The Next President is...

[Lord Ratner]

2 hours ago, MC5Wes said:

Texas Reloaded
 

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=Wd6b_8OlwXU
 

 

So dorky, but Crenshaw might be the savior of the party, so why not?

[brickhistory]

Worker bee FBI agents working the Crossfire Hurricane investigation took out professional malpractice insurance revealed yesterday due to "7th Floor" direction of investigation (7th Floor = FBI Director's Office).

FBI knew that the primary source used by the Steele Dossier had been investigated by the FBI as a "threat to national security" from 2009-2011 via a counter-intelligence investigation.  Never revealed that to the FISA court.

[Lord Ratner]

Kavanaugh really did change things. I wasn't around for Bork or Thomas. The Kavanaugh hearings were the first time I could see an actual difference between the parties in terms of morality. And it was stark.

 

Honestly I don't even like using the term "Democrats" anymore, because it does not draw a distinction between voters who are registered with or consider themselves a part of the Democratic party, and the politicians in the party at the federal level. The voters I have no beef with, just a disagreement on the best way to accomplish largely the same goals. The politicians however, I believe to be in many cases irredeemable.

[FLEA]

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-court-termlimits-idUSKCN26F3L3

Obviously theater as it would require an amendment to really implement this and the current POTUS would veto it. 

However, the concept doesn't even seem that well thought out. Would voters be aware that when they elect a President they are also electing to Surpreme Court Selects? It would completely change elections because it would swing voters to vote for judges instead who would have a much longer appointment than POTUS. 

How is it Congress can get on board with term limits for other offices but can't get on board with term limits for their own political machines? 

[Prozac]

46 minutes ago, Lord Ratner said:

Kavanaugh really did change things. I wasn't around for Bork or Thomas. The Kavanaugh hearings were the first time I could see an actual difference between the parties in terms of morality. And it was stark.

 

Honestly I don't even like using the term "Democrats" anymore, because it does not draw a distinction between voters who are registered with or consider themselves a part of the Democratic party, and the politicians in the party at the federal level. The voters I have no beef with, just a disagreement on the best way to accomplish largely the same goals. The politicians however, I believe to be in many cases irredeemable.

I believe the feeling is mutual on the other side. So the question becomes: How do we bring politics back to something approximating the center in this country? I’m not sure as many political issues seem nearly insurmountable at present. Term limits and campaign finance reform would be a start, but those issues are a third rail for career politicians with too much to loose. I think the fact that you make the distinction between political actors and normal everyday folk is an important step that many, many keyboard warriors should consider. 

[Sim]

 

 

[bfargin]

8 hours ago, Prozac said:

I believe the feeling is mutual on the other side. So the question becomes: How do we bring politics back to something approximating the center in this country? I’m not sure as many political issues seem nearly insurmountable at present. Term limits and campaign finance reform would be a start, but those issues are a third rail for career politicians with too much to loose. I think the fact that you make the distinction between political actors and normal everyday folk is an important step that many, many keyboard warriors should consider. 

For the good of the country we don't want it in the center of where it currently is. For the past 20 years plus Democrats and Republicans have both moved entirely left. We need democrats to be liberals and not leftist and republicans to be conservatives and not liberals. There have always been and will always be those on the extreme fringes (both right and left) but currently those voices seem to have more say in matters than the reasoned thoughtful people on both sides of the aisle.

[drewpey]

1 hour ago, bfargin said:

For the past 20 years plus Democrats and Republicans have both moved entirely left.

Political compass inop...

Yes the Democrats have shifted left, which is what progressives do, and the conservatives traditionally resist change in favor for a more cautious approach.  It wasn't until recently the republican  platform turned into "undo everything and return it to 1950s america, except the taxes".

The republican party used to be respectable.  You used to hate the Russians more than the Democrats, you loved the environment so much you created the EPA to protect parks, hunting grounds and our natural resources, you could have a realistic conversation about illegal immigration, background checks, or healthcare...you didn't bend over backwards for the rich and actually tried to balance the budget and be fiscally responsible.  Your party is off the rails to the point where you don't even have a stated party platform other than "not obama, and whatever comes out of the orange man's mouth".

To think the Republican party shifted left just goes to show how little you have been paying attention to politics during that time.  I mean seriously show me a republican platform from the last 30 years that is further right than the current administration.  I'm interested to see your well-thought out points.

[kaputt]

Quote

You used to hate the Russians more than the Democrats

All of the Russia collusion accusations have been proven multiple times to be completely false. Hunter Biden has more Russian ties than anyone from the Republican Party.

Quote

you loved the environment so much you created the EPA to protect parks, hunting grounds and our natural resources

The Republican party absolutely has a terrible environmental policy these days, especially for those that embrace a Teddy Roosevelt style of conservationism. However, the Democrats provide zero legitimate alternative. The entire Dem environmental "policy" is based on climate alarmism and the Green New Deal, which is wealth distribution and socialism disguised as an environmentally friendly policy. Spend some time in California and you'll realize that Democrat policy has no actual environmental concern. 

Quote

you could have a realistic conversation about illegal immigration, background checks, or healthcare

Pot meet kettle. Where is the link to the speech of Bill Clinton talking about the utmost importance of border security?

Quote

you didn't bend over backwards for the rich and actually tried to balance the budget and be fiscally responsible

Current Republicans are fiscally terrible, that is true for sure. But both parties are completely controlled by the ultra rich. Look who the major donors and influencers of the Democratic party are.

Quote

Your party is off the rails to the point where you don't even have a stated party platform 

Subtly encouraging violence in this country and playing racial politics vs actually pushing a legitimate agenda isn't off the rails?

None of this was a defense of the Republican party btw. But acting as if the Democrats somehow hold some sort of moral high ground is laughable. Honestly both parties are beyond broken. 

[drewpey]

35 minutes ago, kaputt said:

All of the Russia collusion accusations have been proven multiple times to be completely false. Hunter Biden has more Russian ties than anyone from the Republican Party.

No, it wasn't.  If you actually read the reports from the republican-controlled senate intelliegence committee, you would know otherwise.  There was significant coordination between the Trump campaign and russian intelligence officers, wikileaks, etc..  Manafort, Stone, Flynn, Papa, Cohen, Gates all doing shady shit.  Yet you, a "centrist" look past all of that, look past the actual spy Butina who was rooted out, her NRA ties which are being linked to funneling money through the NRA to republicans, the 8 (R) congressmen who spent an emergency 4th of july in Moscow, the repeated softening of republican policy against russia, Trump kowtowing to Putin in Helsinki, and all you see is Hunter.  Hunter is a red herring.  He isn't running for office, and the republicans just released their report on his involvement and found no illegal activity and said it didn't influence US policy.

35 minutes ago, kaputt said:

The Republican party absolutely has a terrible environmental policy these days, especially for those that embrace a Teddy Roosevelt style of conservationism. However, the Democrats provide zero legitimate alternative. The entire Dem environmental "policy" is based on climate alarmism and the Green New Deal, which is wealth distribution and socialism disguised as an environmentally friendly policy. Spend some time in California and you'll realize that Democrat policy has no actual environmental concern. 

Again, your choices are "do nothing" or "do something" to save the environment.  One party wants to open everything up for oil drilling and fracking, another wants to help curb CO2 emissions.  Is it alarmism?  Perhaps...only time will tell, but ultimately it is beneficial to the planet, so why not at least go in that general direction and have a good debate on how drastically we should commit?

35 minutes ago, kaputt said:

Pot meet kettle. Where is the link to the speech of Bill Clinton talking about the utmost importance of border security?

Again you are focusing on the most extreme of the party.  Sure there are some randos claiming open borders, but they are not center of mass for the party and no one is actually trying to make that happen despite what fox news tells you.  I think you'd be hard pressed to find a politician to say border security isn't vitally important to the US, particularly in post 9/11.  You can't have a discussion about what are reasonable legal immigration levels, paths to citizenship for illegal aliens, amnesty policy, etc. without the right screaming "deport them all".  It's not realistic, it makes for good sound bytes but ultimately it's a waste of everyone's time.  There is little discussion on actual policy, and I'm sure the debates will be much of the same.  Biden will discuss policy which is generally boring to the average american...trump will make some quippy soundbytes, drop a bunch of chaff about obama spying on him, insult Biden's wife and the crowd will hoot and holler.  That's basically 2016 debates in a nutshell.

35 minutes ago, kaputt said:

Current Republicans are fiscally terrible, that is true for sure. But both parties are completely controlled by the ultra rich. Look who the major donors and influencers of the Democratic party are.

I don't disagree and Citizens United has done more to undermine our democracy than anything we will see in our lifetime.  That being said no system will ever be perfect and void of exploitation by a populace.  Our current system is heavily exploited by the rich, and the democrats have worked to pass some (not a ton) of legislation to help care for the poorest of the populace.  Healthcare is one of them.  The republicans really screwed the pooch, and if they had lived up to their promises to repeal and replace the ACA with something more workable they would easily sweep democrats this election by beating them at their own game.  Instead they just broke the system, threw a party and walked away.  I've seen more republicans turn democrat over the US healthcare punching them in the face than anything else, and it's going to continue happening.  It's easy to overlook things that never affect you personally, but when you have children dieing of cancer and families going broke to help keep them alive, it really shows how terrible our system is.

35 minutes ago, kaputt said:

Subtly encouraging violence in this country and playing racial politics vs actually pushing a legitimate agenda isn't off the rails?

What are you referring to specifically?  The BLM/Police brutality issue?  Is fighting for racial equality off the rails?

[Negatory]

9 hours ago, kaputt said:

None of this was a defense of the Republican party btw

Literally all of it was. Your point in each of the paragraphs was either republicans are better or at least no worse than democrats. False centrism is a pretty standard tactic.

 

[Sim]

8 hours ago, drewpey said:

There was significant coordination between the Trump campaign and russian intelligence officers, wikileaks, etc.. 

LOL. Delusional liberal with conspiracy theories. Did MSDNC told you this? 

[slackline]

LOL. Delusional liberal with conspiracy theories. Did MSDNC told you this? 

You keep at it guys! Trump is proud of you. Deny anything and everything that even comes close to making sense because it doesn't fit your narrative.

Also, you guys keep saying Democrats are encouraging violence. This is confusing to me. What exactly are you stretching to evince this? This is coming from the party with the President quoting "looting and shooting", telling people at his rallies to beat the opposition, etc. The President! That checks...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[slackline]

Kiloalpha said:

Slack, serious questions. 
Which party, in your opinion, best represents the looters and rioters?

Response: I find it very interesting the way you chose to word this. Sincere response: neither party represents looters or rioters. I would put money on the fact that the overwhelming majority of looters and rioters aren't voters and don't care, beyond superficially, about the issues they are abusing and using as excuses to loot and or riot. Looters more so than rioters.



What candidate for President do you think they will vote for?

Response: See above. If they vote, probably for Biden. If you think this question is legit, then I have one for you that shows how silly this question is. What candidate/party do you think white supremacists, or the people driving their cars into peaceful protestors will be voting for? Looters or white supremacists aren't representative of the majority...



Which media outlets/personalities have excused their actions?

Response: caveat to my answer, I don't watch any news channels really, but this is a question you already know the answer to, and is ridiculous on the surface. What does media have to do with it? Idiots that can't think for themselves watching either side's media believe everything they see/hear on that crap. Can't work with those people. The ones we should care about are those willing to have an actual conversation and critically think about the other side's perspective. There are members on here who say they listen, but they don't. I respect a lot of what guys like FLEA have said on leadership topics, but think he's too firmly in the camp of systemic racism is fake" to actually listen to other's ideas. There has been great evidence posted right here, not just from WaPo , that he and others immediately dismiss because (speculation on my part) he isn't affected by it, or it doesn't fit his/their narrative. What media outlets/personalities have consistently excused abhorrent statements or ethically questionable things made/done by the President?


and... Do you think any of the looting and rioting is justified?

Response: looting absolutely not! Rioting, we're on the balance of condemning history, and I think only history will accurately judge riots for social justice. I think Boston Tea Party is similar. POC feel underrepresented and oppressed, so when they are continually ignored (as has been done similarly by people on this board who ignore the mountains of evidence that has been presented here, yet in an out of hand fashion, dismiss it without real thought) what options do they feel are left to them? They want/crave attention and change. People won't listen because they don't believe it is real. Largely because they don't feel the effects. I'm sure at the time, people ignoring the issue of taxation largely condemned the Boston Tea Party. I recognize that is a loose comparison, but you get the idea.

--Please excuse typos, straggling sentences. Typing this crap on an iPhone gets tedious and easy to get lost since you can't see it all.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[drewpey]

2 hours ago, Sim said:

LOL. Delusional liberal with conspiracy theories. Did MSDNC told you this? 

This is in black and white, typed by your republican senators on the intelligence committee.  Just because you don't read it doesn't mean its a conspiracy theory.  Reals before feels man.

[dream big]

1 hour ago, slackline said:

Kiloalpha said:

Slack, serious questions. 
Which party, in your opinion, best represents the looters and rioters?

Response: I find it very interesting the way you chose to word this. Sincere response: neither party represents looters or rioters. I would put money on the fact that the overwhelming majority of looters and rioters aren't voters and don't care, beyond superficially, about the issues they are abusing and using as excuses to loot and or riot. Looters more so than rioters.



What candidate for President do you think they will vote for?

Response: See above. If they vote, probably for Biden. If you think this question is legit, then I have one for you that shows how silly this question is. What candidate/party do you think white supremacists, or the people driving their cars into peaceful protestors will be voting for? Looters or white supremacists aren't representative of the majority...



Which media outlets/personalities have excused their actions?

Response: caveat to my answer, I don't watch any news channels really, but this is a question you already know the answer to, and is ridiculous on the surface. What does media have to do with it? Idiots that can't think for themselves watching either side's media believe everything they see/hear on that crap. Can't work with those people. The ones we should care about are those willing to have an actual conversation and critically think about the other side's perspective. There are members on here who say they listen, but they don't. I respect a lot of what guys like FLEA have said on leadership topics, but think he's too firmly in the camp of systemic racism is fake" to actually listen to other's ideas. There has been great evidence posted right here, not just from WaPo , that he and others immediately dismiss because (speculation on my part) he isn't affected by it, or it doesn't fit his/their narrative. What media outlets/personalities have consistently excused abhorrent statements or ethically questionable things made/done by the President?


and... Do you think any of the looting and rioting is justified?

Response: looting absolutely not! Rioting, we're on the balance of condemning history, and I think only history will accurately judge riots for social justice. I think Boston Tea Party is similar. POC feel underrepresented and oppressed, so when they are continually ignored (as has been done similarly by people on this board who ignore the mountains of evidence that has been presented here, yet in an out of hand fashion, dismiss it without real thought) what options do they feel are left to them? They want/crave attention and change. People won't listen because they don't believe it is real. Largely because they don't feel the effects. I'm sure at the time, people ignoring the issue of taxation largely condemned the Boston Tea Party. I recognize that is a loose comparison, but you get the idea.

--Please excuse typos, straggling sentences. Typing this crap on an iPhone gets tedious and easy to get lost since you can't see it all.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

When the Democratic Vp nominee Harris proclaims that the riots should continue, then I think we have our answer on which party represents the rioters and looters best.  

[Sua Sponte]

2 hours ago, Kiloalpha said:

Slack, serious questions. 

Which party, in your opinion, best represents the looters and rioters?

What candidate for President do you think they will vote for?

Which media outlets/personalities have excused their actions?

and... Do you think any of the looting and rioting is justified?

Kilo, serious questions.

Which party, in your opinion, best represents people who do this?

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.cnn.com/cnn/2020/05/28/us/man-fired-effigy-kentucky-governor-andy-beshear/index.html
 

Which candidate for President do you think he’ll vote for?

Do you think that action was justified?

 

 

 

[Seadogs]

6 minutes ago, Sua Sponte said:

Kilo, serious questions.

Which party, in your opinion, best represents people who do this?

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.cnn.com/cnn/2020/05/28/us/man-fired-effigy-kentucky-governor-andy-beshear/index.html
 

Which candidate for President do you think he’ll vote for?

Do you think that action was justified?

 

 

 

Lol, you cited CNN but you get mad at other people who cite Fox.👍

[Sua Sponte]

20 minutes ago, Seadogs said:

Lol, you cited CNN but you get mad at other people who cite Fox.👍

Here, this better homie?

https://abcnews.go.com/US/gun-rights-advocates-spark-outrage-hanging-effigy-kentucky/story?id=70866370

https://www.courier-journal.com/story/news/local/2020/05/27/kentucky-governor-hanged-effigy-protester-fired-huffman-auto/5265063002/

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8353975/Shocking-moment-effigy-Kentucky-Governor-Andy-Beshear-hanged-tree.html

🙄

[Sua Sponte]

59 minutes ago, dream big said:

When the Democratic Vp nominee Harris proclaims that the riots should continue, then I think we have our answer on which party represents the rioters and looters best.  

Uh, sure 😂 

https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2020/sep/04/youtube-videos/no-kamala-harris-didnt-say-she-wants-riots-continu/

[Homestar]

I liked this Frontline doc. It attempts to explain why Trump and Biden are the way they are. 
 

BL: I can respect Biden as a man even though I may disagree with his politics. I can’t respect Trump, and his politics are whatever serves Trump best in the moment. 

[Seadogs]

30 minutes ago, Sua Sponte said:

Here, this better homie?

https://abcnews.go.com/US/gun-rights-advocates-spark-outrage-hanging-effigy-kentucky/story?id=70866370

https://www.courier-journal.com/story/news/local/2020/05/27/kentucky-governor-hanged-effigy-protester-fired-huffman-auto/5265063002/

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8353975/Shocking-moment-effigy-Kentucky-Governor-Andy-Beshear-hanged-tree.html

🙄

Lol, you site ABC, dailymail, and politifact and get mad at other people who site Fox. 👎

[slackline]

When the Democratic Vp nominee Harris proclaims that the riots should continue, then I think we have our answer on which party represents the rioters and looters best.  

Do you believe everything that pops up in your echo chamber FB feed? Common sense man...

People twist words of political figures for their narrative on both sides of the aisle. Funny thing though, you don't have to twist anything the Pres says, they're bizarre and ridiculous enough on their own... Totally who should be running the show. A guy who literally doesn't seem able to restrain himself.

Words mean things, but it's cool because he knows he "could stand in the middle of Times square and shoot somebody" and he wouldn't lose a voter. You guys will excuse it as a joke or sarcasm, but the second Fox/Limbaugh/Hannity/Carlson takes something said by someone they disagree with totally out of context you guys jump on it like it's gospel truth...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[brickhistory]

Trump has nominated and McConnell has moved through confirmation 218 Article III federal judges, including two Supreme Court justices.  Soon to be three.

 

To paraphrase the poet Burns, "And that has made all the difference..."

[Sua Sponte]

49 minutes ago, brickhistory said:

Trump has nominated and McConnell has moved through confirmation 218 Article III federal judges, including two Supreme Court justices.  Soon to be three.

 

To paraphrase the poet Burns, "And that has made all the difference..."

Difference in what? The SCOTUS isn't Trump's little henchman protector like the AG apparently is.