Page 47 of 59 FirstFirst ... 38394041424344454647484950515253545556 ... LastLast
Results 691 to 705 of 872

Thread: The US 2020 Presidential Election

  1. #691
    Senior Contributor
    Join Date
    03 Sep 17
    Posts
    2,061
    Quote Originally Posted by snapper View Post
    The US intelligence said that Muscovy did its best to help Trumpkin. That's the way it goes in a two horse race; if you hinder one horse you are helping the other.
    Oh horse puckey! You don't know shit about intel eval. US intel DID NOT SAY THAT. All US intel said was that they hindered Clinton!

    Quote Originally Posted by snapper View Post
    You cannot prove that; nobody can. It is therefore conjecture at best.
    YES I CAN! THE GODDAMNED POLLS!

    Like I said, cannot ACCPET FACTS, just RHETORIC!
    Last edited by WABs_OOE; 02 Jul 20, at 19:23.

  2. #692
    Administrator
    Lei Feng Protege
    Defense Professional
    Join Date
    23 Aug 05
    Location
    Arlington, VA
    Posts
    14,317
    actually, I don't know what the practical difference is.

    assuming that Putin was just doing his best to make life hell for HRC -- what would he have done differently had his intent been for Trump to win?
    There is a cult of ignorance in the United States, and there has always been. The strain of anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that "My ignorance is just as good as your knowledge."- Isaac Asimov

  3. #693
    Senior Contributor
    Join Date
    03 Sep 17
    Posts
    2,061
    Quote Originally Posted by astralis View Post
    actually, I don't know what the practical difference is.

    assuming that Putin was just doing his best to make life hell for HRC -- what would he have done differently had his intent been for Trump to win?
    You're joking, right? Putin would have done what all the other leaders of the world have done. Start offerring contracts to Pro-Trump supporters.

  4. #694
    Senior Contributor
    Join Date
    12 Aug 08
    Location
    UK/Europe
    Posts
    5,682
    Quote Originally Posted by WABs_OOE View Post
    Oh horse puckey! You don't know shit about intel eval. US intel DID NOT SAY THAT. All US intel said was that they hindered Clinton!
    How come they also hacked the RNC but did not release any damaging information from them? I cannot believe you are arguing this when Trumpkin hasn't even complained about Muscovite bounties on US troops... That apparently is the press's fault.


    Quote Originally Posted by WABs_OOE View Post
    YES I CAN! THE GODDAMNED POLLS!
    You cannot prove what Putin or anyone else was thinking by citing poll numbers.

  5. #695
    Senior Contributor
    Join Date
    03 Sep 17
    Posts
    2,061
    Quote Originally Posted by snapper View Post
    How come they also hacked the RNC but did not release any damaging information from them?
    Because they did NOT hacked the RNC you dope. They tried but failed. Do you even know how they hacked the DNC? Go ahead. I'm waiting.

    Quote Originally Posted by snapper View Post
    I cannot believe you are arguing this when Trumpkin hasn't even complained about Muscovite bounties on US troops... That apparently is the press's fault.
    Red herring.

    Quote Originally Posted by snapper View Post
    You cannot prove what Putin or anyone else was thinking by citing poll numbers.
    Oh hell, yes, I can. Every single one of us, you, me, Trump, had the same god damned piece of intel. They ARE STARING AT YOU IN THE FACE, YOU DOPE! Putin was an intelligence officer. He evaluates intel and what does that intel say, you freaking dopy denier. Nice try tying to ignore the intel that is proven to be available to everyone.

    So you are telling me that Putin, an experienced intel Colonel, ignored the best intel with the highest confidence available. Yeah, better keep sailing in your non-existent boat. There WAS EXACTLY ZERO INTEL that suggested Trump would win. Find me one piece of data, one piece of intel that Putin could not ignore that would suggest Trump would win. Go ahead. I'll wait.

    Hell, even Trump said on National TV after his win that he didn't expected to win. He thought it would be close but not close enough.
    Last edited by WABs_OOE; 02 Jul 20, at 21:39.

  6. #696
    Defense ProfessionalSenior Contributor tbm3fan's Avatar
    Join Date
    01 Nov 09
    Location
    San Francisco Bay Area
    Posts
    4,270
    I love watching to two of you, pretty much on opposite ends of the planet, going back and forth about the United States. Although not quite enough to distract me from the imbecile currently in office. Ok, now who has service?

  7. #697
    Senior Contributor GVChamp's Avatar
    Join Date
    26 Aug 06
    Location
    Chicago
    Posts
    1,731
    Quote Originally Posted by tbm3fan View Post
    Like I said this say as much about you as it does about them. You made the reference to Brownshirts ( you forgot the Nazi roots) for some reason. As for the middle age folks I see they don't have shoes now and seek change, their way, by making donations apparently after waving their guns at others. Those poor people which sounds like you identify with. Yeah, so whatever you say...
    The insistence that Trump supporters are attempting to intimidate elected officials with guns was not made by me, and I am quite familiar that the Brownshirts were the street violence arm of the Nazi Party.

    Two people sitting on their own property and responding to a group of protestors charging into a privately held, gated community are not attempting to intimidate elected officials through armed resistance. They just aren't.

    I am not sitting on my porch waving a damned rifle, but I think you might find gated communities with armed security becoming substantially more popular if residential zone protests become de rigueur. I certainly am not living in an open suburban neighborhood if at any given point dozens of protestors may show up with little warning and no police presence. A small risk in a given year, but unacceptably large over the course of 20-30 years given the rather extreme cost.
    "The great questions of the day will not be settled by means of speeches and majority decisions but by iron and blood"-Otto Von Bismarck

  8. #698
    Senior Contributor
    Join Date
    12 Aug 08
    Location
    UK/Europe
    Posts
    5,682
    Quote Originally Posted by WABs_OOE View Post
    Because they did NOT hacked the RNC you dope. They tried but failed. Do you even know how they hacked the DNC? Go ahead. I'm waiting.
    https://www.wired.com/2017/01/russia...director-says/

    Quote Originally Posted by WABs_OOE View Post
    Red herring.
    You do not get to decide what is or is not a 'red herring'. The US Commander in chief knows that Moscow is offering bounties for US soldiers and cannot bring himself to say boo to Putin who help him get elected... Nothing strange there right? Oh just the other day Senate strips provision from intelligence bill requiring campaigns to report foreign election help... all 'coincidence' right?


    Quote Originally Posted by WABs_OOE View Post
    Oh hell, yes, I can. Every single one of us, you, me, Trump, had the same god damned piece of intel. They ARE STARING AT YOU IN THE FACE, YOU DOPE! Putin was an intelligence officer. He evaluates intel and what does that intel say, you freaking dopy denier. Nice try tying to ignore the intel that is proven to be available to everyone.
    Look you can know every detail about the physical circumstances surrounding any event but you can never know exactly the thoughts of the people involved. You may wish to imply thought onto from the events but that is conjectural. You can never know for 100% sure.

  9. #699
    Senior Contributor
    Join Date
    03 Sep 17
    Posts
    2,061
    Do you even read your own links? Old domains that were not being used. In other words, the Russians hacked into dead data.

    Quote Originally Posted by snapper View Post
    You do not get to decide what is or is not a 'red herring'. The US Commander in chief knows that Moscow is offering bounties for US soldiers and cannot bring himself to say boo to Putin who help him get elected... Nothing strange there right? Oh just the other day Senate strips provision from intelligence bill requiring campaigns to report foreign election help... all 'coincidence' right?
    It's a damned red herring when it has nothing to do with the subject being discussed.

    Quote Originally Posted by snapper View Post
    Look you can know every detail about the physical circumstances surrounding any event but you can never know exactly the thoughts of the people involved. You may wish to imply thought onto from the events but that is conjectural. You can never know for 100% sure.
    Come off it, you're in the fog and you know it. Putin was an intel officer and he evaluates intel. There's not one piece of evidence that suggested Trump was going to win. Not a single one. Only a stupid, dumb, crazy nutcase would believe otherwisse. Trump may be all three but even he didn't believe he could win. Putin is none of the those things. If you belive so, then you are worst than Trump.

    I know my enemy. Putin stood against me on the Wall. I know how he's trained. I know how he's trained to think. I know how he reads us, especially after NATO's PHP when Cold War Officers from both sides written down their thoughts. You, however, read nothing and understood nothing.

    Your pitiful stand is that Putin engineered Trump's win. That is more laughable than Trump's hairpiece. Putin is good but he's not that good.
    Last edited by WABs_OOE; 03 Jul 20, at 18:34.

  10. #700
    Senior Contributor
    Join Date
    12 Aug 08
    Location
    UK/Europe
    Posts
    5,682
    Quote Originally Posted by WABs_OOE View Post
    Do you even read your own links? Old domains that were not being used. In other words, the Russians hacked into dead data.
    So now you agree that the RNC was hacked but argue they decided not to release it because it was not relevant?

    Quote Originally Posted by WABs_OOE View Post
    It's a damned red herring when it has nothing to do with the subject being discussed.
    It is relevant... the people who Trump asked for help, helped him, whom he has never said a bad word about and you cannot put the dots together?


    Quote Originally Posted by WABs_OOE View Post
    Come off it, you're in the fog and you know it. Putin was an intel officer and he evaluates intel. There's not one piece of evidence that suggested Trump was going to win. Not a single one. Only a stupid, dumb, crazy nutcase would believe otherwisse. Trump may be all three but even he didn't believe he could win. Putin is none of the those things. If you belive so, then you are worst than Trump.
    I am not saying that Trumpkin believed he would win - or that Putin did either for that matter. I am saying that neither you nor I can know what they thought. Putin may have to wished to just 'stir the water' but equally he acted to help Trump.

  11. #701
    Senior Contributor
    Join Date
    03 Sep 17
    Posts
    2,061
    Quote Originally Posted by snapper View Post
    So now you agree that the RNC was hacked but argue they decided not to release it because it was not relevant?
    No, I do not agree that the RNC was hacked. The old domains were not actively protected and therefore, were of no value. Yeah, you broke into my old house but I no longer live there and it's empty and broken down.

    Quote Originally Posted by snapper View Post
    It is relevant... the people who Trump asked for help, helped him, whom he has never said a bad word about and you cannot put the dots together?
    It is YOU who cannot put the dots together. In fact, you're seeing spots where there are none. Obviously, you don't even read up on the situation. Trump has a ridiculus short attention span. If you don't keep hammering the point, he would not notice and forget. That is even obvious from his tweets that he don't know what he tweeted the day before and contradicts himself almost daily. Throughout ALL the reports, the bounty intel WAS NEVER hammered in.

    In any case, NOTHING TO DO WITH PUTIN PUTTING TRUMP IN THE WHITE HOUSE. RED HERRING!

    Also, has it occurred to you that Trump is too damned stupid to be Putin's agent?

    Quote Originally Posted by snapper View Post
    I am not saying that Trumpkin believed he would win - or that Putin did either for that matter. I am saying that neither you nor I can know what they thought. Putin may have to wished to just 'stir the water' but equally he acted to help Trump.
    Oh for Pete sakes, now, you're tap dancing. I know EXACTLY how Putin thought of the election. That Clinton will win. There is absolutely zero doubt about it. The intel allows for no other conclusion. I'm not trying to read if Putin thought of Trump sucking his dick or not. I'm stating outright that I know EXACTLY how Putin read that intel and the only conclusion he could have gotten.
    Last edited by WABs_OOE; 04 Jul 20, at 18:03.

  12. #702
    Global Moderator
    Comrade Commissar
    TopHatter's Avatar
    Join Date
    03 Sep 03
    Posts
    17,652
    Can Trump's anti-mail-voting crusade hurt him in key states?

    DES MOINES, Iowa (AP) — President Donald Trump's campaign and allies have blocked efforts to expand mail-in voting, forcing an awkward confrontation with top GOP election officials who are promoting the opposite in their states.

    The rare dissonance between Trump and other Republican elected officials also reflects another reality the president will not concede: Many in his party believe expanding mail-in voting could ultimately help him.

    Trump's campaign has intervened directly in Ohio, while allies have fired warning shots in Iowa and Georgia, aimed at blunting Republican secretaries of state in places that could be competitive in November.

    “There is a dimension to legislatures underfunding or undercutting election officials that could ironically backfire and hurt Republicans,” said Michael McDonald, a University of Florida professor and director of the nonpartisan United States Election Project.

    Action by these three secretaries of state, who are the top election officials in their states, was designed to make ballot access easier during the coronavirus pandemic. Trump has repeatedly made the unfounded claim that voting by mail could lead to fraud so extensive it could undermine the integrity of the presidential election.

    In Ohio last month, senior Trump campaign adviser Bob Paduchik weighed in on Secretary of State Frank LaRose's proposal, insisting to GOP legislative leaders that they drop a provision to allow voters to file absentee ballot applications online, according to Republican officials involved in the discussions. The GOP officials spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss internal communications regarding the legislation.

    Ohio already allows the secretary of state to send absentee ballot requests to every registered voter. The provision was aimed at allowing a faster processing option, while making mail-in application processing available.

    Paduchik, Trump's 2016 Iowa campaign director, insisted there be no substantive changes ahead of the November election in Ohio, which Trump won in 2016 by 8 percentage points under the existing rules, according to the GOP officials.

    Trump campaign aides did not respond to requests for comment.

    “This bill didn't do everything I wanted it to do. In fact, there's several things I wanted to get done that are not included in this bill," LaRose said in a video statement this month, promising to try ”to get some of those other changes made in the future."

    Trump has railed against expanding vote by mail, arguing without evidence that the practice, despite being the primary voting method in Colorado, Hawaii, Oregon, Washington and Utah, is ripe for widespread fraud.

    On Sunday, he renewed the criticism, tweeting “Mail-In Voting, on the other hand, will lead to the most corrupt Election is USA history. Bad things happen with Mail-Ins.”

    That claim is part of a pattern. He also has incorrectly equated a secretary of state widely distributing absentee ballot requests with the ballots themselves in Michigan.

    Last week, after Iowa voters broke a 26-year-old statewide primary election turnout record, the Iowa Senate's GOP majority pressed to bar Secretary of State Paul Pate from sending absentee ballots to all 2 million registered voters this fall, as he did before the June 3 primary.

    Republican Gov. Kim Reynolds, a Trump ally, last week signed compromise legislation requiring Pate and his successors to seek approval from a partisan legislative council for similar future actions. The GOP-controlled council unanimously rejected Pate's request to widely send absentee ballot applications this fall.

    “My goal was to protect Iowa voters and poll workers while finding ways to conduct a clean and fair election," Pate said last month. “I stand by my decisions.”

    His Georgia counterpart, Brad Raffensperger, faced a similar fate after he, too, sent absentee ballot applications to nearly 7 million registered voters ahead of the state’s June primary. Although Raffensperger objected to proposed limits being put on his authority, legislation to do that died when the legislature adjourned and after he said he would not repeat the move this fall.

    Trump carried Georgia, Iowa and Ohio comfortably in 2016. To win again, he would likely need to match his sizable winning margins in their rural counties, home to many in his older, white base.

    Presumptive Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden has backed mail-in voting, saying it would make it easier for people to vote this November amid the coronavirus pandemic.

    Some longtime GOP activists say expanded vote by mail is essential for older voters who are accustomed to voting in person but hesitant to during the pandemic and who are unfamiliar with the process.

    Ann Trimble Ray, a veteran Iowa GOP activist, voted in June by mail and says Pate made the right call, especially for the many older voters in her rural home in Sac County, which Trump carried with 72% of the 2016 vote.

    “Reducing their exposure by voting absentee, we think, was a considerate thing to do," she said. “I was grateful for Secretary of State Pate's mailing and encouragement for absentee voting."

    Consolidation of rural polling places, shrunken election staff and long lines may deter rural voters vital to Trump, said University of California Irvine professor Richard Hasen, chair of a committee of U.S. scholars that has recommended changes ahead of the 2020 elections.

    “The voters Trump is hurting are likely his own when he’s making these comments against mail-in balloting," said Hasen, “because it’s a safe and generally effective way to cast a ballot, especially in the midst of a pandemic."

    The check on ballot request steps in Iowa and Georgia also could threaten rural votes from being counted, based on McDonald's study.

    Though Ohio counts all mail-in ballots postmarked by Election Day, a number of absentee ballots came in late for the March 17 primary, including 4,000 in Greene County in southeast Ohio, a county where Trump won 60% of the vote.

    Understaffed election offices and longer processing time between rural areas and metro postal centers could leave some rural voters unable to mail their ballots on time, McDonald said.

    “I’m pretty convinced that ballot request step is hurting rural voters," McDonald said.

    ___

    He's so fucking stupid that the the person he'd hypothetically "shoot on 5th Avenue and not lose voters"....would be one of his own supporters.
    TwentyFiveFortyFive

  13. #703
    Senior Contributor GVChamp's Avatar
    Join Date
    26 Aug 06
    Location
    Chicago
    Posts
    1,731
    Quote Originally Posted by tbm3fan View Post
    Care to list all the news organizations in your opinion that are both left and right of center. As a control throw in a few in the center to get the needed baseline.

    I do hope you realize that the lead of MSN is interchangeable with another three letter word that rhymes with BOX.
    I missed this before, but the "centrist" news of note are effectively the newswires (Reuters/AP).
    Fox is a garbage network, along with most of talk radio. I watched O'Reilly back when I was in high school because I had a few friend that liked him, but it is just trash. The only exceptions I would make are Chris Wallace and Tucker Carlson (because the former is a pretty stand-up guy and the latter makes interesting unorthodox points), and that their news reporting isn't necessarily fictional (it's the editorial bent).

    My personal sources of news/editorializing are Twitter, AP, NPR, 538, Marginal Revolution, Vox, and a local paper. I'd read WSJ, FT, and NYT, but they are behind pay-walls.

    But the biggest issue are the social media networks, because they can easily lock you into an ideological echo chamber. It signal boosts certain stories, twists other ones, outright makes up crap, and does not report on anything that goes against the Hive Mind's narrative (because those stories don't get shared). It's pretty important to at least tap into the other bubbles so you aren't blind, and it's pretty important to listen with a sympathetic, open-mind, or else you obviously are just going to tune out.

    Also, it's important to have a great big heaping teaspoon of intellectual humility re: "stuff we don't know" and "stuff I don't know." We've spent the last several decades chasing a dark matter theory that may not exist and might just come down to us STILL not understanding how gravity works despite having centuries to play around with that concept, with a lot of money and a lot of brilliant people and a lot of controlled experiments trying to figure it out....so I'm not sure why anyone is convinced they know what optimal tax policy is when we haven't even had an income tax for 100 years.
    "The great questions of the day will not be settled by means of speeches and majority decisions but by iron and blood"-Otto Von Bismarck

  14. #704
    Senior Contributor
    Join Date
    12 Aug 08
    Location
    UK/Europe
    Posts
    5,682
    Quote Originally Posted by WABs_OOE View Post
    No, I do not agree that the RNC was hacked. The old domains were not actively protected and therefore, were of no value. Yeah, you broke into my old house but I no longer live there and it's empty and broken down.
    So they were given the keys to your old house and ransacked it while you still owned it?

    Quote Originally Posted by WABs_OOE View Post
    It is YOU who cannot put the dots together. In fact, you're seeing spots where there are none. Obviously, you don't even read up on the situation. Trump has a ridiculus short attention span. If you don't keep hammering the point, he would not notice and forget. That is even obvious from his tweets that he don't know what he tweeted the day before and contradicts himself almost daily. Throughout ALL the reports, the bounty intel WAS NEVER hammered in.

    In any case, NOTHING TO DO WITH PUTIN PUTTING TRUMP IN THE WHITE HOUSE. RED HERRING!

    Also, has it occurred to you that Trump is too damned stupid to be Putin's agent?
    Ok let's say that Trumpkin did not believe Moscow would help him in the election although it was said clearly to his son by the Aglarov agent "Russia's support for your father" remember from the meeting with the Muscovite lawyer? The one that they said was about 'adoption'. Let's say Trumpkin was never 'briefed' on the 'bounties for US soldiers in Afghanistan' - well he has been now... Why has he done nothing about it? Is it like Helsinki where he consistently truly believes Putin over all US intelligence? I mean he genuinely just believes Putin every time? Do you believe that feasible?



    Quote Originally Posted by WABs_OOE View Post
    Oh for Pete sakes, now, you're tap dancing. I know EXACTLY how Putin thought of the election. That Clinton will win. There is absolutely zero doubt about it. The intel allows for no other conclusion. I'm not trying to read if Putin thought of Trump sucking his dick or not. I'm stating outright that I know EXACTLY how Putin read that intel and the only conclusion he could have gotten.
    I do not know how to tap dance. What I said was that your statement that Putin just wanted stir conflict withing the US system is conjecture. You CANNOT as a matter of epistemological logic 100% KNOW that to be a fact. You can argue that the known facts imply that but you cannot know what Putin was thinking. Why? Well if you could the 'person' (or being) thinking it would not be just a 'Putin'; you would be part of the entity thinking it so it would perhaps be an 'OOE-Putin' as opposed to being just a 'Putin'. You can argue the facts impy (as I do with regarding 'Muscovy supports Trumpkin - I mean Putin admitted it) but you cannot that you 100% know another persons thought. You did say you knew it and I merely dispute the possibility of such 'knowledge'. Pretty simple really...

  15. #705
    Senior Contributor Oracle's Avatar
    Join Date
    12 Jul 13
    Location
    Singapore
    Posts
    6,712
    Kanye West announces he's running for US President

    Everybody's taking chances. Maybe I should consider running for PM in 2024. Who knows, I might even win, just like Sir Donald Trump.
    Politicians are elected to serve...far too many don't see it that way - Albany Rifles! || Loyalty to country always. Loyalty to government, when it deserves it - Mark Twain! || I am a far left millennial!

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 4 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 4 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. French Presidential Election
    By kato in forum International Politics
    Replies: 136
    Last Post: 02 Jul 17,, 00:17
  2. 2012 Presidential Election - The Ups and Downs
    By TopHatter in forum American Politics & Economy
    Replies: 1237
    Last Post: 24 Nov 13,, 04:28
  3. dead colts of presidential election
    By luffaman in forum American Politics & Economy
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 28 Jun 08,, 02:17
  4. 2000 US Presidential Election
    By Shek in forum American Politics & Economy
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: 19 May 08,, 04:05
  5. Mexico's Presidential Election's over...
    By ProzacNation in forum International Politics
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 04 Jul 06,, 11:43

Share this thread with friends:

Share this thread with friends:

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •