• Welcome to TalkWeather!
    We see you lurking around TalkWeather! Take the extra step and join us today to view attachments, see less ads and maybe even join the discussion.
    CLICK TO JOIN TALKWEATHER

Archive 2017-2019 Political Thread

Status
Not open for further replies.
What I simply don't understand is how supporters of this President, or even occasional/sometimes supporters of his policies, aren't tired of his antics and self-created controversies and meltdowns. Doesn't it get old? It's not even as if Trump's admin has pushed through more than a handful of policy items legislatively. Even as it pertains to judges, that's 99.9% due to McConnell, the Federalist Society, and others.

I fail to see how we wouldn't get EVEN MORE done than what Trump has accomplished, with 99.9% less drama and controversy, had the GOP managed to avoid nominating Trump. I certainly don't understand why they're blocking primary challenges to him. Almost any standard bearer Republican would be worlds better than Trump both from an accomplishments standpoint to less drama/controversy and fatigue.
 
Does anybody know why Trump didn’t try to root out corruption in Ukraine before Biden became a candidate?

Mullaney tried too say he didn’t say what we all heard him say.


MULVANEY I: “Did he also mention to me in the past the corruption related to the DNC server? Absolutely.... that’s y we held up the $."
Later:
MULVANEY II: "Let me be clear, there was absolutely no quid pro quo between Ukrainian military $ & any investigation into the 2016 election."
 

Attachments

  • 44281982-64EE-447D-9320-9A9B6A1795EC.jpeg
    44281982-64EE-447D-9320-9A9B6A1795EC.jpeg
    263.9 KB · Views: 0
Evan said:
What I simply don't understand is how supporters of this President, or even occasional/sometimes supporters of his policies, aren't tired of his antics and self-created controversies and meltdowns. Doesn't it get old? It's not even as if Trump's admin has pushed through more than a handful of policy items legislatively. Even as it pertains to judges, that's 99.9% due to McConnell, the Federalist Society, and others.

I fail to see how we wouldn't get EVEN MORE done than what Trump has accomplished, with 99.9% less drama and controversy, had the GOP managed to avoid nominating Trump. I certainly don't understand why they're blocking primary challenges to him. Almost any standard bearer Republican would be worlds better than Trump both from an accomplishments standpoint to less drama/controversy and fatigue.
Click to expand...
I'm not advocating for Trump, but do you think any other candidate besides Trump could've beaten Hillary? I personally don't think so. He captured a very disgruntled sector of Americans that I don't think the standard Republican politician could have...whether that be for better or for worse.
 
Al Smith Dinner was last night. Gen. James Mattis (Ret, USMC) gave an amazing speech. Naturally he roasted his former boss a bit but I've skipped past part and focused on the meat of his speech. Something each and every American needs to understand. General Mattis references a speech by a 29 year old Abe Lincon in where he outlines the true dangers of the success or failure of the United States lies from within. Well worth your time to watch. The first clip starts at 5 minutes after the majority of his roasting. The second clip is the full speech.





(full speech including roasting of Donald Trump -)
)
 
Kory said:
I'm not advocating for Trump, but do you think any other candidate besides Trump could've beaten Hillary? I personally don't think so. He captured a very disgruntled sector of Americans that I don't think the standard Republican politician could have...whether that be for better or for worse.
Click to expand...

I do. Polling long showed Trump was one of the weakest GOP candidates for the general election. Hillary didn't lose because Trump ran an amazing campaign and was beloved by the party and voters. He won because Hillary was loathed by all Republicans, most independents, and even a substantial segment of Democrats. And, Comey and Wikileaks both dropped bombs on her campaign shortly before the election.

I've not seen any evidence that Trump had an advantage over other primary candidates. Only thing I've ever seen offered are anecdotal stories or claims.

I'll post the links after lunch, but every single general election poll of primary candidates versus Clinton showed that Rubio, Kasich, Jeb, etc all had significantly better numbers versus Hillary than Trump. I'm not even speaking of a few points. We're talking close to a double digit % advantage when compared to Trump. The one exception is Ted Cruz. His advantage over Trump was little bit smaller than the other candidates although it was also pretty substantial. The neat thing about going back and looking at these polls is that you can compare the exact same poll for each of these candidates. That's when it really stands out because you're comparing apples to apples. When you see Trump was -10 to Hillary in the exact same poll that Kasich was +7, Rubio is +5, and Cruz is +1 it really hits home (those are not the actual numbers...I will provide them later, but as you'll see I'm not exaggerating).

The response of Trump supporters have always been that polls are fake news. They'll post the NYTimes Upshot prediction showing Clinton with a 95% chance to win and say "you can't believe anything the media says or any polls they do." When I post the other polling I will also post some of the reputable polls from right before election day. They did not badly miss. They did not predict that Hillary was going to crush Trump. People have consistently conflated the opinion of pundits with what polls actually showed.

The polls actually did quite well, and significantly out-performed 2012 Presidential polling. For example, ABC/Wapo final poll before election day showed Hillary 49 and Trump 46. The Economist had it Hillary 49 Trump 45. Fox News showed Hillary 48 and Trump 44. Actual results of the election? Hillary 48.2% and Trump 46.1%.

So, yeah, I think there's strong evidence that the GOP won the Presidency in spite of Trump and not because of his strength as a candidate. He won because Hillary was a historically weak candidate who wasn't liked even by the people who voted for her.
 

Attachments

  • Screenshot_20191018-121932_Chrome.jpg
    Screenshot_20191018-121932_Chrome.jpg
    694.5 KB · Views: 0
Here’s a recommendation for the POTUS. When you’re talking about the violent and forced removal of an ethnic minority from their homes (who by the way was our greatest ally in the destruction of ISIS), don’t use the term “ultimate solution.” A very poor and historically illiterate choice of words.

 
Last edited:
ghost said:
Here’s a recommendation for the POTUS. When you’re talking about the violent and forced removal of an ethnic minority from their homes (who by the way was our greatest ally in the destruction of ISIS), don’t use the term “ultimate solution.” A very poor and historically illiterate choice of words.

Click to expand...


agreed bad choice of words.
 
Mike S said:
I guess it depends on which side of the aisle you fall on. 2 separate conclusions from the same report

Click to expand...

I think they say the same thing. The problem all along is you can’t prove she was INTENTIONALLY negligent with classified info. You and I both know she probably was, but it’s hard to prove in court.
 
gangstonc said:
I think they say the same thing. The problem all along is you can’t prove she was INTENTIONALLY negligent with classified info. You and I both know she probably was, but it’s hard to prove in court.
Click to expand...

They do, but for the headline-only readers of the world there are 2 different conclusions made.
 
ghost said:
Here’s a recommendation for the POTUS. When you’re talking about the violent and forced removal of an ethnic minority from their homes (who by the way was our greatest ally in the destruction of ISIS), don’t use the term “ultimate solution.” A very poor and historically illiterate choice of words.

Click to expand...


Our President has made it clear he's OK with ethnic cleansing of the Kurds. Same goes for the concentration camps China has forced millions of Uyghurs into so they can be tortured, brainwashed, and experimented on.

I thought our country, and the world, learned a lesson from the Holocaust. If we did, clearly the learnings from that lesson have expired. I find it tragic beyond words. We've going backwards and embracing the most ignorant people possible in a race to the bottom.

I previously believed that the American empire and our great experiment with democracy was in mild decline, but I didn't think it was in any danger of collapse. I definitely don't believe that anymore. We're in serious trouble. History has shown that when the moral underpinnings of an empire and its culture become corroded, a future collapse is inevitable unless revolutionary changes take place.

I fear our country lacks the unity, social fabric, and spirit of sacrifice necessary for those revolutionary changes to take root. The sun is rapidly setting on the American empire and its global hegemony. Others will rise in our place, and the thought of China, Russia, or others taking over the leadership of the world, and imposing their culture and morals, is quite sobering.
 
Now we know Trump was actually friends with Parnas (wrote him a personal note and were pictured together many times) and we know he was closely tied to Trump’s legal team (was at a very small victory party with Giuliani post Mueller report).

quote of the day:

“you people with this phony emoluments clause!”
Can some Trump supporter please explain to me how the emoluments clause is phony?
 
Last edited:
Reports that a couple dozen Republican congressmen have entered the testimony room for the impeachment inquiry and refuse to leave. Interesting..
 
I found these pics in my FB memories, I’m not directing it to anyone in particular but I think it applies to the nation as a whole and this thread...BE244F2F-C96B-4E6F-8722-B6FD36F32F3C.jpeg3C1F7D86-1184-4206-BB27-747A69628B4C.jpeg
 
KoD said:
Reports that a couple dozen Republican congressmen have entered the testimony room for the impeachment inquiry and refuse to leave. Interesting..
Click to expand...
Wow... here is a pretty good story of what went down along with some tweets and comments from Fox News - https://www.foxnews.com/politics/go...be-before-attempting-to-storm-the-proceedings

Interesting to note that some representatives brought their cell phones into the secure meeting room which violates a ton of really good rules and laws on classified spaces. In no way do I condone what they did today but the democrats need to formalize this inquiry and get on with it.
 
WesL said:
Wow... here is a pretty good story of what went down along with some tweets and comments from Fox News - https://www.foxnews.com/politics/go...be-before-attempting-to-storm-the-proceedings

Interesting to note that some representatives brought their cell phones into the secure meeting room which violates a ton of really good rules and laws on classified spaces. In no way do I condone what they did today but the democrats need to formalize this inquiry and get on with it.
Click to expand...
Yes, unauthorized entry into a SCIF is a crime that authorizes the use of lethal force. Bringing electronics in is an entirely different crime altogether. Not a smart move on their part. Of course, lethal force wouldn't be used in this situation, but intentionally breaking the law in this manner often results in a loss of clearance.


I agree the Dems need to hurry and formalize this inquiry, but they are locking down testimony before the administration has a chance to circle the wagons. It's a safe strategy to use when the Dems can't afford to miss on impeachment if they decide to really go through with it.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top