The Next President is...

[brickhistory]

"1980 called.  It wants its Cold War back."  President Barack Obama, 2012 debate

Infamous "reset" button with SecState Hillary Clinton to Russian Foreign Minister

"I'll have more room to maneuver once I've won re-election." President Obama to President Medvedev

And, the winning entry, the Obama Administration knew of the Russian shenanigans but chose not to react because it didn't want to affect the outcome of the 2016  election. Meaning to cast any shadow on a Hillary win.

 

And what, exactly, do any of you propose to thump Vlad and Company?  

 

Finally, ditto to the GOP of today.  Democrat-lite and toothless when it comes to getting anything done that it promised, campaigned on, and most importantly, to them, raised money from..

Which is I why I wrote and told 'em to pack sand.  There is no difference between the parties; we are paying for their livin' large lifestyles.

A pox on 'em both.

[drewpey]

Democrats were wrong.  As was Bush before them.  We've given them plenty of opportunity, but Russia has demonstrated they cannot be trusted time and again.  We should work to exile them, starting with enforcing the overwhelming bipartisan sanctions that were approved by the House and Senate.  Spread the Magnitsky Act around the world, and turn the oligarchs into the pariahs they long to be.  Keep squeezing until something changes.

 

[matmacwc]

6 hours ago, Vertigo said:

Meanwhile a spending plan has been approved that'll cost us a trillion dollars in new debt. But don't worry Republicans have announced a plan to pretend to be fiscally conservative again the moment a Democrat takes office.

I hate this bill.

[tac airlifter]

15 hours ago, drewpey said:

What happened that made you fall in love with Russia?  Was it their invasion of Crimea?  Their involvement in Syria? Them violating North Korean Sanctions?  Meddling in our democracy? Harboring Edward Snowden?  Feeding propaganda to undermine the west through Wikileaks?  Violating nuclear treaties? .......

You guys are beyond hope.

Drewpey, do you think this antogonistic approach makes anyone want to listen or engage?  This is an Internet forum for discussion.  Going guns hot on bros with a different perspective is antithetical to discussion.

[di1630]

Why no one other than the left listens to the left:

“If you don’t think Trump helped the Russians hack the election you must love Russia and Putin ”..goes with..”you want a secure border, you must hate Mexicans”..or..”you are against illegal immigrants, you must hate all immigrants who ever came here”....”you didn’t like Hillary, you’re sexist!”

I’m middle of the road, don’t like the dems or GOP diehards, but the left has gone full retard all over the map whereas at least my GOP friends were predictable in their “Obama wants my guns” argument.

[Lord Ratner]

Odds on a memo getting leaked just went up...I guess the Democrats have to check with the FBI and DOJ before a memo goes out. Republicans... Not so much.

Makes it so partisan and petty when it could be one more step closer to over. But that wouldn't be reality TV enough for Donny-Boy.

What you just said is made up. The Republican memo was absolutely vetted by the DOJ and FBI.

[brickhistory]

4 hours ago, Lord Ratner said:

On ‎2‎/‎9‎/‎2018 at 8:54 PM, 17D_guy said:

Odds on a memo getting leaked just went up...I guess the Democrats have to check with the FBI and DOJ before a memo goes out. Republicans... Not so much.

Makes it so partisan and petty when it could be one more step closer to over. But that wouldn't be reality TV enough for Donny-Boy.

What you just said is made up. The Republican memo was absolutely vetted by the DOJ and FBI.

Who both objected strenuously against its release.

Unfortunately, their overt political actions regarding Hillary and Trump has tainted their word.  Were their objections really based on revealing sources and methods or not wanting their dirty laundry aired in public?  Their actions have made that a not quite so clear cut issue.

As for the Democrat memo, they, most likely, included really sensitive sources and methods info making it nearly impossible to release by POTUS.

Or he could simply be playing politics as well

I say release it.  Show the Democrats he'll call their bluff.  If sensitive information gets blown (sts), so be it.  

[nsplayr]

I agree with Justin Amash here, and we don’t agree on a lot.

My preference on these stupid memos is:

1. Release none, let investigations play out without needless Congressional partisan posturing.

...big gap...

2. Release the memos from both sides and let the public decide what seems more credible.

...Grand Canyon...

3. Release only one side and suppress the other.

Unfortunately as of today, we’re apparently  going with door number 3.

[drewpey]

9 hours ago, tac airlifter said:

Drewpey, do you think this antogonistic approach makes anyone want to listen or engage?  This is an Internet forum for discussion.  Going guns hot on bros with a different perspective is antithetical to discussion.

I am participating in the discussion, and presenting facts to support my stances.  Some people feel attacked by facts and when confronted with hypocrisy, that's not my fault.

Politically speaking the military is an echo chamber.  So many republicans go around making snide remarks about democrats because they think everyone in ear shot has the same views they do.  I've sat quiet for many years, and now I'm to the point where I'm willing to engage with most folks on politics if they want to openly talk about it.  I'm finding that the military is filled with a lot of loud and politically uninformed people.  I have yet to flip someone politically, but I have found that educating people of the facts, and explaining the democratic stance at least softens their views, and makes them realize there is in fact some common ground for D, R and yes...even Libertarians to agree on.    Those in charge just want to divide us, say that Democrats want open borders (not true), to turn us into socialism (not true), run up huge debt (not true) and to gut the military (again, not true).  They benefit from the fact that those that listen to them aren't going to seek out the truth in their words and actions (and also that Democrats suck at unity and messaging, but we're working on it).

Those that become more entrenched in their views and use their interactions with me to verify their preconceived notions of democrats weren't going to do so differently if I used flowery language.  I guess I could be gentler for some of you, but it might be better for everyone if people (as the republicans say) stop being snowflakes.

[brickhistory]

How very tolerant of you.

[tac airlifter]

Telling people who disagree with your politics they are “beyond hope” is not ”presenting facts.”  It’s conjecture.  

[Kiloalpha]

50 minutes ago, drewpey said:

Politically speaking the military is an echo chamber.  So many republicans go around making snide remarks about democrats because they think everyone in ear shot has the same views they do.  I've sat quiet for many years, and now I'm to the point where I'm willing to engage with most folks on politics if they want to openly talk about it.  I'm finding that the military is filled with a lot of loud and politically uninformed people.  I have yet to flip someone politically, but I have found that educating people of the facts, and explaining the democratic stance at least softens their views, and makes them realize there is in fact some common ground for D, R and yes...even Libertarians to agree on.    Those in charge just want to divide us, say that Democrats want open borders (not true), to turn us into socialism (not true), run up huge debt (not true) and to gut the military (again, not true).  They benefit from the fact that those that listen to them aren't going to seek out the truth in their words and actions (and also that Democrats suck at unity and messaging, but we're working on it).

Those that become more entrenched in their views and use their interactions with me to verify their preconceived notions of democrats weren't going to do so differently if I used flowery language.  I guess I could be gentler for some of you, but it might be better for everyone if people (as the republicans say) stop being snowflakes.

I'm your huckleberry. Give me facts to support your key points you made in the following post:

1. Democrats aren't for open borders and open immigration
2. Democrats aren't advocating socialism
3. Democrats haven't ran up huge debts
4. Democrats don't want to "gut the military"

[matmacwc]

13 minutes ago, Kiloalpha said:

I'm your huckleberry. Give me facts to support your key points you made in the following post:

1. Democrats aren't for open borders and open immigration
2. Democrats aren't advocating socialism
3. Democrats haven't ran up huge debts
4. Democrats don't want to "gut the military"

No, that pretty much sums it up but the  Repubs aren't far behind with the debt thing anymore which is disappointing but I guess you have to give a little to make a deal.  I enjoy a little political debate as well but a lot of liberals I talk to usually default to name calling once you make a point that isn't emotional.  Republicans can come off as cold and uncaring when debating but I'm over it, that kind of sums up the difference for me though, a lot of leftist vote with their heart and righty's with their brains.  I also think politics are a religion for leftist, owing to their non-belief of traditional religions, once their party loses or is voted out, they lose their Vulcan minds due to that.

Edited February 12, 2018 by matmacwc

[17D_guy]

1 hour ago, Kiloalpha said:

I'm your huckleberry. Give me facts to support your key points you made in the following post:

1. Democrats aren't for open borders and open immigration
2. Democrats aren't advocating socialism
3. Democrats haven't ran up huge debts
4. Democrats don't want to "gut the military"

Not a Demo, but lets not act like 2-4 aren't pinnable on the "Conservatives" currently in office.

[17D_guy]

3 hours ago, drewpey said:

I am participating in the discussion, and presenting facts to support my stances.  Some people feel attacked by facts and when confronted with hypocrisy, that's not my fault.

Politically speaking the military is an echo chamber.  So many republicans go around making snide remarks about democrats because they think everyone in ear shot has the same views they do.  I've sat quiet for many years, and now I'm to the point where I'm willing to engage with most folks on politics if they want to openly talk about it.  I'm finding that the military is filled with a lot of loud and politically uninformed people.  I have yet to flip someone politically, but I have found that educating people of the facts, and explaining the democratic stance at least softens their views, and makes them realize there is in fact some common ground for D, R and yes...even Libertarians to agree on.    Those in charge just want to divide us, say that Democrats want open borders (not true), to turn us into socialism (not true), run up huge debt (not true) and to gut the military (again, not true).  They benefit from the fact that those that listen to them aren't going to seek out the truth in their words and actions (and also that Democrats suck at unity and messaging, but we're working on it).

Those that become more entrenched in their views and use their interactions with me to verify their preconceived notions of democrats weren't going to do so differently if I used flowery language.  I guess I could be gentler for some of you, but it might be better for everyone if people (as the republicans say) stop being snowflakes.

Going to say that this election has caused more office talk about politics that I'd seen in 20ish years.  A lot more liberals coworkers, and concerned conservatives than I'd thought were around. The die-hard conservatives aren't around as much as I thought they'd be...plus they're usually Guard.  Go figure.  I'm on staff...maybe it's an age thing.

[Kiloalpha]

14 minutes ago, 17D_guy said:

Not a Demo, but lets not act like 2-4 aren't pinnable on the "Conservatives" currently in office.

Trust me. I know better than anyone that Repubs are just as culpable. 

I'd contest #2, but grant you 3 and 4. 

[Vertigo]

13 hours ago, Lord Ratner said:

On 2/9/2018 at 10:54 PM, 17D_guy said:

Odds on a memo getting leaked just went up...I guess the Democrats have to check with the FBI and DOJ before a memo goes out. Republicans... Not so much.

Makes it so partisan and petty when it could be one more step closer to over. But that wouldn't be reality TV enough for Donny-Boy.

What you just said is made up. The Republican memo was absolutely vetted by the DOJ and FBI.

The looked at it yes. And they had this to say about it "...we have grave concerns about material omissions of fact that fundamentally impact the memo’s accuracy."

 

Meaning they said it is cherry picked to give the appearance other than what really happened.

[Lord Ratner]

The looked at it yes. And they had this to say about it "...we have grave concerns about material omissions of fact that fundamentally impact the memo’s accuracy."
 
Meaning they said it is cherry picked to give the appearance other than what really happened.

Which has zero bearing on what I said

[brickhistory]

19 minutes ago, Vertigo said:

The looked at it yes. And they had this to say about it "...we have grave concerns about material omissions of fact that fundamentally impact the memo’s accuracy."

 

Meaning they said it is cherry picked to give the appearance other than what really happened.

Both agencies were caught tipping the scales of justice(my opinion is with this options) and/or with the appearance of having done so.

And both agencies didn't want that information to go public.

Shocked, I tell you.  Shocked.

[busdriver]

Serious question: what would be a meaningful way of "dealing with" the Russians? Europe is in serious trouble without Russian energy, or no?

[drewpey]

On 2/11/2018 at 4:21 PM, Kiloalpha said:

I'm your huckleberry. Give me facts to support your key points you made in the following post:

1. Democrats aren't for open borders and open immigration
2. Democrats aren't advocating socialism
3. Democrats haven't ran up huge debts
4. Democrats don't want to "gut the military"

Democrats don’t want open borders.  The GOP website has a nice article outlining the Democratic stance over the past several years:

https://gop.com/dems-claim-to-be-pro-border-security-but-criticize-a-border-wall-rsr/

In 2013 a bipartisan senate bill was passed 68/32 and was ultimately shelved in the R-controlled House for not being comprehensive enough.  Several of the topics in that bill share current-day R talking points, to include more border security, expanding/upgrading the current fence, as well as shifting to a more merit-based system, and changing the lottery to focus on those already in the country, vs those who have never lived here.  Democrats have maintained they are in favor of reasonable border security throughout the Trump presidency, and are willing to work with Trump.  Trump wants his wall, and to impose limits on legal immigration.  Democrats are in favor of legal immigration, and don’t want the wall. 

"We believe in border security. We want to make it work, we want to make it real, not just symbolic. But we believe in it. If our Republican colleagues and the president engage in good faith in that negotiation -- without unreasonable demands like the absurdly expensive and ineffective border wall that publicly many Republicans oppose and privately many more do -- I do not doubt that we can reach an agreement on DACA that's acceptable to both sides." ~Schumer, 3 Jan 18

Democrats don’t want socialism.  What I typically hear is that democrats want to turn us into a socialist country and we will inevitably end up like Venezuela, or many of the other countries full-blown socialism has claimed.  While democrats do advocate for platform policies with a “socialist flavor”, I have yet to see a democratic politician basing their platform on seizing control of private companies, property or production for the greater good.  Democrats simply want to provide a better healthcare, social safety nets and education to get people back on their feet and continue producing tax revenue for the country.  No one should go broke for losing the health lottery.  Many modern countries are able to juggle a capitalist economy and still maintain a more affordable healthcare system.  Bernie was able to motivate a lot of younger voters but Democrats turned away from him and his policies to a less popular, more vanilla Democratic candidate (she who shall not be named).  Democratic voters are interested in some of those policies, but are still haven’t gone full-Bernie.

Democrats don’t want to run up debt…just like Republicans, but they will when it suits their purposes…just like republicans.  For Rs to run around claiming to be the party of fiscal responsibility is a bit disingenuous.  The parties just argue how to spend the money.  

Democrats don’t want to gut the military.  Many folks seem to think democratic politicians harbor some resentment towards them and just want to gut us out of existence.  The recent gutting of the military was mainly due to sequestration, which was a bipartisan failure.  Obama did draw down the military, but mainly because he was trying to exit (unsuccessfully) from Iraq and scale back Afghanistan.  Currently both parties favor a DoD audit along with a predictable long-term budget.

[drewpey]

23 hours ago, busdriver said:

Serious question: what would be a meaningful way of "dealing with" the Russians? Europe is in serious trouble without Russian energy, or no?

Sanctions targeted towards Russian oligarchs and leadership money laundering.  Stop accepting kids of Russian oligarchs into western universities.  Expand NATO east.  Sell more patriot systems and F-35s to counter Russian influence.  Harden our election systems.  Properly fund the state department.  Invest more in renewable energies to minimize their leverage with oil exports.  Combat climate change to minimize their warm-water ports.

Eastern European countries are heavily dependant on Russian oil.  Western not as much as they are able to diversify.

[HeloDude]

^^What a joke!  You don't care about Russia--you're just a progressive who doesn't like Trump (which is fine, I'm not a big fan of him personally either).  But I'm not using Russia an excuse to further support a progressive agenda of being against oil lol.

[brickhistory]

12 hours ago, drewpey said:

  Combat climate change to minimize their warm-water ports.

 

"Climate change."  {Drink!}

Besides that crafty Ivan will just hook the mother of all propane burners to his gas fields and melt the ice that we create by reverting to the Stone Age.

Nah, we need a better plan.  Consulted the Acme Company yet?

[tac airlifter]

13 hours ago, drewpey said:

 Expand NATO east........

Eastern European countries are heavily dependant on Russian oil.  

I found a problem with your plan.