boulderite (people's republic of Boulder), who is rich and buys his elections, his first election was for school board and he spent a million on the campaign.  Liberals only mind the buying of campaigns if they are not the one's doing it.

Co Governor Hickenlooper is a nice guy (moderate), but I can't see him making it on the national stage, Senator Bennett is a bit of a carpet bagger.  Someone who came to Colorado to make it politically, because he couldn't do it where he came from.


Edited by franciscosan - 24 Mar 2019 at 03:19
Back to Top
Vanuatu View Drop Down
Administrator
Administrator
Avatar

Joined: 24 Feb 2015
Location: New England
Status: Offline
Points: 1921
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Vanuatu Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 22 Mar 2019 at 00:18
Quote
This also puts 3rd party candidates at a serious disadvantage in the electoral college. The electoral system  favors the 2 mainstream political parties. There's no need for the winner to have an absolute majority (51% or more) of votes. If one candidate gets 34% of the popular vote, another gets 33%, and a third also gets 33%, the first candidate will get 100% of that states' electoral votes.   
Hi Windemere

What are your thoughts on the front runners DNC who have announced their candidacy?

Can you see Gillibrand or Booker or Harris winning a Primary?

Jill Stein was a much better candidate than any of these democrats, says I. Yet as you suggest quality does not matter where the mainstream parties or media is concerned.
“The United Nations is the biggest joke of this century. If each one is trying to assert his own rights there, how can there be a United Nations?” UG Krishnamurti
Back to Top
Vanuatu View Drop Down
Administrator
Administrator
Avatar

Joined: 24 Feb 2015
Location: New England
Status: Offline
Points: 1921
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Vanuatu Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 22 Mar 2019 at 00:10
Originally posted by franciscosan franciscosan wrote:

Considering how hostile President Obama was to the business community, I think that Scooby Do would have improved the economy if he had been elected.  Now President Trump probably did better than Scooby Do would.  But so would have your favorite person, Hillary Clinton.
Considering how President Obama cooked the statics for unemployment, I am not sure that when you say lowest unemployment since the 1950s, that that is a meaningful statistic under President Trump.  Obama did not count people who had been unemployed a long time, and had basically stopped looking, he did not count them as unemployed, thus cooking the statistics that had been developed by Herbert Hoover.

So, whose statistics are you and Trump using, Herbert Hoover's or President Obama's?
Now, now certainly your friends at CNN would have discredited the employment data if they COULD.
The fact that liberal media won't talk about the economy should be a BIG TIP, much like the elephant's circumcision. 
“The United Nations is the biggest joke of this century. If each one is trying to assert his own rights there, how can there be a United Nations?” UG Krishnamurti
Back to Top
Windemere View Drop Down
Consul
Consul
Avatar

Joined: 10 Oct 2007
Location: U.S.A.
Status: Offline
Points: 310
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Windemere Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 19 Mar 2019 at 05:08
Originally posted by franciscosan franciscosan wrote:

Part of the significance of the democrats having their convention in Millwaukie is that Wisconsin has historically had a strong streak of socialism, they had a governor or two that was a socialist.  Also, the democrats have to do something about the loss of the mid-West in the last election.

Also, Wisconsin is a swing-vote state. Right from the get-go, most states are either clearly red (conservative Republican) or clearly blue (liberal Democratic). Thus it may pay off more to campaign in a swing-vote state, which can go either way. I think that Florida and Ohio are also swing-vote states.

In the electoral college, for most states, it's winner-take-all. Whoever gets the most popular votes gets all of that state's electoral votes. I n the election, it's almost a predestined fact which candidate will get the red states' electoral votes, and which candidate   will get the blue states' electoral votes. In the swing states, even if the popular vote is very close, it doesn't matter, all of the electoral votes will go to the winner. 

This also puts 3rd party candidates at a serious disadvantage in the electoral college. The electoral system  favors the 2 mainstream political parties. There's no need for the winner to have an absolute majority (51% or more) of votes. If one candidate gets 34% of the popular vote, another gets 33%, and a third also gets 33%, the first candidate will get 100% of that states' electoral votes.   


Edited by Windemere - 19 Mar 2019 at 05:20
Dis Aliter Visum
"Beware of martyrs and those who would die for their beliefs; for they frequently make many others die with them, often before them, sometimes instead of them."
Back to Top
franciscosan View Drop Down
WorldHistoria Master
WorldHistoria Master


Joined: 09 Feb 2015
Location: Littleton CO
Status: Offline
Points: 10106
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote franciscosan Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 14 Mar 2019 at 10:04
Part of the significance of the democrats having their convention in Millwaukie is that Wisconsin has historically had a strong streak of socialism, they had a governor or two that was a socialist.  Also, the democrats have to do something about the loss of the mid-West in the last election.
Back to Top
franciscosan View Drop Down
WorldHistoria Master
WorldHistoria Master


Joined: 09 Feb 2015
Location: Littleton CO
Status: Offline
Points: 10106
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote franciscosan Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 01 Mar 2019 at 10:33
Considering how hostile President Obama was to the business community, I think that Scooby Do would have improved the economy if he had been elected.  Now President Trump probably did better than Scooby Do would.  But so would have your favorite person, Hillary Clinton.
Considering how President Obama cooked the statics for unemployment, I am not sure that when you say lowest unemployment since the 1950s, that that is a meaningful statistic under President Trump.  Obama did not count people who had been unemployed a long time, and had basically stopped looking, he did not count them as unemployed, thus cooking the statistics that had been developed by Herbert Hoover.

So, whose statistics are you and Trump using, Herbert Hoover's or President Obama's?
Back to Top
Vanuatu View Drop Down
Administrator
Administrator
Avatar

Joined: 24 Feb 2015
Location: New England
Status: Offline
Points: 1921
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Vanuatu Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 26 Feb 2019 at 13:50
Originally posted by toyomotor toyomotor wrote:

Quote Do you buy your colored glasses from the same manufacturer as toyomotor? Wink

That's a bit unfair!

I've formed opinions on Trump after reading many different American on-line newspapers and watching him on TV news broadcasts - the man has been proven to be an unmitigated liar and a buffoon.

He's single handedly created a situation where the western world can no longer rely on common sense and stability coming from the White House, nor can others with whom the USA must deal with in relation to trade, finances, military and climate control.

I don't wear rose coloured glasses, I just wish Trump would wake up and smell the grass.

If I alone had these views, I'd be concerned, but I don't and I'm not. Many far more informed and more intelligent than me have the same views.
I'd list Trump's economic progress and tell you about the great job numbers, justice reform, highest number of minorities employed ever, lowest unemployment since the 1950's but it's wasted on you. That's bc of the glasses.
Smart people are susceptible to emotional decisions that are misguided and stubborn and rooted in ego and many of those people are far more informed and intelligent than you. Finally we agree!LOL
“The United Nations is the biggest joke of this century. If each one is trying to assert his own rights there, how can there be a United Nations?” UG Krishnamurti
Back to Top
Vanuatu View Drop Down
Administrator
Administrator
Avatar

Joined: 24 Feb 2015
Location: New England
Status: Offline
Points: 1921
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Vanuatu Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 26 Feb 2019 at 13:42
Originally posted by franciscosan franciscosan wrote:

btw, my lens are not colored, they are photo-sensitive.


But, surely Vanuatu, you don't think Donald Trump would have been elected if a large portion of the American people weren't giving the establishment a big F U?  Or maybe you are also one of those types that believes Trump would have gotten the popular vote if Hillary hadn't "cheated."
Of course the country was giving an extremely vulgar F U to the establishment, it was overdue and it's been my view since 2016.

Quote Jordan Peterson has some interesting observations about Trump promoting the wall.  He points out that conservatives are into borders, personal, political, moral.  Whereas liberals are more into openness, more what I would call 'loose-goosy' on the moral boundaries, political boundaries etc.  So what Trump says about a wall strikes a real cord with the conservatives.  The liberals (and more precisely, the radicals) go apesh*t about this and can't stand it, disparaging anyone who doesn't see it their way.
loosy goosy liberals live behind walls and they don't want the drug trade to dry up or the supply of children for Kevin Spacey and his ilk. 

Quote Personally, I think the conservatives are more tolerant, believing in borders they believe that someone else can legitimately have an opinion that is different than theirs.  The liberals/radicals being so open can't accept that there might be another opinion, as valid or even more valid than their own.
Of course conservatives are more tolerant, they just want some distance from whatever they choose to avoid, like horrible evil doers and actors. 
Loonie Leftists are emotionally and intellectually impaired, lacking perspective not potential.
“The United Nations is the biggest joke of this century. If each one is trying to assert his own rights there, how can there be a United Nations?” UG Krishnamurti
Back to Top
Vanuatu View Drop Down
Administrator
Administrator
Avatar

Joined: 24 Feb 2015
Location: New England
Status: Offline
Points: 1921
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Vanuatu Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 26 Feb 2019 at 13:32
Originally posted by franciscosan franciscosan wrote:

I am a little confused by your triple negative, "Mueller doesn't say that doesn't mean he won't direct others to leak, leak and leak some more."
Mueller doesn't say -to follow your "Mueller isn't talking" but do give yourself big points for noticing missing comma. 

Quote In a trial, I believe the jury is supreme in a court case.  I had a friend that was in a criminal trial and my dad and I went to the trial in support.  At the beginning of the trial, when they were selecting the jury, the prosecution said, 'if you thought that a law was silly, but the person was guilty of the law, would you convict? for example if it was illegal to eat ice cream on the sidewalk and the person was guilty, would you convict?'  I would have said, 'if the law said someone had to wear a star, and then wouldn't wear a star, would you convict?'
So, yes the jury has a right to acquit the guilty (and hence also convict the "innocent"), now the jury also has responsibilities, and the responsibilities are more important than their 'rights.'  But their responsibilities do not necessarily include making the judge's, the prosecutor's and the defense's day go smoothly.
btw
The friend was found guilty for a lesser offense, the jury split the difference.  But, the judge threw the book at him, rightfully so, because my friend was a very bad liar and the judge surely knew when the defendant was asked if he had ever done anything similar, and the defendant lied.  If he had properly talked to his own lawyer, his own lawyer would not have asked that precise question.  Of course, the fact that he lied, badly, does imply that generally he is the honest sort.  Which he was.  But, he got 3 months in jail, rather than a couple of weeks home detention.
 
I love a judge with ESP it's totally constitutional. A jury isn't relevant until a law official has done their work correctly. The evidence found after the election would never have seen daylight if Hillaroid had won as was expected. Mueller's warrant for Manafort may never see daylight but things have a way of leeeeeking. 




Edited by Vanuatu - 26 Feb 2019 at 13:44
“The United Nations is the biggest joke of this century. If each one is trying to assert his own rights there, how can there be a United Nations?” UG Krishnamurti
Back to Top
franciscosan View Drop Down
WorldHistoria Master
WorldHistoria Master


Joined: 09 Feb 2015
Location: Littleton CO
Status: Offline
Points: 10106
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote franciscosan Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 26 Feb 2019 at 13:09
btw, my lens are not colored, they are photo-sensitive.

Oh, I also believe that voters have a right to write in candidates, although I wonder what would actually happen if Mickey Mouse got elected.  Poll staffers hate write in candidates, because they have to count them by hand.  Same thing, jury activism is frowned upon by the establishment, but is well within the purview of the juror (or elector as the case may be.

But, surely Vanuatu, you don't think Donald Trump would have been elected if a large portion of the American people weren't giving the establishment a big F U?  Or maybe you are also one of those types that believes Trump would have gotten the popular vote if Hillary hadn't "cheated."

Jordan Peterson has some interesting observations about Trump promoting the wall.  He points out that conservatives are into borders, personal, political, moral.  Whereas liberals are more into openness, more what I would call 'loose-goosy' on the moral boundaries, political boundaries etc.  So what Trump says about a wall strikes a real cord with the conservatives.  The liberals (and more precisely, the radicals) go apesh*t about this and can't stand it, disparaging anyone who doesn't see it their way.

Personally, I think the conservatives are more tolerant, believing in borders they believe that someone else can legitimately have an opinion that is different than theirs.  The liberals/radicals being so open can't accept that there might be another opinion, as valid or even more valid than their own.
Back to Top
franciscosan View Drop Down
WorldHistoria Master
WorldHistoria Master


Joined: 09 Feb 2015
Location: Littleton CO
Status: Offline
Points: 10106
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote franciscosan Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 26 Feb 2019 at 10:48
I am a little confused by your triple negative, "Mueller doesn't say that doesn't mean he won't direct others to leak, leak and leak some more."

In a trial, I believe the jury is supreme in a court case.  I had a friend that was in a criminal trial and my dad and I went to the trial in support.  At the beginning of the trial, when they were selecting the jury, the prosecution said, 'if you thought that a law was silly, but the person was guilty of the law, would you convict? for example if it was illegal to eat ice cream on the sidewalk and the person was guilty, would you convict?'  I would have said, 'if the law said someone had to wear a star, and then wouldn't wear a star, would you convict?'
So, yes the jury has a right to acquit the guilty (and hence also convict the "innocent"), now the jury also has responsibilities, and the responsibilities are more important than their 'rights.'  But their responsibilities do not necessarily include making the judge's, the prosecutor's and the defense's day go smoothly.
btw
The friend was found guilty for a lesser offense, the jury split the difference.  But, the judge threw the book at him, rightfully so, because my friend was a very bad liar and the judge surely knew when the defendant was asked if he had ever done anything similar, and the defendant lied.  If he had properly talked to his own lawyer, his own lawyer would not have asked that precise question.  Of course, the fact that he lied, badly, does imply that generally he is the honest sort.  Which he was.  But, he got 3 months in jail, rather than a couple of weeks home detention.

I do hope that Mueller's report is publicly released, if not though, I am not sure I am quite comfortable with it and Mueller being subpoenaed.  Of course, Donald Trump goes to extremes and likes to fight (whether it is necessary or not), and so maybe Mueller being subpoenaed is what it takes.
Back to Top
toyomotor View Drop Down
Moderator
Moderator
Avatar

Joined: 15 Feb 2014
Location: Tasmania, AUST.
Status: Offline
Points: 5242
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote toyomotor Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 26 Feb 2019 at 10:30
Quote Do you buy your colored glasses from the same manufacturer as toyomotor? Wink

That's a bit unfair!

I've formed opinions on Trump after reading many different American on-line newspapers and watching him on TV news broadcasts - the man has been proven to be an unmitigated liar and a buffoon.

He's single handedly created a situation where the western world can no longer rely on common sense and stability coming from the White House, nor can others with whom the USA must deal with in relation to trade, finances, military and climate control.

I don't wear rose coloured glasses, I just wish Trump would wake up and smell the grass.

If I alone had these views, I'd be concerned, but I don't and I'm not. Many far more informed and more intelligent than me have the same views.
It's not that I was born in Ireland,
It's the Ireland that was born in me.
Back to Top
Vanuatu View Drop Down
Administrator
Administrator
Avatar

Joined: 24 Feb 2015
Location: New England
Status: Offline
Points: 1921
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Vanuatu Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 26 Feb 2019 at 03:36
Originally posted by franciscosan franciscosan wrote:

Are the charges against Manafort false?  Flynn?  Cohen?  Stone?  Papadopoulos?  Are they innocents?martyrs? or did they get caught fair and square?
Since the FBI knew all about Manafort before the election, I assume they raided his house and documents to prevent him from hiding/destroying any evidence. 

Yet a search warrant MUST indicate the flavor of the evidence that is to be preserved. A judge determines whether the warrant is legit. We don't know why the warrant was authorized. When Trump was elected the FBI showed him the dossier and said "we don't have anything to prove it, there is no open investigation on you." So if there were no counterintelligence documents recovered from Manafort's home than it was an illegal search and seizure.

Gen Flynn was harassed by the intelligence community in order to find information to use against Trump, bc they had NONE.
Ditto Cohen, FBI is subject to the law no matter how inconvenient it is for liberals.  

Papadpoulos did nothing illegal- see Hillary's dossier compiled by Russian ex KGB and Peter Steele her liberal cheerleader or Hill's Uranium 1 deal- that is counterintelligence fraud.


I have no idea what Roger Stone is being accused of, I guess he is an arms or drug dealer since they brought SWAT in to take him down as if he's El Chapo.


Quote Did Cohen pay off two bimbos?  Why shouldn't that be considered a campaign contribution?  Did the editor of National Enquirer work to suppress the news of one of those bimbo eruptions?  Is that just an act of friendship or is that a campaign contribution?  I believe the sentencing agreement looked upon it as an example of the later.  Did he try to blackmail Bezos, or was he just trying to get the news 'accurately portrayed' regarding the supposed uninvolvement of the Saudis.  Whatever it was, was it violation of his plea agreement?  Was Stone courting wikileaks and what was his role in getting them to release the Clinton emails?
Horrifying! Won't someone PLEASE think of the children! 
When you have a few more straw men come back I'm building a house of sticks.

Quote When I say Trump is not innocent, I think in terms of Scottish (?) law, where there are 3 possible verdicts, guilty, innocent, and not guilty.  Not guilty means that the person under trial was not guilty of that particular charge, but they could be brought up on another charge and tried on the basically the same or a similar matter.  Trump is not guilty at best, but Mueller has not brought him up on charges, presumably not yet.  We don't know what he has, and neither does Trump, although not knowing has never kept Trump from acting.
Do you buy your colored glasses from the same manufacturer as toyomotor? Wink

Quote Mueller is not vocal in the press, nor disparaging President Trump, he is acting in a legal capacity not a media capacity.  Trump blasts Mueller and Mueller takes it.  The media blasts Trump, and Trump blasts back.  Mueller does not leak to the media.  I think you can fault the media (and the media can fault Trump, but they are not exactly an impartial actor).  But, as far as public appearance is concerned, Mueller really doesn't say anything.
Mueller doesn't say that doesn't mean he won't direct others to leak, leak and leak some more. Everyone of his subordinates has contradicted their direct superiors. 
Mueller actually did speak up and deny media poop after Barr was clear to be the next AG.

Quote I am sure you will find some trivial detail wrong with what I say, and dismiss the whole.
You are trafficking in trivialities and "What if's?" Please highlight your most devastating FACT.

Quote I believe that the jury has a right to be activist if they find an extreme necessity for it.
Absolutely sickening
 
“The United Nations is the biggest joke of this century. If each one is trying to assert his own rights there, how can there be a United Nations?” UG Krishnamurti
Back to Top
franciscosan View Drop Down
WorldHistoria Master
WorldHistoria Master


Joined: 09 Feb 2015
Location: Littleton CO
Status: Offline
Points: 10106
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote franciscosan Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 24 Feb 2019 at 01:28
The fact that someone may have gotten away with something, doesn't have anything to do with whether the next schmuck gets away with something.  So what?  Because the Clintons were not prosecuted or persecuted, Manafort, Flynt, Cohen smell like roses?  Clintons are corrupt, and they have fallen out of favor, shown especially by her loosing the national election, and she _lost_ it by not playing the electoral college, and getting arrogant.

 I am talking about an activist jury, and the theory that a jury can do what it wants.  Are you saying that Manafort, Flynt and Cohen do not have a right to a jury of their peers?  Just because they do a plea agreement, and settle out of court, does not mean that they have a right to a jury of their peers??  Are they allowed a defense attorney??  Isn't part of the purpose of the defense attorney to call bull on the prosecution if the prosecution warrants that (if it gets that far).

But, maybe you are right, Cohen might not be guilty of conspiracy with Russia, but I think that looking at payoffs of bimbos is a form of campaign violations.  But, maybe you only get upset with Clinton's bimbo eruptions, not Trump's.  When everything stinks to high heaven, it is little difficult to tell what smell comes from which steaming pile.

Mueller has been rather closed mouth in general concerning the press.  The "President" on the other hand feels rather free to lambast the Justice department and the Judiciary when the whim suits him, which it often does.  Donald Trump, a man that never lets ignorance hold him back.
Back to Top
Vanuatu View Drop Down
Administrator
Administrator
Avatar

Joined: 24 Feb 2015
Location: New England
Status: Offline
Points: 1921
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Vanuatu Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 13 Feb 2019 at 11:19
Originally posted by franciscosan franciscosan wrote:

Are the charges against Manafort false?  Flynn?  Cohen?  Stone?  Papadopoulos?  Are they innocents?martyrs? or did they get caught fair and square?
Nope, US won't accuse on no evidence. The "collusion" was a story there was no evidence for investigating Cohen or Manafort for collusion. Don't worry though investigating Hillary's deal giving Russians uranium might replace the national pastime.
Quote
Mueller does not leak to the media. 
No reason to believe that, he recently corrected a leak bc of AG Barr. 

Quote
I am sure you will find some trivial detail wrong with what I say, and dismiss the whole.  I believe that the jury has a right to be activist if they find an extreme necessity for it.

what jury? This was a prosecutor's allegations, there was no jury. 
 
Quote Lawyers and judges hate it, but if they want to rule someone obviously guilty as innocent, or obviously innocent guilty (and points in between), they can.  That includes where what happened is murky, and the jury chooses to interpret in a definite manner.  Now it may be thrown out on appeal, but that is another story.  So, yes if you are a rotten excuse for a human being, that counts for something.  But, I am talking about extreme hypothetical cases.  In a way, if the media convicts him in the court of public opinion, then how do you get a jury pool?  Of course, cross that bridge if or when we get to it. 
What's going to be thrown out on appeal? What the hell are you referring to?


Edited by Vanuatu - 13 Feb 2019 at 11:22
“The United Nations is the biggest joke of this century. If each one is trying to assert his own rights there, how can there be a United Nations?” UG Krishnamurti
Back to Top
toyomotor View Drop Down
Moderator
Moderator
Avatar

Joined: 15 Feb 2014
Location: Tasmania, AUST.
Status: Offline
Points: 5242
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote toyomotor Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 13 Feb 2019 at 10:17
When the media launches a campaign against an individual or a corporation, there often comes a time when getting a completely impartial decision on guilt or innocence is virtually impossible. Under these circumstances, it's been argued in the past that as a fair trial cannot be held, proceedings should be halted.

Take, for example, the case of El Chapo. The reporting on his activities has been so extensive and, allegedly impartial, that he was always going to be found guilty. And I'm not suggesting that he's innocent.

In the case of Donald Trump, he's created so much adverse media publicity that he possibly could never get a fair trial either.

As for the Democrats, I wouldn't have thought that they'll self destruct, not for a while anyway, but should they remain in power, especial with a Dem president after 2020, the road will be rough for a while.

It's not that I was born in Ireland,
It's the Ireland that was born in me.
Back to Top
franciscosan View Drop Down
WorldHistoria Master
WorldHistoria Master


Joined: 09 Feb 2015
Location: Littleton CO
Status: Offline
Points: 10106
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote franciscosan Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 13 Feb 2019 at 09:49
Are the charges against Manafort false?  Flynn?  Cohen?  Stone?  Papadopoulos?  Are they innocents?martyrs? or did they get caught fair and square?

Did Cohen pay off two bimbos?  Why shouldn't that be considered a campaign contribution?  Did the editor of National Enquirer work to suppress the news of one of those bimbo eruptions?  Is that just an act of friendship or is that a campaign contribution?  I believe the sentencing agreement looked upon it as an example of the later.  Did he try to blackmail Bezos, or was he just trying to get the news 'accurately portrayed' regarding the supposed uninvolvement of the Saudis.  Whatever it was, was it violation of his plea agreement?  Was Stone courting wikileaks and what was his role in getting them to release the Clinton emails?

When I say Trump is not innocent, I think in terms of Scottish (?) law, where there are 3 possible verdicts, guilty, innocent, and not guilty.  Not guilty means that the person under trial was not guilty of that particular charge, but they could be brought up on another charge and tried on the basically the same or a similar matter.  Trump is not guilty at best, but Mueller has not brought him up on charges, presumably not yet.  We don't know what he has, and neither does Trump, although not knowing has never kept Trump from acting.  Mueller is not vocal in the press, nor disparaging President Trump, he is acting in a legal capacity not a media capacity.  Trump blasts Mueller and Mueller takes it.  The media blasts Trump, and Trump blasts back.  Mueller does not leak to the media.  I think you can fault the media (and the media can fault Trump, but they are not exactly an impartial actor).  But, as far as public appearance is concerned, Mueller really doesn't say anything.

I am sure you will find some trivial detail wrong with what I say, and dismiss the whole.  I believe that the jury has a right to be activist if they find an extreme necessity for it.  Lawyers and judges hate it, but if they want to rule someone obviously guilty as innocent, or obviously innocent guilty (and points in between), they can.  That includes where what happened is murky, and the jury chooses to interpret in a definite manner.  Now it may be thrown out on appeal, but that is another story.  So, yes if you are a rotten excuse for a human being, that counts for something.  But, I am talking about extreme hypothetical cases.  In a way, if the media convicts him in the court of public opinion, then how do you get a jury pool?  Of course, cross that bridge if or when we get to it. 
Back to Top
toyomotor View Drop Down
Moderator
Moderator
Avatar

Joined: 15 Feb 2014
Location: Tasmania, AUST.
Status: Offline
Points: 5242
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote toyomotor Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 12 Feb 2019 at 10:23
LOL
It's not that I was born in Ireland,
It's the Ireland that was born in me.
Back to Top
Vanuatu View Drop Down
Administrator
Administrator
Avatar

Joined: 24 Feb 2015
Location: New England
Status: Offline
Points: 1921
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Vanuatu Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 12 Feb 2019 at 01:09
Originally posted by toyomotor toyomotor wrote:

Quote I'm not talking about Olivia Newton John!!!

Hugh Jackman?
Eric Bana?
Ah, Paul Hogan, right?

Quote When were you innocent? 
Not Guilty is more like it.

That would depend of what crime or offence that you intend to level at me.

Dislike Donald Trump-fair cop guv, you've got me.

Robbing banks-innocent and not guilty.

If you're going to level accusations against me, make them clear, don't muck about girl, speak up.Thumbs Down

Quote "But, I do think that thinking Trump is "innocent" Really?
Right bc all I've said is how INNOCENT Trump is, pppft

And you're wrong again, face up to it.

Quote Why would Trump be innocent?
He's not. CNN said so.Wink

Quote False charges against a son of bitch, are STILL FALSE !
 

Many a son-of -bitch has been convicted because he's a son-of-a-bitch and needs to convicted for the public good.

Quote And when it's the DNC, DOJ, CIA and FBI creating a false narrative, that bothers me a lot, glad you can ignore it in favor of hating Trump for fashion's sake
It's like Jordan Peterson asked- when the hell do you say this is the limit and I can't move any further away from what I know to be right?

And now you turn on some of the worlds leading Intelligence and Law Enforcement agencies-just like Trump. When will you ever learn?

Hating Trump gives purpose to my day and makes me feel good. Why should I stop?

Hate him all you want it's the lying to yourself that should bother you.

You are not innocent in any sense of the word.That's the reason defendants are found NOT GUILTY instead of INNOCENT.

You would convict on false charges bc you hate Trump? 
OK glad I know where you stand and wonder if you didn't employ the "bc I don't like you" rational when you were on the job. 

I didn't accuse you of a crime I said you are not innocent. And have not been since you pushed off mother's teat.

I never said Trump was INNOCENT! I said the liberal media, ANTIFA, democrats and leftists were behaving much worse than racist Trump, who by the way doesn't appear in black face or in a KKK costume like the Dixiecrat posers in Virginia. 

Lastly save the "girl" for your children, you step all over my posts for "name calling."
“The United Nations is the biggest joke of this century. If each one is trying to assert his own rights there, how can there be a United Nations?” UG Krishnamurti
Back to Top
toyomotor View Drop Down
Moderator
Moderator
Avatar

Joined: 15 Feb 2014
Location: Tasmania, AUST.
Status: Offline
Points: 5242
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote toyomotor Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 11 Feb 2019 at 23:55
Quote I'm not talking about Olivia Newton John!!!

Hugh Jackman?
Eric Bana?
Ah, Paul Hogan, right?

Quote When were you innocent? 
Not Guilty is more like it.

That would depend of what crime or offence that you intend to level at me.

Dislike Donald Trump-fair cop guv, you've got me.

Robbing banks-innocent and not guilty.

If you're going to level accusations against me, make them clear, don't muck about girl, speak up.Thumbs Down

Quote "But, I do think that thinking Trump is "innocent" Really?
Right bc all I've said is how INNOCENT Trump is, pppft

And you're wrong again, face up to it.

Quote Why would Trump be innocent?
He's not. CNN said so.Wink

Quote False charges against a son of bitch, are STILL FALSE !
 

Many a son-of -bitch has been convicted because he's a son-of-a-bitch and needs to convicted for the public good.

Quote And when it's the DNC, DOJ, CIA and FBI creating a false narrative, that bothers me a lot, glad you can ignore it in favor of hating Trump for fashion's sake
It's like Jordan Peterson asked- when the hell do you say this is the limit and I can't move any further away from what I know to be right?

And now you turn on some of the worlds leading Intelligence and Law Enforcement agencies-just like Trump. When will you ever learn?

Hating Trump gives purpose to my day and makes me feel good. Why should I stop?



Edited by toyomotor - 12 Feb 2019 at 00:05
It's not that I was born in Ireland,
It's the Ireland that was born in me.
Back to Top
Vanuatu View Drop Down
Administrator
Administrator
Avatar

Joined: 24 Feb 2015
Location: New England
Status: Offline
Points: 1921
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Vanuatu Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 11 Feb 2019 at 22:21
Originally posted by toyomotor toyomotor wrote:

Quote NOR IS OUR FRIEND IN AU!

I hope you're not talking about me!!!
I'm not talking about Olivia Newton John!!!

When were you innocent? 
Not Guilty is more like it.


Edited by Vanuatu - 11 Feb 2019 at 22:22
“The United Nations is the biggest joke of this century. If each one is trying to assert his own rights there, how can there be a United Nations?” UG Krishnamurti
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  12>
  Share Topic   

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Forum Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 12.01
Copyright ©2001-2018 Web Wiz Ltd.

This page was generated in 0.234 seconds.