Re: Presidential Election 2020
Quote:
Originally Posted by
DawgyNWindow
Yeah, I don't get it if that is what he is doing.
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.
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.
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.
Re: Presidential Election 2020
Quote:
Originally Posted by
inudesu
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.
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.
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.
Re: Presidential Election 2020
Quote:
Originally Posted by
inudesu
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.
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.
Some of us grow...
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.
Re: Presidential Election 2020
***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...
Re: Presidential Election 2020
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..
Re: Presidential Election 2020
Quote:
Originally Posted by
FriscoDog
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?
Re: Presidential Election 2020
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Guisslapp
Hey Princess, most of the article is about China’s preference for Biden. Drama queen much?
Sure was a misleading title for the article, then. Don't you think?
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?
Re: Presidential Election 2020
Quote:
Originally Posted by
DawgyNWindow
Sure was a misleading title for the article, then. Don't you think?
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.
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.
Re: Presidential Election 2020
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Guisslapp
Read the official statement, and see who is being the princess.
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.
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?
Re: Presidential Election 2020
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Guisslapp
Read the official statement, and see who is being the princess.
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.
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?
Re: Presidential Election 2020
Quote:
Originally Posted by
arkansasbob
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.
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.
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.
Re: Presidential Election 2020
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.
Re: Presidential Election 2020
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Guisslapp
Hey Princess, most of the article is about China’s preference for Biden. Drama queen much?
Sorry... but you have zero credibility on this board.. Mr. Narcissist. You are starting to edge out Trump in your opinion of yourself..
Re: Presidential Election 2020
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Guisslapp
Read the official statement, and see who is being the princess.
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.
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.
They’re doing a bang up job of it, specifically on social media right now.
Forward that meme, though.
Re: Presidential Election 2020
Quote:
Originally Posted by
turbodawg
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.
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.
