You certainly made a lot of biased assumptions in that post.Quote:
Originally Posted by johnnylightnin
Printable View
You certainly made a lot of biased assumptions in that post.Quote:
Originally Posted by johnnylightnin
There is compelling evidence that not only was the Russian collusion impeachment basis a hoax, but that is was manufactured by the Obama administration. Many regular Americans thought so. Sounds treasonous to this regular American.
Now Stodgedog Goosey has been telling us for over a year that the evidence is right there in the Mueller report.. it's very plain, and in black and white print. So much so that the democratic controlled House, did not put it in the articles of impeachment, nor did they list any crime committed in the articles. But Goosey says it is there and they should have impeached him. That's his opinion, but the problem is that the people who's opinion matter (i.e. those in DC) don't agree with Goosey.. Even Mitt Romney is now saying Trump will win in November.... oh vey...Quote:
Originally Posted by stodgdog
Thats not even a sane comment.Quote:
Originally Posted by Guisslapp
Remember in 2016 nobody got it right. And not even the best cable news network FOX.Quote:
Originally Posted by johnnylightnin
The total meltdown will be seen from the left again.Quote:
Originally Posted by johnnylightnin
New Rasmussen Poll, July 15-21, 2020.
Likely Black Voters
Biden 54%
Trump 30%
As I started saying last year, if Trump gets anywhere close to 20% of black voters Sleepy has no chance.
Rasmussen. LolQuote:
Originally Posted by FriscoDawg
Quote:
Originally Posted by FriscoDog
Hope Mitt is right
Again, Jobby was spot on.Quote:
Originally Posted by TYLERTECHSAS
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=ijy4h69UttM
:rolleyes:
Was at a small gathering last night and as often happens the men gathered in one room, the ladies in another. We were talking FOOTBALL... then the hostess comes in, sits down and says, "Well, I suppose you two (Mike C. and I) are Trumpers." We nodded. "Well," she says, "I can't vote for that man." Why not? "He's a sexist, just wants to attack women. I wouldn't feel safe being in the same building...he would rape me." Oh! really? So, Mike says, you would be okay being in same room with Joe Biden? I guess he would just rub your shoulders, sniff your hair, call you sweety..." "What!?" she bellows, "Huh? What are you talking about?" So Mike details Creepy Joe's exploits. "With little girls too!? Mike nods. "Well...I ain't voting for that creep either!" She returns to the room with the women, who had started arguing politics, which had chased our lovely hostess to us. We went back to talking FOOTBALL!
Interesting group of football fanatics it was too. Mike C. played for Tulane back in the '70's, Wayne is a Univ of Hawaii grad and big time booster of their football program...had some interesting stories to tell about June Jones. Was very complimentary of Tech. Said they (UH folks) really liked sharing a conference with Tech...highly respected school and programs. We had one former LSU player (mostly a bench warmer), and a fellow from Florida who is a big Auburn fan because his nephew played there.
All 5 of us are supporting Trump....BTW.
Wow!
Bernie Sanders co-chair: Voting for Joe Biden like eating ‘half a bowl of s–t”
https://nypost.com/2020/07/27/sander...a-bowl-of-s-t/
Saw that in two battleground states a poll found that upwards of 60% of those responding say Biden is unfit to be president. Only 60%? Some on the Trump team cite this as "good news," a chink in the armor of Biden. Well, first, if that number is only 60% then those polled are either being generous or are as ignorant as too many others. Biden is woefully unfit to be president. Worse! he'll be nothing but a puppet for the evil-doers.
Next, like all the others, these were limited polls, probably a few hundred people asked. To clarify it was in gradients, such as "Unfit" "Somewhat Unfit" "Fit" "Not Sure" In one state it was 55% Unfit, 20% Somewhat Unfit, and less than 10% Not Sure, leaving the rest, about 15% saying Fit. The poll did not ask those same respondents of Trump.
Polls are tools. If properly conducted, and more importantly properly interpreted, they can be useful tools...provided you appreciate their limitations. Regardless, if I were on the Trump team (close advisors), I wouldn't get too giddy about these results. Like all other polls it is merely a snapshot of a limited sample, still 3 months from the election.
My two cents on polls: After the 2016 election, I put no faith in polls. Night before election NY Times had Hillary at 93% chance of winning POTUS. Also, I never answer any phone calls or text messages from political campaigns or unknown spam numbers, so pollsters would never get my opinion anyway. Many people if they are polled are afraid to actually speak how they feel. Given today's climate of being labeled a racist for even supporting Trump, people don't answer or lie and tell the person what they want to hear. So the data being provided is not accurate.Quote:
Originally Posted by dawg80
Well It's official..
DNC Platform Committee Votes down "Medicare for All". This is definitely going to piss off a lot of Bernie Bros... Trump's chances just improved IMO.
That's impossible. I was told Biden is just a puppet for AOC.Quote:
Originally Posted by FriscoDog
AOC is just a puppet herself, for George Soros et al
Well there were several different states delegates that said that they would not vote for Biden for POTUS at convention. It's not enough to matter in overall scheme of things due to superdelegates that DNC has, but there will be infighting.Quote:
Originally Posted by johnnylightnin
Should mention it here...I do NOT hold Senator Kamala Harris responsible or accountable for the actions of her ancestors 200 years ago. I have other issues with her, politically, but not that. It's a non-issue, for me, should Biden select her to run as VP.
Of course, this does point out the hypocrisy of the left...again.
At this very moment a Dem is lecturing AG Barr saying there is no way a foreign adversary can interfere in our elections. Can't happen! Has never happened! :icon_roll: Ah, excuse me, but isn't that the gist of the whole Russian probe (hoax)? Didn't Killary say the Russians stole the election from her? Now some Dem is incensed at the mere hint someone is concerned about foreign intervention.
They are totally without shame.
Man, this AG "hearing" is a farce. Dems answering their own questions. Barr doesn't seem allowed to respond. The American should easily be able to see what sham the Dem Party has become.
More than 100 Police Agencies pull out of security agreements to guard DNC Convention.quote:
At least 100 law enforcement agencies have withdrawn agreements to send personnel to next month’s Democratic National Convention, some of them citing orders to Milwaukee’s police chief to cease the use of tear gas and pepper spray during demonstrations.
The withdrawals cast doubt on a program to bring about 1,000 police officers from outside agencies to help shore up security for the event, scheduled for the week of Aug 17. Among the agencies confirmed to have withdrawn are police departments in Fond du Lac, Franklin, Greendale and West Allis.
Asked on Monday if the agreements were collapsing, Fond du Lac Police Chief William Lamb said, “Yes,” adding that he expects other agencies from across the state to withdraw from the program.
“We regret having to do that,” said Lamb, who chairs the Wisconsin Police Executive Group, which consists of police chiefs from cities with populations of more than 20,000 people.
Good for the cops..
The Dems had a game plan for sure. They would ask Barr a question then when he tried to answer, they would cut him off answering, in their slanted way, their own question. Obviously orchestrated and rehearsed. But the even bigger issues are these 1) they now admit their witch hunt was totally without merit, both the Russian hoax and the fake impeachment by stating over and over it is impossible for any foreign adversary to interfere in our elections (finally threw Killary under the bus) and more importantly 2) they are doing this in an attempt to defuse the notion of interference in elections because the Dems will be cheating in November, especially with that fraud-ridden mail-in ballot scheme. They want to set the table so when someone calls them on their fraud, which will happen, they can stick to that script of "no one can interfere in elections." Well, that may be true of foreign nations, but they aren't the threat, the DNC will cheat in this election!!!Quote:
Originally Posted by dawg80
Marching in lock step like the good Nazis they are. Gotta hand it to the Dems, they can concoct some schemes and all stick to it. The GOP can't organize a Bar-B-Cue.
Question for the board: Who is currently running the Democrat Party? It's certainly not Biden. I don't think Obamas or the Clintons are major influencers in the party. Who's running the show?
Commie bastards...and bitches. (equality, ya know)Quote:
Originally Posted by FriscoDog
Bernie and The SquadQuote:
Originally Posted by FriscoDog
Well Satan for sure but for the non- believers I think it’sQuote:
Originally Posted by FriscoDog
Barack Obama and Michelle, Bernie, DNC, with China/Russia behind the scenes and Hollywood/George Soros funding.
Isn't Jan 20, 2021, Inaugural Day? I just heard a MSNBC "journalist" say Inauguration Day.
Hum...
Dan Bongino Warns ‘Biden’s Cognitive Decline Is Rapidly Worsening’
Conservative pundit and former Secret Service agent Dan Bongino declared Sunday morning that former Vice President Joe Biden is suffering a rapid “cognitive decline” — and he suggested that his sources were “close to the situation.
More
https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2...dly-worsening/
Clinton Aide Advises Joe Biden: ‘Whatever You Do, Don’t Debate Trump’
Quote:
Originally Posted by TYLERTECHSAS
Clinton Aide Advises Joe Biden: ‘Whatever You Do, Don’t Debate Trump
Joe Lockhart, a former press secretary for President Bill Clinton, is publicly advising former Vice President Joe Biden not to debate President Donald Trump.
Lockhart published an op-ed last week at CNN.com warning Biden that he should not debate Trump because the latter is prone to statement that fail the fact-checking test (original emphasis):
More
https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2...-debate-trump/
Definitely Satan.Quote:
Originally Posted by TYLERTECHSAS
Will there be any debates, let alone the three currently scheduled? The Left is pushing hard for no debates at all. They will get support from left-leaning institutions who will cite fear of the China Virus for the reason to cancel the debate at their venue. But...why have an audience? Just have Trump and Biden on the stage...6 feet apart...and televise the debates.
A former Clinton campaign person was on TV and says Biden should agree to the debates. He says Trump is stupid, with an IQ barely above 80, and Biden as a good Lefty is sharp as a tack. That "right" is on the side of Biden and all of that will be made obvious in the debates where Trump can't hide, can't run from his record. I agree! Go for it Joe!
I am sure our resident libs agree, right Goosey? Jubru? johnny? Champ? Trump is stupid! He couldn't find his way out of a phone booth...with a map! All you anti-Trumpers should be screaming for the debates, and why stop at 3? Biden will smoke him in the debates. Biden, sharp as a tack, and Trump a blithering moron.
I am sure given the HUGE advantage Biden has over Trump, we will see multiple debates. Well, I won't watch them. It'll be like watching your favorite football team getting clobbered 49-3! No fun at all. But you Bidenites, you anti-Trumpers will relish the chance.
Er, right?
You know what they say about wrestling a pig. No point debating someone like Trump who operates completely untethered to the truth.
LOL!Quote:
Originally Posted by Guisslapp
and BTW as promised, I am adding turbo to y'alls list.
If Trump lies and lies and that's all he does, then that just gives Biden more ammo to smoke him in the debate. That's also what that Clinton dude said. Just another reason for Biden to debate him.
The Clinton dude is wrong. HRC worked Trump over on the facts in 2016 debates, but that doesn’t matter to low information voters.Quote:
Originally Posted by dawg80
The debates will be a circus, and the clown always has the advantage there.
Lame excuses! Never mind, I know the REAL truth.
Chicken shit!!!!!!!!!!! Bawahh! LOL at you...and Creepy, sleepy Joe!
1. Man, the anchor has really moved on "liberal" hasn't it?Quote:
Originally Posted by dawg80
2. I do think there should probably be debates. Just because it's the norm and expected. I wouldn't watch a Biden/Trump debate for $100 personally. But it seems at least some expectation is there.
3. I also agree that at this point it's probably kind of a waste of time. Trump's biggest fans will back him literally no matter how he comes off in a debate. And it's hard to think of what he could say to win over the other side. I guess there would be a slim chance that some of the "lesser of two evil" voters who held their nose the last time could get that final straw to back off (and vote the other way, third candidate, or sit this one out). But again, at this point, don't we know who he is? Best guess is both sides declare victory and pull some sound-bytes and the end result changes virtually no actual votes.
4. I know you're being sarcastic, but I'll ask anyway - as a Trump supporter, do you really think he helps his chances for re-election by speaking in public? I tend to disagree with the content of what he says, but even when I happen to agree with him - hearing him speak. . .doesn't inspire confidence in me. Do you really find that he comes across as inspiring, intelligent, or at all competent when you hear him speak? Maybe it's just my southern prejudice towards his accent (or again, my frequent disagreement with his points or skepticism on his facts) but even pre-presidential run I never heard Donald Trump speak and thought he was doing himself any favors - but again, clearly others disagree (or do they - at least some of his support is in spite of what he says rather than because of it, right?).
5. So again - sarcasm aside - as a Trump supporter, you really want to see him in a debate? Do you think that's something he's good at? And good enough to swing votes his way? Or stir up his base by "owning the libs so hard" in a debate? Is that your wish? Seriously asking.
This is easy it is not even close, the Democrats have moved so far left that they are Marxist in policy. Anyone that does not believe that is just not paying attention. If you truly believe America and it’s economy is not the best in the world then vote for the Marxist, but at least be honest about it and declare that you are in favor of Marxism.
The BIG question is this: why is Biden, and his handlers, running for cover on the subject of debates, and why is Trump and his campaign clamoring for more than the just the original three?
If I were a neutral party I would say Biden is afraid and has something to hide. I also think that's what a good portion of that undecided vote, maybe 10% of the electorate, will think as well.
Flashback to 2012...remember Romney smoked obummer in Debate #1. Really hammered him hard and temporarily turned the polls, the election, on its head. Of course being the candy-azz he is, Romney let obummer up off the mat, and then obummer turned the tables on him the remaining debates. Had Romney had any balls, and wasn't afraid to be branded as a racist for "attacking the black guy," he could have finished obummer off at the end of Debate 1 and then in Debate 2. But, he backed off, and that was all obummer needed to regain the edge. So, don't tell me the debates don't matter.
I also think Trump drilled Krooked Killary in the debates. He had least pushed himself into the arena where he had a chance. He seized the momentum and after the first debate, undecideds and even Killary-leaners, started listening to what he had to say.
Killary tried to play defense...you know that old, tried and untrue, prevent defense and ride what she thought was a safe lead in the polls. Wrong!
Quote:
Originally Posted by inudesu
Quote:
Originally Posted by dawg80
So. . . yes, then?Quote:
Originally Posted by dawg80
As a Trump supporter you think a public debate helps his election chances and hurts Biden's election chances? I don't have an agenda (here) or even any more follow up questions (I imagine this thread will continue down the usual path and I'll unsubscribe shortly).
Just curious. I would have thought the opposite in general.
I think those that pay no attention to what is going on in the world - those that watch fake news will have an opportunity to watch Biden in action. It is quite interesting to see him and anyone that watched Weekend at Bernie's will think of it during the debate. He is clearly clueless, and Trump will eat his lunch. Will that help Trump I think it will. Those that don't care are more likely to stay home.Quote:
Originally Posted by inudesu
Quote:
Originally Posted by inudesu
Quote:
Originally Posted by dawg80
So. . . yes, then?Quote:
Originally Posted by dawg80
As a Trump supporter you think a public debate helps his election chances and hurts Biden's election chances? I don't have an agenda (here) or even any more follow up questions (I imagine this thread will continue down the usual path and I'll unsubscribe shortly).
Just curious. I would have thought the opposite in general.
What makes you think I am a Trump supporter?Quote:
Originally Posted by inudesu
CNN's April Ryan 'cannot wait' to see 'armed forces' pull Trump out of the White House
quote:
“There’s going to be a split-screen on Jan. 20, 2021. If Joe Biden is now going to be the 46th president of the United States, you will have him being inaugurated and watching police and armed forces trying to pull Donald Trump out of the White House. I cannot wait for that split-screen,” Ryan said.quote:This is absolutely hilarious considering it is the Democratic Party who has refused to except the results of the 2016 election and have been doing everything they possibly can to overturn the election.
Hillary Clinton, Rep. Maxine Waters, D-Calif., and Rep. James Clyburn, D-S.C., have also recently expressed concern that Trump will refuse to leave the White House if he loses the election, with many prominent liberals claiming Trump’s rhetoric dismissing mail-in ballots is the foundation for the theory.
I mean, what? The post below for a start. And. . .the post I was responding to initially. And most of what you've said in this forum over the last 4 years. I mean, if not. . . I guess the same question applies?Quote:
Originally Posted by dawg80
Whether a Trump supporter or not, I'm curious as to whether you see him engaging in public debate as helpful for his re-election hopes? His debate skills are a plus in this election? Do you really think that's the case? I won't argue if you do, but I'm truly wondering if that's something you think (or others who would like to chime in, particularly those who support him).
Quote:
Originally Posted by dawg80
I'm sorry, inudesu, but you have me confused with someone who has an interest in politics. I don't dwell on such matters.
Got to live this one. Yes our resident regressives love a good commie for President. China, Cuba and Russia want Biden to win as well. Must make y’all proud to be a Regressive Democrat.
Communist Party leader Bob Avakian has announced his support for former Vice President Joe Biden in the upcoming presidential election.
Avakian, the founder and leader of the Revolutionary Communist Party USA, told his followers in a statement on Saturday that they should vote for Joe Biden in the 2020 presidential election.
https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2...ses-joe-biden/
But, I did some quick research on the topic...I would have to say, yes, Trump would crush Biden in the debates. There are lots of pundits who share that view. Biden's own people, and those supporting him, are encouraging him to avoid the debates. That speaks volumes.
They are smart enough to know what happens when you wrestle with a pig. Or debate a clown.Quote:
Originally Posted by dawg80
Or, they realize Joe Biden is a much bigger liar than Donald Trump, and they know he can’t keep the truth straight.Quote:
Originally Posted by Guisslapp
Your boy is going with Susan Rice. There’s a losing ticket if there ever was one.
Definitely Satan.
Don't their pretty much have to be debates?Quote:
Originally Posted by TYLERTECHSAS
Definitely Satan.Quote:
Originally Posted by turbodawg
I would think debates are primarily aimed at Independents and also to increase enthusiasm. I and R voter turnout is vital, IMO, especially with the mail in ballot idiocy. A new system can't be fairly implemented in a matter of weeks.Quote:
Originally Posted by inudesu
I don't think so, if you mean by law, or something. It has been a tradition. Most famously the Lincoln-Douglas debates, JFK-Nixon, and Reagan-Carter. On the latter two historians agree that the debates turned the tide of the elections. Reagan was way behind Carter, in August, double digits in the polls, but he smoked the hapless Carter in the debates.Quote:
Originally Posted by stodgdog
I don't think anyone believes that the debates alone determine the ultimate outcome of elections, but they have changed the momentum. And I think Trump will win in November after he crushes the mindless Biden in the 3 scheduled debates. Biden won't be able to hide behind the lying media, which right now is protecting him.
Keep in mind that political parties are private organizations. They can do as they please in selecting their candidates and how those candidates conduct their campaigns. For the Dems trying to push a comatose Biden across the finish line, avoiding the debates, where their guy would actually have to step up and be out there alone, is sound strategy. The only question is how would undecideds react to it? Would they hold Biden accountable, as in, he can't even handle a simple debate, how is he supposed to stand up to Putin, the Chicoms, NK, etc... I can save them the trouble, Biden can't/won't stand up to our enemies. He'll do like his former boss, obummer, kowtow to 'em.
Oh, there is a flip side to the debate question. We all know that we often determine if an outcome is good or bad as judged against our expectations. For instance, if some little school football team was going to play a powerhouse, like a Bama, most fans would say, Oh my! this is gonna be a slaughter, 100-0! But, if the final score is something like 42-20, even though the little school still lost, as measured against expectations, many would say, hey! Little School did great! Good job!
Well, if Biden can just avoid getting slaughtered in the debates, because that will be the expectations, he can actually gain a measure of respect and probably sew up his victory in November.
We also know that Biden's handlers will coach him up! They will have him as prepared as possible, and I'm sure, school him into NOT adlibbing. Stick to the script! No matter what the question is, just use one of the three carefully rehearsed answers. Of course, if CNN hosts one of the debates, they'll give Biden's team the questions ahead of time.
Now, does Trump have any chinks in his armor re: the debates? Yes. Trump is Trump. He tends to go off on tangents and is prone to exaggerate. Most intelligent people brush off his exaggerations as mere rhetoric, and focus on what he means. But the Left is devoid of common sense. I remember when ESPN did a special report on Rattay-Edwards, the reporter started the piece by saying, "This quarterback-receiver duo has accounted for a gazillion yards..." Intelligent people knew not to take him literally on the "gazillion" comment, he simply meant, wow! they have thrown for a bunch of yards. Trump uses such references a lot. Sometimes, I cringe when he does, not that I don't know better, but most of the voting populace is not like me...armed with tons of facts. The lamestream media will do its level best to draw the low-information crowd, i.e. viewers of CNN & MSNBC, to those points of exaggeration and try to cast them as "lies." Did that ESPN reporter lie when he said "gazillion yards?"
Anyway, that is both sides of the coin re: the debates. I am FAIR & BALANCED, and I understand all the possibilities that exist.
Quote:
Originally Posted by dawg80
It's interesting to me that you see it that way. Thanks for answering.Quote:
Originally Posted by dawg80
As promised - no further commentary from me. Just trying to understand your point.
One question for Marxist on here, how are you going to increase your take home pay or standard of living with the vote for the Democrats?
You sound like a Marxist looking out for the proletariat.Quote:
Originally Posted by frogdog
Hah! Trump has learned to be careful using superlatives. This morning, live on FOX, he was speaking of reopening schools and said, children are totally immune from the effects of the virus...then he stopped and said... well, I shouldn't say totally, I'll get in trouble saying totally, so I'll say virtually immune from the effects of the virus.
It is what I, and others, have been saying from the very beginning, if Trump would simply clean up the rhetoric he'd have much greater support in the polls and in popular opinion. Too many, WAY too many, people are hung up on his Tweets and such, and fail to recognize all the great things he has done for America and Americans. But voters also tend to have short memories, so if he starts now, most voters won't even remember they once denounced him for it.
Some on this board need to just send their money to the government, and it’s their money. But, making that decision for the rest of us that has worked hard and made sacrifices to have a chance to retire in a manner we planed for do not want to pay for anymore dead weight. Can not believe that we actually graduated any one with that little logical thought.
Trump was spending like a drunken sailor BEFORE COVID. How did you think that was going to be paid for? If your retirement plan can’t survive a Democrat in office, you’ve got a bad plan.Quote:
Originally Posted by frogdog
Yes...we have discussed this before, Trump has been spending a bunch. It is a concern. There are reasons...as I have mentioned many times, like rebuilding the military. You can disagree with some of that spending, or all of it, but at least we can actually see it! I want to see a curtailing in spending, and the deficit addressed first. Can't do a thing about the debt until the annual deficit is turned around.Quote:
Originally Posted by johnnylightnin
obummer added $10 trillion to the debt in 8 years. I have yet to see anyone be able to point to ....??????? What? Show me something tangible where the money went.
I hope that Trump will turn his enormous energy and prowess into dealing with the deficit/debt.
And we wouldn’t be spending so much on COVID (including economic stimulus) if he had competently managed the crisis.Quote:
Originally Posted by johnnylightnin
Broken record...Quote:
Originally Posted by Guisslapp
It is so easy to criticize and very difficult to work and solve. Data was furnished on this forum that the USA was on par with like counties in the ChiVi War. Wonder if the Chinese are taking any active interest?Quote:
Originally Posted by Guisslapp
Wrong. We are doing very subpar in controlling coronavirus relative to our peers. And we are no where close to the leader on per capita testing.Quote:
Originally Posted by stodgdog
OK. I believe you. We do get contradicting numbers from different "official" sources.Quote:
Originally Posted by Guisslapp
Who are our "peers"? This should be good. I'll give you a hint. We don't have any.Quote:
Originally Posted by Guisslapp
Poll: 70% Don’t Want Illegals Counted in Assigning Congressional SeatsPosted on 8/6/20 at 12:54 pm
https://tdzone-fandroppingsllc.netdn...ttons/uArw.png22https://tdzone-fandroppingsllc.netdn...ttons/dArw.png0
https://tdzone-fandroppingsllc.netdn...ayout/bkm1.png
quote:
The poll results come as California, Florida and Texas would each lose a House seat if President Trump succeeds in getting illegal immigrants removed from the 2020 U.S. census, according to a new Pew Research Center analysis.quote:
Rasmussen noted that the poll found opposition to including illegal immigrants comes from 72% of White voters, 67% of Black voters, and 57% of Hispanic voters. Opposition also comes from 88% of conservatives, 68% of moderates, and 51% of liberals.
80K ballots were invalidated in NY..
quote:
The mail-in ballots of more than 84,000 New York City Democrats who sought to vote in the presidential primary were disqualified, according to new figures released by the Board of Elections.
The city BOE received 403,103 mail-in ballots for the June 23 Democratic presidential primary.
But the certified results released Wednesday revealed that only 318,995 mail-in ballots were counted.
That means 84,108 ballots were not counted or invalidated — 21 percent of the total.
One out of four mail-in ballots were disqualified for arriving late, lacking a postmark or failing to include a voter’s signature, or other defects. The New York Post reported Tuesday that roughly 30,000 mail-in ballots were invalidated in Brooklyn alone.
This should prove interesting come November...
They can invalidate 100% of the Dem votes...works for me. They're the ones wanting mail-in voting, so sting 'em! The Dems WILL cheat, there is no question about it. Not just in the POTUS race, of course, but across the whole ballot. Just as assuredly as the sun rises in the east, Dems cheat in elections.
Amen!Quote:
Originally Posted by frogdog
Weak, weak and scared regressive Dems and Biden. So freaking true!!
Published 6 hours ago
Fred Fleitz: If Biden skips debates with Trump here's how our enemies will read it
If Biden refused to debate Trump, America’s enemies and adversaries would interpret this as a sign of weakness
https://www.foxnews.com/opinion/bide...es-fred-fleitz
And evil cheaters as well!
Facebook bans pro-Trump super PAC's ads for 90 days
Varney: Zuckerberg caved when Facebook censored Trump's campaign
Rep wants Twitter's CEO to testify about 'censorship of conservatives' and 'cozy' China relationship
https://www.foxbusiness.com/politics...n-its-platform
Isn't the President pushing mail in voting in Florida?Quote:
Originally Posted by dawg80
He seems a little inconsistent on this issue. Votes by mail himself (I think) but it's also somehow a terrible impractical thing, but also please do it in Florida, but also it will never work in Nevada (even though they just did it successfully).
Do you think his view is maybe similar to dawg80's? Mail in voting for him are legit, mail in votes for Biden clearly fraud?
Whew! et tu inudesu? You're part of the low-information crowd too, I see. Allow me to set you straight...Quote:
Originally Posted by inudesu
Trump has specifically referred to ABSENTEE BALLOTING which has been around for decades. That's how he votes since he is registered in Florida, I suppose, and lives/works in DC. So, like every other American facing that dilemma, he requests a legit, confirmed, absentee ballot. That is NOT, I repeat NOT, the same thing as this new, contrived mail-in ballot fraud-to-be mess.
If you require more explanation, then ask. But, please, get with the program and make yourself aware of the truth before you post stuff like this. We already have a few who deliberately distort the truth for political and TDS reasons.
Yeah, I don't get it if that is what he is doing.Quote:
Originally Posted by inudesu
But first you have to differentiate "mail in" from "absentee". One involves the mass mailing of ballots to people dead and alive who may or may not still be eligible to vote in the election and the other involves the active request of a ballot in the voter's name with identification procedures attached. I do not believe Trump is pushing pure "mail in" balloting in Florida, and if he is he is wrong for doing so. Pure "mail in" is ripe for fraud.
As far as inconsistency, were you as peeved while the dems pushed a silly Russian collusion narrative to try and say the 2016 election was tainted while they were busy using Russian disinformation provided by a foreign agent to allow their plants in our federal law enforcement agencies to abuse their power and investigate a candidate of the opposing party? I bet you were floored and angered by that inconsistency.
Where they have a working system in place is different than what they’re trying to do In Nevada
I dislike inconsistency across the board. I was just as annoyed by the Republicans who were aggressively "character matters" during Clinton's terms who suddenly changed to "he's not the pastor-in-chief" for Trump as the Democrats who were "private lives of politicians don't matter" in the 90's but wanted to talk about cheating and divorce in 2016.Quote:
Originally Posted by DawgyNWindow
It's not fair to bash Trump for things you'd have let Obama skate for. Absolutely. And it's unfair to act like Trump's being picked on when Obama's suit color was a whole big thing at one time. The whole deal's a racket and I'm not crazy about any of them.
It's pretty sorry to rail on "chain migration" when you used the family based policy in your own family. It's not consistent to want mail in voting where it might help you and not where it might hurt you (even if you can dig around and find some specific differences to latch onto).
I hate politics. I don't know why I ever post in this forum at all.
I think we agree on a lot of stuff, then.Quote:
Originally Posted by inudesu
Clinton was not the first philandering scumbag in the White House, though. Heck, we have an "eternal flame" burning atop one of the biggest sleazebags in Arlington cemetery and that escapes any scrutiny whatsoever. Personally, I don't give Trump a pass on what he has done, but I don't vote based on it either.
Some of us grow...Quote:
Originally Posted by inudesu
I was not a Bill Clinton fan during his tenure. Never voted for him either time. I did not like, and still don't, his using the Oval Office for his affair with Monica. It's not an appropriate place for such things. A Motel 6 works better. Oh, BTW, as I am consistent...I agree with those expressing dissatisfaction with Trump using the White House to accept the GOP nomination. Like all other political parties, the GOP is a private organization, and a taxpayer funded, public building, like the WH is not appropriate for such events. He (they) need to rent a hotel ballroom, or hold it in one of the Trump hotels...of course the silly Dems will go ballistic over that too. Anyway, my beef with Bill Clinton had a lot to do with his personal conduct...and his selling missile guidance technology to the Chicoms to fund his 1996 re-election campaign.***
I have posted many times that the economy was great during Clinton's tenure...it was. And I commend him for it. But, still think he should have gotten a Motel 6 room for his sexual forays. Now, in the bigger picture, partially due to Clinton's personal behavior, but also others, the whole notion of "character matters" has been ratcheted way down. Now, it's "he may be a scumbag, but he's our scumbag, so there!"
As for "chain migration" (a reference to Melania's use of it) and any other policies...because someone took advantage of a legal policy that means they cannot, later on, seek to end it if they believe it hurts the country? I suppose in the 18th Century, that a former slave-holder couldn't later rail against the practice? What would you say? Oh no! I don't want to hear your criticism of slavery, and no, we don't want your support for abolishing slavery, nope! just go back to being a slave-owner again and shut up!
Some people change and grow. More people should try it...
...and you should try to grasp the differences between absentee voting and the new proposed mail-in voting, they are not the same.
***Clinton's sale of missile guidance technology to the Chicoms.
Of course, using his power of executive orders, he had the US sell the technology to the Chicoms for some agreed-upon price, against the wishes of many, including our military leaders, who were aghast! That money for that transaction went to the US Treasury, all above the table. BUT!! part of the deal was an additional payment to the Clinton Campaign via some Chinese monks who, all of a sudden, found they had many $millions in their bank account. Wow! Then they made a donation to Clinton, as they had taken a vow of poverty... Yeah, right.
When it was made public what Clinton had done, many good Americans, and our allies were like, "Are you nuts!?" But, the lib media defended Clinton, applauded him, saying he did that to assure there would be no, or little collateral damage, should the Chicoms shoot nuke ICBMs at us. If the Chicoms wanted to obliterate our navy base at San Diego, for instance, it was very likely they would miss and hit the city instead, killing millions of civilians. With this enhanced tech their missiles would hit the mark and wipe out our navy base. Oh joy! I think Clinton was considered for the Nobel Peace Prize because of that.
I have spoken with some folks in-the-know, and they say it caused many a sleepless night for US, and allied, military leaders. The Chicoms had the tech to pinpoint nuclear missiles anywhere in the world. This caused a change in logistics for us, and our allies, for instance assuring we never had too many assets in one place at one time. By 1999, we had made tech improvements to offset the Chicoms, and by 2004, we had rendered that tech virtually useless and obsolete. We survived the traitorous action of Clinton thru technological advances. That and surrendering the Pacific fiber optics line to the Chicoms was a big no-no for Clinton and a reason I don't like him...while still acknowledging he did some good things too.
No one is perfect...
More misleading information by NY Times and MSM.. as if most sane people didn't know their crap is propaganda..
Russia Continues Interfering in Election to Try to Help Trump, U.S. Intelligence Says
WASHINGTON — Russia is using a range of techniques to denigrate Joseph R. Biden Jr., American intelligence officials said Friday in their first public assessment that Moscow continues to try to interfere in the 2020 campaign to help President Trump.
What they intentionally omit is that China and Iran are helping Biden..
Hey Princess, most of the article is about China’s preference for Biden. Drama queen much?Quote:
Originally Posted by FriscoDog
Sure was a misleading title for the article, then. Don't you think?Quote:
Originally Posted by Guisslapp
And after re-reading the article, I'd say it is HEAVILY slanted toward saying Russia is actively doing stuff to get Trump re-elected and China likely prefers that Trump lose, but is not really doing anything nefarious to make that happen.
So it appears you are the princess. Perhaps you and your ilk are ready to press the "overload" button again?
Read the official statement, and see who is being the princess.Quote:
Originally Posted by DawgyNWindow
https://www.dni.gov/index.php/newsro...merican-public
China is issuing statements against Trump’s criticisms of China to influence the election while Russia is leaking phone calls of Biden. One of those tactics is more interfering than the other, Princess.
that's a strange thing to say. why would anyone take it as interference when a foreign country issues official statements against a sitting president? the statements aren't interference -- they are just indications of the attitude of an entity with the potential to do a lot of interfering through technological means. i'm not sure how effective they can be if they try to meddle, but maybe they can be more subtle than i give them credit for.Quote:
Originally Posted by Guisslapp
as for publishing leaked phone calls, if the phone calls are incriminating, i'm glad they're getting published. that's not interference -- that's potentially stopping corruption. if they are not incriminating, then in what way can they possibly interfere with an election?
that's a strange thing to say. why would anyone take it as interference when a foreign country issues official statements against a sitting president? the statements aren't interference -- they are just indications of the attitude of an entity with the potential to do a lot of interfering through technological means. i'm not sure how effective they can be if they try to meddle, but maybe they can be more subtle than i give them credit for.Quote:
Originally Posted by Guisslapp
as for publishing leaked phone calls, if the phone calls are incriminating, i'm glad they're getting published. that's not interference -- that's potentially stopping corruption. if they are not incriminating, then in what way can they possibly interfere with an election?
Yeah, I don’t think I would call stating that you object to an administrations policy as interference, which is why it would have been weird for the NYT to say as much in the headline.Quote:
Originally Posted by arkansasbob
Leaking stuff, while you might like the transparency aspect, is more of a asymmetrical tactic that has the ability to do more political damage. In this case, what they leaked was really a nothingburger, but it was intended to breathe new life into a favorite Trump conspiracy theory. The leak, though edited to come across as effective as possible, didn’t really add to what had been openly stated - Biden worked to get Ukraine’s corrupt “diamond prosecutor” fired.
Yes, good ole quid pro quo creepy sleepy Joe! You won't get the money, unless you fire the guy who is investigating my son and his crooked dealings... Extortion 101.
Sorry... but you have zero credibility on this board.. Mr. Narcissist. You are starting to edge out Trump in your opinion of yourself..Quote:
Originally Posted by Guisslapp
Beijing, Moscow, and Tehran realize -regardless of the 2020 presidential election results - that divisiveness in the United States weakens our position globally, and gives gain to each.Quote:
Originally Posted by Guisslapp
They’re doing a bang up job of it, specifically on social media right now.
Forward that meme, though.
We'll see in November. Voting based on what other world leaders think about us is weak. We are in a much stronger position than we were three years ago.Quote:
Originally Posted by turbodawg
Memes? That's the focus?Quote:
Originally Posted by turbodawg
Whatever you do, don't look at the streets of many of our large cities where "peaceful" protests (anarchist separatist movements) are going on leaving property damage and death in their wake.
Memes!
Don't forget our own darling media in this country to are fanning the flames. Even their own employees have stated this.Quote:
Originally Posted by DawgyNWindow
You don’t think that those nations are targeting the US right now in an attempt to weaken the US?Quote:
Originally Posted by FriscoDog
There’s been some bullshit, no doubt. But as we speak, in which of the ‘many’ large cities is that going on tonight?
Looks like Chicago, Ferguson, Seattle and Portland are the ones they are mentioning this morning.
I have no idea how this genie gets put back into the bottle. The rioters/looters have been encouraged to act this way by the media and the dems hoping to use this as a campaign issue. They see and say nothing while innocent people die on the streets. If Biden wins, will they suddenly turn on the very mobs they ignored or praised while this happened?
Since Trump was elected there has been a "win at any cost" strategy employed by the largely democrat media and the democrat party itself. They have abused the federal law enforcement apparatus, focused on partisan impeachment efforts where they have no evidence or crime, and now encouraged the looting and destruction of property that has resulted in many innocent deaths. They couldn't just wait four (or at worst eight) years for his eligibility to occupy office to end, they had to abuse the Constitution and attempt to destroy the very thing they want to control.
I was not surprised to hear Biden say that AAs are not diverse at all ("with a few notable exceptions"). This is what they've worked for since I've been watching. Of course, this comes at a great cost to an entire race and to our nation.
The Left is screaming, again, about interference in the upcoming election...Russia is trying to hurt Biden's campaign, and help Trump's. Really, how are they doing that? More importantly, WHY would they do that? In three years in office Trump has hardly been a friend of Russia. obummer refused to sell weapons to Ukraine in their on-going strife with Russia...Trump immediately authorized the sale of weapons to Ukraine. Just one example.
The Dems just lectured Barr on there being no chance, NONE!!! that a foreign power could influence a US POTUS election....of course they did this ahead of their planned cheating in the mail-in ballot fraud...and want to set the stage now that NO WAY could anyone/anything challenge the tainted results afterwards. Of course, they are right, it won't be Russia or any other foreign nation cheating, it will be the DNC.
And, if one was truly concerned about foreign intervention they would be steadfast against the mail-in ballot process. This makes it easier for a foreign country to submit false ballots.