The Next President is...

[AirGuardianC141747]

2 hours ago, Prozac said:

Confident? Confident in what? That this guy will continue be incompetent if he’s re-elected? 
 

Let’s talk about that wall. As of the beginning of August, about 275 miles of wall had been built. Only 30 or so miles of new wall had been built where there were no existing barriers. Exact numbers may vary but I think you’ll agree that Trump has failed to come anywhere near achieving his vision of a big, beautiful wall spanning the length of the southern border. And no, Mexico has not paid for an inch of it. In fact, the military construction budget was pilfered to do it because, like with repealing the ACA, congress knows that a good talking point does not equal good government policy. If you want to call that a promise fulfilled, knock yourself out. The bigger, more tragic picture here is for all the talk about his stupid wall, there has been no meaningful discussion about real, effective, immigration reform. Want to curb illegal immigration? Maybe talk to the farmers and growers whose business model doesn’t work without cheap migrant labor. 
 

Back to repealing the ACA: N730 is exactly correct above. Republicans held both houses of Congress and the executive. They could have absolutely gotten that done, but in the decade since ACA was passed, conservatives have been wholely unable to come up with anything better. I would agree that the ACA has serious flaws. Republicans has their chance to fix it and abjectly failed. Trump could only offer the weak excuse: “who knew healthcare was so complicated?”. 
 

How about bringing law and order back to the apocalyptic cityscapes Trump so bleakly described in his inaugural speech? He’s been president for nearly four years. The streets that were actually bleak are bleaker and law and order is, in fact breaking down in places where it was previously peaceful. Trumps response has been to fan the flames and encourage his supporters to instigate further unrest. I do not believe for a second that The current or future Trump administration will make our streets remotely safer. The chaos he insists will be the result of a Biden administration is happening now, under his watch. 
 

What ever happened to infrastructure? Wasn’t that one of his “promises”? In four years his administration has been unable to get past initial talks with congress regarding an infrastructure bill, the one policy promise of this administration that had robust bipartisan support. The Democrats were willing to help him and he still couldn’t get it done. 
 

How about that Iran nuclear deal? Yeah, we pulled out of an imperfect agreement. Has that spurred any meaningful progress with the Iranian government. Is America safer because of it or has the region become even more unstable? Hint: it’s not the former. 
 

While we’re on the subject of foreign policy does anyone know what Trump got for spending the first year of his presidency fondling Kim Jong Un’s balls? Doesn’t seem like much has changed in Lil’ Kim’s people’s paradise. 
 

So let’s talk about something that’s one of Donnie’s strengths: The economy. It’s true that Wall Street seemed to love the man and his get out of the way policies. In fact, my own 401k swelled as a result of his economic policies. But, prosperity under Trump came in large part due to a tax cut that was extremely generous to big business, but is set to expire on average Joe’s like you and me. The real elephant in the room for those who would call themselves conservatives is that Trump is nothing of the sort when it comes to economic policy. So, at best he gets mixed reviews in this area. 
 

In fact, the only promise I can think of that the man unequivocally upheld was the promise to stack the Supreme Court with conservatives. I have to admit, the Republicans have played masterful politics here, basically stealing a nomination from the outgoing administration and putting a candidate in the White House with timing that got them another nomination and likely one more if they can hold the executive. If you’re a Republican, this is legitimate means to celebrate. But let’s face it: Any Republican candidate would have done just fine here. A Rubio, a Cruz, or a Bush would have absolutely put acceptable justices on the court. 

I fully expect a flurry of excuses from his supporters. Some may even have some validity buried in them somewhere. But one of his signature campaign phrases was “I alone can fix it”.  He hasn’t.

And all of this incompetence doesn’t even take into account the administration’s pathetic response to Covid-19, which I believe is a dead horse that I’ve already beaten in these forums. So if the ends justify the means for you; if another Supreme Court justice is worth the civil unrest, the decline of science and reason in our country, the abysmal global reputation we are fermenting, the further destabilization of troubled regions around the world, the jaded and cynical worldview one must accept to come to the conclusion that a man with no morals should be the leader of the free world.....if all of those things are worth it to you, then by all means vote to re-elect Donald Trump President of the United States for four more years. 

Daaang, while I am not Fox News having discussed actual experiences, I will probably be accused of such due to my angles. But overall I firmly believe I have been duped by multiple networks.

How did CNN, ABC, NBC get on here. 
 

*I guess I could continue to travel around the world and carry on that previous 8 year tradition and apologize for being American, probably get a less than noble prize for it, Meh - Not gonna happen... Guess I had better vote in person whether it helps or not. It is whatever it is...

Edited September 4, 2020 by AirGuardianC141747

[M2]

6 hours ago, Prozac said:

Blah blah blah...

Just one question.  Do you honestly believe Biden will be any better?

/argument

[spike]

24 minutes ago, M2 said:

Just one question.  Do you honestly believe Biden will be any better?

/argument

Yes. A lot better.

[M2]

9 minutes ago, spike said:

Yes. A lot better.

Explain.

[brickhistory]

4 hours ago, spike said:

Yes. A lot better.

I, too, would be interested in your reasoning.  Seriously.  Not because you will get me to change my mind on who I'm voting for, but what you know/believe that Biden has accomplished.

If your reasoning is "Orange Man bad" and you'd vote for anybody/anything else, I, too, can respect that.

I would've voted for the more stupid of my two dogs before I'd have voted for Hillary in 2016.

This has become a sporting/ego event where "we must prevail" over you.  ("We" can be the left or "we" can be the right.  "You" can be the left or "you" can be the right)

Both political parties have given up any policy positions or differences of opinions.  It's just brute force now.

Both parties are spending imaginary money that would make the Weimar Republic proud of the quantities.

All fun and games until the marker gets called in.

So, again, I ask, whether your agree with the actions of either candidate or not, what has Biden actually done in 47 years in politics compared to Trump in 3?

[Prozac]

4 hours ago, M2 said:

Just one question.  Do you honestly believe Biden will be any better?

/argument

Yes I do.
 

But I am far further left on the spectrum than you on most issues and we won’t see eye to eye on what I consider Biden’s strengths. And that’s ok. But Trump is no Republican. In fact, he’s taken a party that, believe it or not, I once considered myself a proud member of, and turned it into something unrecognizable. Up until Trump, there were tenets of the Republican platform, and Republican politicians that I deeply admired and even supported. The Republican Party was a party of statesmen that made it it’s mission to spread liberal democratic values (note: not the same as Liberal values) around the world, not a protectionist party that buried its head in the sand and pretended the outside world didn’t exist. The Republican Party I knew supported our military, not just with a budget, but with real compassion for those who serve and their families. No real Republican would EVER disparage captured, missing, or dead Americans. The Republican Party I knew was truly a fiscally conservative party capable of providing constructive and meaningful checks on their Democratic colleagues. The Republican Party I knew understood that it’s political opponents were just that: legitimate opponents who were elected by Americans, not enemies to be vanquished in a zero sum game with the intent of disenfranchising large swaths of the American public. 
 

I honestly do not expect Republicans to vote for Biden. I think he does a better job than Trump representing many of the ideals mentioned above but he is certainly no conservative. But if I were a Republican, I’d walk away from this election and this man before he could do any more damage to my party. I’d take the four years of a Biden administration (which is unlikely to implement radical liberal policies) to re shape the party into something closer to what was envisioned following the 2008 election: a party true to its conservative roots that is also capable of accepting moderate social reform and, most importantly, is more inclusive of the groups which will make up the majority of the American electorate going forward. 
 

And you know what? If the Republicans could put a somewhat moderate candidate out there in 2024. Someone who is fiscally conservative but socially, more liberal. Someone capable of reaching across the aisle. Someone who is willing to be a leader for red AND blue America. If Republicans could do that, there are an awful lot of people like me living in blue strongholds who would consider voting for that person. 

[SurelySerious]

That’s the same argument I made for what the Democrats should have done this year instead of a lifeless hack who’s been doing nothing except keeping himself in power for 47 years...and several avowed Democrats  were aghast that someone could not accept Biden as a good alternative, so I see your last paragraph as disingenuous. 

[Homestar]

 

Another liberal rag "confirms" the details of the story.  Fake news generators pandering to its audience smh.

Edited September 5, 2020 by Homestar

[AirGuardianC141747]

As far as fanning the flames of violence. Antifa sympathizer shot dead by Federal Marshall’s not fake but dead. Not local State authorities as their hands are tied by their State leaders within their Blue Stronghold, but once again Federal Marshall’s sent in to apprehend, he does not give up willingly, pulls out a weapon or whatever happened - maybe he did not resist, doesn’t matter as we weren’t there = Still Dead.

More and more of this enforcement will happen as the Federal side starts to gather info on loose groups tied to no one particular state. Groups/Movements/Person crossing state lines loosely, creating havoc, violence, etc. are being categorized as menaces to society as a whole and specifically falling into the Domestic Terrorists mold. Federal Assistance/Proactive Enforcement by one side = Welcome aboard to finally hunt down those who weren’t just fanning the flames but igniting them.
Case in point: *Quikrete a Police precinct and attempt to set it on fire is not just Arson, but attempted Murder. No wiggle room there.

Not an Orange Man statement or Biden breakdown - Just information on some Bluish State Leadership - Do your job, still not OK so the Feds will do it for you incrementally at first, then hammer down the nails that show themselves more and more and more-snowball effect.

Edited September 5, 2020 by AirGuardianC141747

[busdriver]

2 hours ago, Homestar said:

Another liberal rag "confirms" the details of the story.  Fake news generators pandering to its audience smh.

Is anyone surprised that the President acts like a petulant child?

Does anyone actually think the politicians we're looking at are quality choices?  You either accept that this is the way the game is played, vote for a third party, or freak the fuck out like this isn't the same ole shit that's been going on forever.  Everyone has already decided which is the lesser shit sandwich to eat, then rationalizes their choice by pointing to the other pile of shit while ignoring their own.

 

[SurelySerious]

1 hour ago, busdriver said:

Is anyone surprised that the President acts like a petulant child?

Does anyone actually think the politicians we're looking at are quality choices?  You either accept that this is the way the game is played, vote for a third party, or freak the fuck out like this isn't the same ole shit that's been going on forever.  Everyone has already decided which is the lesser shit sandwich to eat, then rationalizes their choice by pointing to the other pile of shit while ignoring their own.

 

True. I was more impressed with the last go third party choice of Johnson/Weld , but good luck hearing anything about the alternatives this time. 

[guineapigfury]

9 hours ago, busdriver said:

Is anyone surprised that the President acts like a petulant child?

Does anyone actually think the politicians we're looking at are quality choices?  You either accept that this is the way the game is played, vote for a third party, or freak the fuck out like this isn't the same ole shit that's been going on forever.  Everyone has already decided which is the lesser shit sandwich to eat, then rationalizes their choice by pointing to the other pile of shit while ignoring their own.

 

The major party POTUS candidates have been especially bad the last two elections.  I'm a third party guy, but I'd take any of the major party candidates from the previous 3 decades over Trump, Hillary or Biden.

[FLEA]

15 hours ago, busdriver said:

Is anyone surprised that the President acts like a petulant child?

Does anyone actually think the politicians we're looking at are quality choices?  You either accept that this is the way the game is played, vote for a third party, or freak the fuck out like this isn't the same ole shit that's been going on forever.  Everyone has already decided which is the lesser shit sandwich to eat, then rationalizes their choice by pointing to the other pile of shit while ignoring their own.

 

After the Atlantic story I'm starting to wonder if Trump isn't high functioning autistic which would actually explain A LOT about him. But I actually don't doubt the Atlantic story because he has said things in poor taste to military and veterans in the past. These arent just beyond the normal expectations of social couth but hint that Trump may be incapable of certain degrees of empathy. 

[brickhistory]

12 minutes ago, FLEA said:

After the Atlantic story I'm starting to wonder if Trump isn't high functioning autistic which would actually explain A LOT about him. But I actually don't doubt the Atlantic story because he has said things in poor taste to military and veterans in the past. These arent just beyond the normal expectations of social couth but hint that Trump may be incapable of certain degrees of empathy. 

Atlantic publishes "anonymously sourced" article last night.

On the record sources, including infamous John Bolton, say it's false.

Well-produced and scripted Democrat attack ads released using the story today, within 8 hours of the release.  Same for the anti-Trump veterans letters being distributed citing the piece as evidence.

Same outlet, among others, was 24/7 "Russia, Russia, Russia."

Color me squint-eyed and a little cynical about another type of collusion.

 

Not to mention, nary a word anywhere about a FOIA lawsuit filed this week against Secret Service for admittedly destroying records regarding Biden feeling up the wife of an agent at a photo op.  Agent had to be physically restrained from decking "Fingers."

Nothing to see here.  Move along...

[FLEA]

14 minutes ago, brickhistory said:

Atlantic publishes "anonymously sourced" article last night.

On the record sources, including infamous John Bolton, say it's false.

Well-produced and scripted Democrat attack ads released using the story today, within 8 hours of the release.  Same for the anti-Trump veterans letters being distributed citing the piece as evidence.

Same outlet, among others, was 24/7 "Russia, Russia, Russia."

Color me squint-eyed and a little cynical about another type of collusion.

 

Not to mention, nary a word anywhere about a FOIA lawsuit filed this week against Secret Service for admittedly destroying records regarding Biden feeling up the wife of an agent at a photo op.  Agent had to be physically restrained from decking "Fingers."

Nothing to see here.  Move along...

This is all true. Definitely a "he said/she said" article. However, the Atlantic likely notified the White House and both parties last week they intended to publish the article. This is common in journalism before you publish a slandering story and I heard as early as Tuesday that the Atlantic intended to publish a story about Trump making negative remarks about the US military. So no surprises there. However....

This is the same President who called POW's losers, and who disparaged the gold star parents of a fallen veteran and described his merits creating jobs and real estate as equally sacrificial to the life of their son. 

I'm not saying this makes Trump a good or bad President. Its an interesting observation. If he is high functioning autistic, he would not be alone, as many people in the intel community believe his good buddy Putin is also high functioning. 

In fact, just looking up the definition of Asperger's again: "a neurodevelopmental disorder characterized by significant difficulties in social interaction and nonverbal communication, along with restricted and repetitive patterns of behavior and interests."

He definitely has repetitive speech patterns. 

[dream big]

1 hour ago, brickhistory said:

Atlantic publishes "anonymously sourced" article last night.

On the record sources, including infamous John Bolton, say it's false.

Well-produced and scripted Democrat attack ads released using the story today, within 8 hours of the release.  Same for the anti-Trump veterans letters being distributed citing the piece as evidence.

Same outlet, among others, was 24/7 "Russia, Russia, Russia."

Color me squint-eyed and a little cynical about another type of collusion.

 

Not to mention, nary a word anywhere about a FOIA lawsuit filed this week against Secret Service for admittedly destroying records regarding Biden feeling up the wife of an agent at a photo op.  Agent had to be physically restrained from decking "Fingers."

Nothing to see here.  Move along...

The democrats were probably stroking each other in glee as they thought they hit gold with this hit piece.  Perhaps another “grab her by the pxxxx” October surprise which Trump has apologized for many times (cmon gents.. you have said worse and don’t BS me into claiming you haven’t, right or wrong.)  

Unfortunately, this is just that, a hit piece devoid of any evidence, logic or fact. Much like the hit piece with Russia or Kavanaugh.  It will fall flat...and add it to the reasons why I will laugh so hard when the mass tears flow from the leftists 3 November.  You reap what you sow. 

[brickhistory]

One day, Trump will be gone.

What will the media do to regain it's credibility then?

But as long as their tribe wins, I guess it's worth it.

[slackline]

(cmon gents.. you have said worse and don’t BS me into claiming you haven’t, right or wrong.)   

No, I haven’t. While I do know people who have talked like this, they aren’t what I’d consider stand up guys. You simply sound like someone who disguises misogyny with “Locker room” talk. I apologize if I mislabeled you, but your statement would lead one to believe it isn’t a stretch.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[Homestar]

5 hours ago, brickhistory said:

Same outlet, among others, was 24/7 "Russia, Russia, Russia."

AP and Fox News both corroborated the story.

Russia indeed.

[brickhistory]

Again, "anonymous sources" claim it.  Multiple on-the-record folks say it's false.  

From outlets that have beclowned themselves repeatedly.  Including Fox News which only corroborated, they say, part of the story.

Not to mention the timing of the Democrat ads using the Atlantic article - hours after the article, boom, there are the well-polished ads.  Complete with veterans against Trump letters.  That's efficiency... 

 

Let those anonymous sources go on the record.  Wonder why they didn't/won't?

 

[Prozac]

Dear god. This guy really could shoot someone on the street in broad daylight and his supporters would claim fake news. The Atlantic article is completely in character with things he’s said publicly and has been confirmed by multiple sources. Anonymous sources make major contributions to stories all the time. 

[Breckey]

Dear god. This guy really could shoot someone on the street in broad daylight and his supporters would claim fake news. The Atlantic article is completely in character with things he’s said publicly and has been confirmed by multiple sources. Anonymous sources make major contributions to stories all the time. 

Ref. Deep Throat

[drewpey]

"anonymous sources" isn't as nefarious as it sounds, and no credible journalist would risk their career quoting a shady anonymous source.  I encourage you to familiarize yourself with the process of using anonymous sources.  Trump et al like to think anyone and everyone can be an anonymous source for anything, but that's not how it works.  Also this administration torpedoes anyone who isn't gushingly supportive of Trump, so it's no wonder they don't raise their hand as all you drones will follow your leader into hating him....see McCain who went from your 2012 2008 presidential hopeful to a "RINO" in a matter of years despite him having little to no shift in ideals or positions.

Trump rolled in hot on Kelly during an interview recently, so I think Trump knows it was him, and is annoyed he can't single him out or he verifies the story.

If you've been paying attention this is just the latest in a long line of slights towards the military, so it's hardly a surprise to anyone.  Democrats don't need to "dig" to find stuff on Trump, shit just floats to the surface.  There's always a "greatest hits" list floating around reddit...

 

If even 10% of this is truth, it's reprehensible and you would be howling if the shoe was on the other foot.

 

EDIT: forgot it was 2008, not 2012

Edited September 6, 2020 by drewpey

[M2]

Really?  If anyone isn't suspicious as to the timing of this "news," they are blindly naïve!  If such a statement was made, especially in front of John Kelly, it would have been newsworthy two years ago.

I call BS.

And if anything believes the Democrats are going to treat the military any better, you need professional help!

[FLEA]

8 hours ago, drewpey said:

"anonymous sources" isn't as nefarious as it sounds, and no credible journalist would risk their career quoting a shady anonymous source.  I encourage you to familiarize yourself with the process of using anonymous sources.  Trump et al like to think anyone and everyone can be an anonymous source for anything, but that's not how it works.  Also this administration torpedoes anyone who isn't gushingly supportive of Trump, so it's no wonder they don't raise their hand as all you drones will follow your leader into hating him....see McCain who went from your 2012 2008 presidential hopeful to a "RINO" in a matter of years despite him having little to no shift in ideals or positions.

Trump rolled in hot on Kelly during an interview recently, so I think Trump knows it was him, and is annoyed he can't single him out or he verifies the story.

If you've been paying attention this is just the latest in a long line of slights towards the military, so it's hardly a surprise to anyone.  Democrats don't need to "dig" to find stuff on Trump, shit just floats to the surface.  There's always a "greatest hits" list floating around reddit...

 

If even 10% of this is truth, it's reprehensible and you would be howling if the shoe was on the other foot.

 

EDIT: forgot it was 2008, not 2012

So while some of this is verifiably true, a lot of this sounds like it's written by someone outside the military with little knowledge of how government works. About 1/3 of these decisions were made far below Trump's level. About another 1/3 aren't really even that big of a deal. And about 1/3 is stuff that he probably shouldn't have said, or a socially couth person at least wouldn't have said.