Announcement

Collapse

Civics 101 Guidelines

Want to argue about politics? Healthcare reform? Taxes? Governments? You've come to the right place!

Try to keep it civil though. The rules still apply here.
See more
See less

Hillary in 2020!!!

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #61
    Originally posted by rogue06 View Post
    As I've said before the left has become the Boy Who Cried Wolf wrt Trump to the point that if something really big ever did surface many people will simply ignore it because of all the histrionics in the past.
    I'm not sure this is the case so much as it is that Trump's persona wards off any scandal. In the first two or three weeks campaign, before he was widely criticized as he is now, he overcame several scandals that would have toppled any other candidate (namely, giving out Lindsay Graham's cell phone number and mocking John McCain for being captured).
    "I am not angered that the Moral Majority boys campaign against abortion. I am angry when the same men who say, "Save OUR children" bellow "Build more and bigger bombers." That's right! Blast the children in other nations into eternity, or limbless misery as they lay crippled from "OUR" bombers! This does not jell." - Leonard Ravenhill

    Comment


    • #62
      Originally posted by Chaotic Void View Post
      That kind of thing is why I've heard the Electoral College exists... because otherwise, all an aspiring party has to do is pander to the Yuppies in New York and Commiefornia to win an election because that's where the Majority of folks live.
      Actually, the reason for having an electoral college rather than a popular vote for president is quite different. As you may know, slaves couldn't vote, but the states with them still wanted to get benefit from their slave population. The electoral college was thus a method to gain some benefit from the slave population (3/5 of it, at least) without having to actually let them vote. Given that slavery is no longer around, the original reason for it is basically gone. Check out James Madison's statement on the subject in his notes on the convention:

      "There was one difficulty however of a serious nature attending an immediate choice by the people. The right of suffrage was much more diffusive in the Northern than the Southern States; and the latter could have no influence in the election on the score of the Negroes. The substitution of electors obviated this difficulty and seemed on the whole to be liable to fewest objections."

      At any rate, I don't think the electoral college is particularly effective at what you describe. Oh, sure, it makes it so that presidents don't "pander" to California, New York, or Texas. But that's because they're so reliable in which party they vote for. If California was a swing state you can be darn sure that winning it would be priority #1 for any president. Florida has the same number of electors as New York and it gets tons of attention in presidential elections because of its status as a swing state, as it's the largest such state.

      Instead, it makes swing states paramount. So really, all the electoral college does is move the "pandering" from California/New York/Texas/Florida to Florida/Pennsylvania/Ohio/North Carolina. Presidential candidates still do a lot of pandering and focus on specific states, and I am not sure that the fact the pandering has simply been shifted is really that much of an accomplishment.

      Nor do I think that a popular vote would make it so you only have to win California and New York. Together, they form 15.8% of the electoral college, and 18.2% of the population. So that's an increase, but not that much of one (admittedly, if you expunge those not eligible for voting from the populations of both states and the US as a whole, it might be a different percentage, but is probably about the same). So their importance is only slightly increased.

      Of course, the original reason no longer being in effect doesn't mean some new reason might not have emerged in the meantime to warrant keeping it. But to be honest, the primary advantage I see of the electoral college is that it makes recounts much simpler, as you only have to do it for that particular state or states rather than the whole country. I am not sure that is sufficient reason to keep it.

      Originally posted by rogue06 View Post
      As I've said before the left has become the Boy Who Cried Wolf wrt Trump to the point that if something really big ever did surface many people will simply ignore it because of all the histrionics in the past.
      Oh yes, that's actually a major concern of mine, that if something legitimately big does come out about Trump--which I think is not unlikely--people won't take it seriously because wolf has been cried so many times.

      Comment


      • #63
        Originally posted by Tassman View Post
        No the reason Hillary lost the election, but NOT the popular vote, is because Putin meddled in the 2016 election with the express purpose of helping Trump and hurting Hillary's chances...as determined by US Intel Agencies and the Senate Committee.
        Actually, at least according to Mueller's first indictment of some Russians (the one that blew up in his face when they showed up), they were "engaged in operations primarily intended to communicate derogatory information about Hillary Clinton" but not to the exclusive benefit of Trump since they were also trying "to support Bernie Sanders." So much for your "express purpose of helping Trump."

        I'm always still in trouble again

        "You're by far the worst poster on TWeb" and "TWeb's biggest liar" --starlight (the guy who says Stalin was a right-winger)
        "Overall I would rate the withdrawal from Afghanistan as by far the best thing Biden's done" --Starlight
        "Of course, human life begins at fertilization that’s not the argument." --Tassman

        Comment


        • #64
          Originally posted by rogue06 View Post
          Actually, at least according to Mueller's first indictment of some Russians (the one that blew up in his face when they showed up), they were "engaged in operations primarily intended to communicate derogatory information about Hillary Clinton" but not to the exclusive benefit of Trump since they were also trying "to support Bernie Sanders." So much for your "express purpose of helping Trump."
          If Hillary didn't have so much freakin' TRUE derogatory information to transmit....

          The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.

          Comment


          • #65
            Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post
            If Hillary didn't have so much freakin' TRUE derogatory information to transmit....

            And according to the indictment the Russians spent "thousands" of dollars every month for advertising on social media. According to Facebook they were spending around $100,000 on Facebook and Instagram combined -- a drop in the bucket in a presidential campaign. Further, again according to Facebook, most of the time they showed up in a person's news feed was after the election (with only 44% before the election and 56% after it) and 25% of them were seen by nobody at all.

            What's more, concerning these ads Facebook reported that, "the vast majority [of them] didn't specifically reference the U.S. presidential election, voting or a particular candidate."

            I'm always still in trouble again

            "You're by far the worst poster on TWeb" and "TWeb's biggest liar" --starlight (the guy who says Stalin was a right-winger)
            "Overall I would rate the withdrawal from Afghanistan as by far the best thing Biden's done" --Starlight
            "Of course, human life begins at fertilization that’s not the argument." --Tassman

            Comment


            • #66
              Originally posted by rogue06 View Post
              Actually, at least according to Mueller's first indictment of some Russians (the one that blew up in his face when they showed up), they were "engaged in operations primarily intended to communicate derogatory information about Hillary Clinton" but not to the exclusive benefit of Trump since they were also trying "to support Bernie Sanders." So much for your "express purpose of helping Trump."
              This has been the underlying problem throughout. The Republican-controlled Senate panel said it supports US Intel findings that Russia interfered in the 2016 presidential election to help elect Donald Trump and to hurt Hillary. Director of National Intelligence Dan Coats warned Friday of the intensifying threat of cyber-attacks against US infrastructure. He called Russia “the most aggressive foreign” actor in attempts to disrupt and divide America.

              https://www.vox.com/2018/7/13/175704...ts-trump-putin

              And, thanks to Evangelicals, Putin is succeeding in disrupting and dividing and isolating America. Trump defends Putin yet refers to the EU as the “foe. Putin’s agenda has long been to dismantle NATO and Trump called it “obsolete”. Putin was expelled from the G7 and Trump think he should be allowed back. And yet, he can do no wrong to some.
              “He felt that his whole life was a kind of dream and he sometimes wondered whose it was and whether they were enjoying it.” - Douglas Adams.

              Comment


              • #67
                Originally posted by Faber View Post
                Or Grover Cleveland.

                Comment


                • #68
                  Originally posted by rogue06 View Post
                  And according to the indictment the Russians spent "thousands" of dollars every month for advertising on social media. According to Facebook they were spending around $100,000 on Facebook and Instagram combined -- a drop in the bucket in a presidential campaign. Further, again according to Facebook, most of the time they showed up in a person's news feed was after the election (with only 44% before the election and 56% after it) and 25% of them were seen by nobody at all.

                  What's more, concerning these ads Facebook reported that, "the vast majority [of them] didn't specifically reference the U.S. presidential election, voting or a particular candidate."
                  Your focus on spending is misguided. In cyber warfare, most of the work is done at home base, off the grid, under the radar.

                  Jim
                  My brethren, do not hold your faith in our glorious Lord Jesus Christ with an attitude of personal favoritism. James 2:1

                  If anyone thinks himself to be religious, and yet does not  bridle his tongue but deceives his own heart, this man’s religion is worthless James 1:26

                  This you know, my beloved brethren. But everyone must be quick to hear, slow to speak and slow to anger; James 1:19

                  Comment


                  • #69
                    Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post
                    Don't you wish now that she had won in 2016 rather than being embarrassed by having voted in a treasonous con man? No, not yet? Still got the blinders on do you?

                    Comment


                    • #70
                      Originally posted by JimL View Post
                      Don't you wish now that she had won in 2016 rather than being embarrassed by having voted in a treasonous con man? No, not yet? Still got the blinders on do you?
                      As opposed to someone who is too dumb to know how to handle classified information and provided our enemies with tons of intel, due to incompetence?
                      "The man from the yacht thought he was the first to find England; I thought I was the first to find Europe. I did try to found a heresy of my own; and when I had put the last touches to it, I discovered that it was orthodoxy."
                      GK Chesterton; Orthodoxy

                      Comment


                      • #71
                        Originally posted by lilpixieofterror View Post
                        As opposed to someone who is too dumb to know how to handle classified information and provided our enemies with tons of intel, due to incompetence?
                        As opposed to Trump who actually divulged classified info to the Russian Foriegn Minister and Ambassador/spy to the U.S. that he secretly brought into the oval office to have a laugh over his firing of James Comey. Gee, I wonder what they talked about during their secret one on one meeting in Helsinki. Trump was probably getting his instructions from his boss.

                        Comment


                        • #72
                          Originally posted by lilpixieofterror View Post
                          As opposed to someone who is too dumb to know how to handle classified information and provided our enemies with tons of intel, due to incompetence?
                          Hillary wasn't too dumb to know how to handle classified information. Rules are for the little people.
                          Enter the Church and wash away your sins. For here there is a hospital and not a court of law. Do not be ashamed to enter the Church; be ashamed when you sin, but not when you repent. – St. John Chrysostom

                          Veritas vos Liberabit<>< Learn Greek <>< Look here for an Orthodox Church in America<><Ancient Faith Radio
                          sigpic
                          I recommend you do not try too hard and ...research as little as possible. Such weighty things give me a headache. - Shunyadragon, Baha'i apologist

                          Comment


                          • #73
                            Originally posted by One Bad Pig View Post
                            Hillary wasn't too dumb to know how to handle classified information. Rules are for the little people.
                            She broke a rule, she isn't a traitor like your choice. Yes, I know, you still don't get it, and I don't expect that you ever will, but you were conned and now you just can't ever admit to that. It's obvious with all of you, no matter what Trump does you will continue to defend him. Like he said, and he was right, he could shoot someone on fifth avenue in broad daylight, and you'd still remain loyal.

                            http://mobile.twitter.com/nydailynew...194304/photo/1
                            Last edited by JimL; 07-17-2018, 11:27 AM.

                            Comment


                            • #74
                              Originally posted by JimL View Post
                              She broke a rule, she isn't a traitor like your choice. Yes, I know, you still don't get it, and I don't expect that you ever will, but you were conned and now you just can't ever admit to that. It's obvious with all of you, no matter what Trump does you will continue to defend him. Like he said, and he was right, he could shoot someone on fifth avenue in broad daylight, and you'd still remain loyal.
                              That was quite a 'vent to atmosphere', Jim... ya feel better now? Might try some Gas-X next time.
                              The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.

                              Comment


                              • #75
                                Originally posted by JimL View Post
                                Don't you wish now that she had won in 2016 rather than being embarrassed by having voted in a treasonous con man? No, not yet? Still got the blinders on do you?
                                I'm glad she's not POTUS, and I'm glad SCOTUS is going the direction it is. As for Trump? It's not the first time God used an ass to accomplish his purpose.
                                The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.

                                Comment

                                Related Threads

                                Collapse

                                Topics Statistics Last Post
                                Started by little_monkey, Yesterday, 04:19 PM
                                6 responses
                                44 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post whag
                                by whag
                                 
                                Started by whag, 03-26-2024, 04:38 PM
                                42 responses
                                228 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post whag
                                by whag
                                 
                                Started by rogue06, 03-26-2024, 11:45 AM
                                24 responses
                                104 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post Ronson
                                by Ronson
                                 
                                Started by Hypatia_Alexandria, 03-26-2024, 09:21 AM
                                32 responses
                                173 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post Hypatia_Alexandria  
                                Started by Hypatia_Alexandria, 03-26-2024, 08:34 AM
                                72 responses
                                280 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post JimL
                                by JimL
                                 
                                Working...
                                X