PDA

View Full Version : Election 2016



Pages : [1] 2 3 4 5

Absinthe Anecdote
07-22-2015, 02:22 PM
Who is a Trump supporter? I'm guessing that we have a few of them in here.

I wish he'd get the hell out of the race, but he might actually help thin the republican field, and then drop out.

I'm worried that he might end up running as an independent and siphon enough votes from the Republican nominee, and set up Hillary for a win.

I think that is about the only chance Hillary has to win, and I hope that doesn't happen.

I can't stand Hillary.

MikeKerriii
07-22-2015, 03:46 PM
Who is a Trump supporter? I'm guessing that we have a few of them in here.

I wish he'd get the hell out of the race, but he might actually help thin the republican field, and then drop out.

I'm worried that he might end up running as an independent and siphon enough votes from the Republican nominee, and set up Hillary for a win.

I think that is about the only chance Hillary has to win, and I hope that doesn't happen.

I can't stand Hillary.
I hate the Idea of Hillary become president, but I don't see anyone in the republican side that I would have to see in the office less.

I don't think Trump give up until he has either won the nomination or destroyed his Republican opposition, It is a glorious thing to watch.

Watching Republicans who complain about Trumps attacks on McCain handle questions abut why they were silent about attacks on Duckworth, Cleland and Kerry is funny as hell also,

Such an overabundance of schadenfreude!

Mjölnir
07-22-2015, 04:21 PM
Who is a Trump supporter? I'm guessing that we have a few of them in here.

I wish he'd get the hell out of the race, but he might actually help thin the republican field, and then drop out.

I'm worried that he might end up running as an independent and siphon enough votes from the Republican nominee, and set up Hillary for a win.

I think that is about the only chance Hillary has to win, and I hope that doesn't happen.

I can't stand Hillary.

Never was a 'supporter' in the sense that I never felt like I would / could vote for him. I think he brought up a couple of subjects that should be talked about, albeit in a manner that seems to have pissed a lot of people off but that is usually the case with the 'elephant in the room.'

Part of me likens him to Ralph Nader; Nader never really had a chance of winning the Presidency but used his candidacy to talk about what was important to him: the environment, consumer advocacy etc. I think Donald Trump is kind of doing the same thing ... but what is important for him to talk about is Donald Trump.


Watching Republicans who complain about Trumps attacks on McCain handle questions abut why they were silent about attacks on Duckworth, Cleland and Kerry is funny as hell also

re: Duckworth (I assume you mean Congresswoman Duckworth) and Senator Cleland, I am not overly familiar with anyone discrediting their military service.

re: Kerry. About the only difference I can see is that the veterans who came out publicly questioning John Kerry's service were people who had served (some of them had actually served with him) and were arguing that his record (while it still being the official record) had been inflated. I never really lent much attention to it as it seemed to have little facts to back up their points. Donald Trump (veteran of 4 education deferments and a medical DQ) questioning the service of John McCain would be like me telling my daughter's surgeon how he should have conducted one of her surgeries.

Bos Mutus
07-22-2015, 04:36 PM
Who is a Trump supporter? I'm guessing that we have a few of them in here.

I wish he'd get the hell out of the race, but he might actually help thin the republican field, and then drop out.

I'm worried that he might end up running as an independent and siphon enough votes from the Republican nominee, and set up Hillary for a win.

I think that is about the only chance Hillary has to win, and I hope that doesn't happen.

I can't stand Hillary.

He's entertaining...and it's fun watching the rest of the Republican candidates have to respond to his ramblings.

There is something refreshing about a candidate that is willing to just say whatever the f is on his mind...even though I disagree with what's on his mind, I like the approach.

He is incredibly immature and it's hilarious, it's like he's running for middle school class president...counterattacks those who say stuff about him... Oh, Lindsay Graham knocked me? Well, I'll just share his personal cell phone number with everyone...LOL. That's right outta the 12-year old playbook.

I like that he just doesn't seem give a damn what anybody thinks...he's gonna tell you where he stands, take it or leave it...I wish more candidates would do that instead of just trying to dance around every question with pre-scripted, non-committal nonsense...I hate that.

...fun watching him and the GOP field get at it.

Absinthe Anecdote
07-22-2015, 05:15 PM
He's entertaining...and it's fun watching the rest of the Republican candidates have to respond to his ramblings.

There is something refreshing about a candidate that is willing to just say whatever the f is on his mind...even though I disagree with what's on his mind, I like the approach.

He is incredibly immature and it's hilarious, it's like he's running for middle school class president...counterattacks those who say stuff about him... Oh, Lindsay Graham knocked me? Well, I'll just share his personal cell phone number with everyone...LOL. That's right outta the 12-year old playbook.

I like that he just doesn't seem give a damn what anybody thinks...he's gonna tell you where he stands, take it or leave it...I wish more candidates would do that instead of just trying to dance around every question with pre-scripted, non-committal nonsense...I hate that.

...fun watching him and the GOP field get at it.

There has to be a ton of dirt and many scandals in Trumps past. With his connections to casinos and real estate, there just has to be a bunch of easy stuff to dig up on him. Not to mention his past romances.

If he stays in the race long enough it will start coming out.

I guess it is being saved for the primaries.

Is Trump still divorced, or has he remarried? I can't recall him getting married again after Ivanka.

FLAPS, USAF (ret)
07-22-2015, 05:23 PM
There has to be a ton of dirt and many scandals in Trumps past. With his connections to casinos and real estate, there just has to be a bunch of easy stuff to dig up on him. Not to mention his past romances.

If he stays in the race long enough it will start coming out.

I guess it is being saved for the primaries.

Is Trump still divorced, or has he remarried? I can't recall him getting married again after Ivanka.

Yeah, soon enough the media will shed light on the fact that he's a human being. I can't wait for that dirt to come out!

In the mean time, we need to press on with our efforts to elect someone to keep that deficit spending on track. Borrowing $.40 for each $1.00 we spend is a must if we are to keep supporting our precious entitlement system.

Rainmaker
07-22-2015, 05:31 PM
There has to be a ton of dirt and many scandals in Trumps past. With his connections to casinos and real estate, there just has to be a bunch of easy stuff to dig up on him. Not to mention his past romances.

If he stays in the race long enough it will start coming out.

I guess it is being saved for the primaries.

Is Trump still divorced, or has he remarried? I can't recall him getting married again after Ivanka.

a major side benefit of a Trump Presidency would be having a Hot ass First Lady!

http://www.melaniatrump.com/my-world/

Bos Mutus
07-22-2015, 05:53 PM
There has to be a ton of dirt and many scandals in Trumps past. With his connections to casinos and real estate, there just has to be a bunch of easy stuff to dig up on him. Not to mention his past romances.

If he stays in the race long enough it will start coming out.

I guess it is being saved for the primaries.

Is Trump still divorced, or has he remarried? I can't recall him getting married again after Ivanka.

To me, he seems like the type that will not be that hampered from personal scandal...he doesn't get up there and preach family values and all that stuff.

I think if you don't preach a moralistic code, it's a little easier to get over the "scandals."

A master at that was Arnold Schwarzenegger...he's had quite a few come up in his day and seems to just get past them, a little scratched maybe, but not destroyed like some others:

Smoked pot: "Yah, grass and hash--no hard drugs. But tha point ez that I du what I feel like do-ink.
Groped female co-workers/acquiantences, etc: "Yah, I zumtimes behaved bahdly"
Had an affair with housekeeper, fathered a child, got divorced cuz of it: "That was my mistake...but, I always suppowted da child"

This is a book I've had in the back of my mind to write one of these days...how some guys cruise through these scandals and others get destroyed by seemingly pretty small scandals...part of it, of course, starts with not being a moralizing sanctimonious ass to begin with....but the recovery, I think, is more about owning up to it and just saying "yeah, that's me"...it's usually the cover-up and denial that makes them look worse.

I Think Tiger would probably have his 18 majors by now if he'd just said, "What can I say, I like slutty women...and I have a billion dollars, so they like me too. I'm sorry I hurt Elin, but that's just the way it is."

I think Donald would be that kind of guy...and I don't think anyone would be shocked by his scandals...and it won't destroy his candidacy. Just like I think Arnold could probably run for office again and do pretty well...despite everything and his pretty poor record.

SomeRandomGuy
07-22-2015, 06:16 PM
Saw something hilarious on Twitter the other day. Here is what Trump said about McCain:

"He's not a war hero," Trump said. "He's a war hero because he was captured. I like people that weren't captured."

Someone modified the quote to say the same thing about another historical figure:

"They call Jesus the messiah. I like messiahs who don't get captured and nailed to pieces of wood." - Trump

Note: Trump didn't actually say the second one but it's basically the same as the first right?

Bos Mutus
07-22-2015, 06:21 PM
Saw something hilarious on Twitter the other day. Here is what Trump said about McCain:

"He's not a war hero," Trump said. "He's a war hero because he was captured. I like people that weren't captured."

Someone modified the quote to say the same thing about another historical figure:

"They call Jesus the messiah. I like messiahs who don't get captured and nailed to pieces of wood." - Trump

Note: Trump didn't actually say the second one but it's basically the same as the first right?

I remember as a small child wondering why we honored soldiers who were killed in war...when the object was to not get killed.

Of course, then I turned 7 and matured.

That's the thing about the Trump, sometimes it's like he's a grade-school kid...and if someone says something negative about him, he'll attack them back in the most childish way...that's what he was doing to McCain, retaliating like a 6 year old.

Absinthe Anecdote
07-22-2015, 06:41 PM
To me, he seems like the type that will not be that hampered from personal scandal...he doesn't get up there and preach family values and all that stuff.

I think if you don't preach a moralistic code, it's a little easier to get over the "scandals."

A master at that was Arnold Schwarzenegger...he's had quite a few come up in his day and seems to just get past them, a little scratched maybe, but not destroyed like some others:

Smoked pot: "Yah, grass and hash--no hard drugs. But tha point ez that I du what I feel like do-ink.
Groped female co-workers/acquiantences, etc: "Yah, I zumtimes behaved bahdly"
Had an affair with housekeeper, fathered a child, got divorced cuz of it: "That was my mistake...but, I always suppowted da child"

This is a book I've had in the back of my mind to write one of these days...how some guys cruise through these scandals and others get destroyed by seemingly pretty small scandals...part of it, of course, starts with not being a moralizing sanctimonious ass to begin with....but the recovery, I think, is more about owning up to it and just saying "yeah, that's me"...it's usually the cover-up and denial that makes them look worse.

I Think Tiger would probably have his 18 majors by now if he'd just said, "What can I say, I like slutty women...and I have a billion dollars, so they like me too. I'm sorry I hurt Elin, but that's just the way it is."

I think Donald would be that kind of guy...and I don't think anyone would be shocked by his scandals...and it won't destroy his candidacy. Just like I think Arnold could probably run for office again and do pretty well...despite everything and his pretty poor record.

You are probably right that Trump is less vulnerable to a personal sex scandal than other politicians.

It depends on the optics of it.

Though I'd say that he is probably more vulnerable to business scandals.

His bigger weakness would be on matters of policy and how he responds to in depth questions about foreign affairs. Assuming he makes it far enough into the primaries, debates and the big interviews will be problematic for him.

I can't think that he'll be anything more than a spoiler, knocking out part of the field without having a shot at the nomination himself.

I wouldn't be surprised if that is the sole reason he is in the mix at this point.

SomeRandomGuy
07-22-2015, 06:42 PM
I remember as a small child wondering why we honored soldiers who were killed in war...when the object was to not get killed.

Of course, then I turned 7 and matured.

That's the thing about the Trump, sometimes it's like he's a grade-school kid...and if someone says something negative about him, he'll attack them back in the most childish way...that's what he was doing to McCain, retaliating like a 6 year old.

I actually think it is more to do with him being super rich. There comes a point when people become so rich that everyone around them is simply a "yes man" and everyone coddles them. They basically turn into a small child like you describe where the world revolves around them.

When I hear Trump speak I always wonder how he got to be so rich though. He doesn't seem to be incredibly smart like rich computer people (Gates, Zuckerburg) and he doesn't even seem business smart like Warren Buffet.

The biggest thing I'm waiting for is Trump's opinion on Cruz's birth certificate. Trump was one of the biggest Obama birth certificate guys out there. Pretty much everyone concedes that Obama's mother was American even if he wasn't born in Hawaii as he claims.

How does Trump feel about Cruz who was born in Canada to an American and freely admits this? Isn't it the same thing?

Rainmaker
07-22-2015, 06:43 PM
The funniest thing about this is Trump's not even really a conservative....... He could be just a Stalking Horse..... Time will tell......

The Donald is resonating because, he is saying things that needed to be said and not just bowing to Political Correctness......

It's doubtful that Trump could actually be the GOP nominee, so he will either have to get elected as a 3rd party candidate or turn the Country over to HillBillary for another good 8 year fucking with the NEOCON Rainbow Colored strap on, you self hating, leftist morons always demand..

Anyhow, If as a side effect Trump causes this entire RINO-GOP shitshow to collapse along the way even better!

Because, we're living under a 2 party dictatorship as it is, so it makes no real difference, whether we Get another Bush or Clinton as POTUS...

Absinthe Anecdote
07-22-2015, 06:56 PM
I remember as a small child wondering why we honored soldiers who were killed in war...when the object was to not get killed.

Of course, then I turned 7 and matured.

That's the thing about the Trump, sometimes it's like he's a grade-school kid...and if someone says something negative about him, he'll attack them back in the most childish way...that's what he was doing to McCain, retaliating like a 6 year old.

I get how you see Trump as being childlike in his taunts, but until now I viewed his taunts as scrappy NYC bravado.

I see Trump as Howard Stern-ish in his behavior, another New Yorker. One of the reasons I like Stern is that he is a brutally honest and candid person.

However, I readily admit that one could make a strong case for both Stern and Trump being childlike.

Bos Mutus
07-22-2015, 07:05 PM
I get how you see Trump as being childlike in his taunts, but until now I viewed his taunts as scrappy NYC bravado.

I don't think so...he doesn't reattack with a firm position...he flings poo, off-topic, irrelevant, whatever he thinks will get under someone's skin.


I see Trump as Howard Stern-ish in his behavior, another New Yorker.

Howard can be brutal in counterattack...of course, he's a "shock jock" and not running for office.


One of the reasons I like Stern is that he is a brutally honest and candid person.

I do like Stern...haven't really listened to him since he went to Sirius, but I used to enjoy his show...yes, he's brutally honest and that's one of the things very appealing about him.


However, I readily admit that one could make a strong case for both Stern and Trump being childlike.

I don't think Stern would deny that.

Absinthe Anecdote
07-22-2015, 07:22 PM
I don't think so...he doesn't reattack with a firm position...he flings poo, off-topic, irrelevant, whatever he thinks will get under someone's skin.



And that is exactly how I would characterize your typical scrappy "trash talking" New Yorker.

They dig at you to get under your skin and pull very few punches.

Rainmaker
07-22-2015, 07:38 PM
And that is exactly how I would characterize your typical scrappy "trash talking" New yt? Yorker.

They dig at you to get under your skin and pull very few punches.

Cut from the same NYC cloth huh?

You two can stop with this obvious routine any time now.

You posers wouldn't know scrappy if it bit you in the ass son.

Although a little too liberal for my liking Donald Trump is a patriot

Howard Stern is a 65 year old deviant ,cross dressing, Christ hating ,parasite wearing a gene Simmons wig & blabbering on about free speech while threatening to sue anyone who calls him out on it.

No wonder you're a fan.

Bos Mutus
07-22-2015, 07:38 PM
And that is exactly how I would characterize your typical scrappy "trash talking" New Yorker.

They dig at you to get under your skin and pull very few punches.

LOL...oh yeah, and Rick Perry...wears glasses to make himself look smart...it doesn't work..but, he's smarter than Lindsay Graham. LOL.

Rainmaker
07-22-2015, 09:33 PM
re: Senator Cleland, I am not overly familiar with anyone discrediting their military service.



Saxby Chambliss.. The RINO Chicken Hawk that got 2 student draft deferments, when his country called. yet, had the gall to smear a Silver star winner and Disabled Vet Max Cleland as somehow "lacking in courage" for voting against the Patriot act.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tKFYpd0q9nE

Just Another Typical NEOCON Bucket of Shit....

MikeKerriii
07-23-2015, 12:14 AM
Never was a 'supporter' in the sense that I never felt like I would / could vote for him. I think he brought up a couple of subjects that should be talked about, albeit in a manner that seems to have pissed a lot of people off but that is usually the case with the 'elephant in the room.'

Part of me likens him to Ralph Nader; Nader never really had a chance of winning the Presidency but used his candidacy to talk about what was important to him: the environment, consumer advocacy etc. I think Donald Trump is kind of doing the same thing ... but what is important for him to talk about is Donald Trump.



re: Duckworth (I assume you mean Congresswoman Duckworth) and Senator Cleland, I am not overly familiar with anyone discrediting their military service.

re: Kerry. About the only difference I can see is that the veterans who came out publicly questioning John Kerry's service were people who had served (some of them had actually served with him) and were arguing that his record (while it still being the official record) had been inflated. I never really lent much attention to it as it seemed to have little facts to back up their points. Donald Trump (veteran of 4 education deferments and a medical DQ) questioning the service of John McCain would be like me telling my daughter's surgeon how he should have conducted one of her surgeries.

Others have covered the attacks on Cleland.

You don't remember Joe Walsh and the "no true hero" attacks?

http://thinkprogress.org/election/2012/07/03/510443/joe-walsh-tammy-duckworth-service/
http://thinkprogress.org/election/2012/07/03/510791/vote-vets-joe-walsh/
http://www.msnbc.com/the-last-word/walsh-suggests-iraq-vet-not-true-her

The Republican response to these attacks was a huge upwelling of hypocritical silence

MikeKerriii
07-23-2015, 12:18 AM
Yeah, soon enough the media will shed light on the fact that he's a human being. I can't wait for that dirt to come out!

In the mean time, we need to press on with our efforts to elect someone to keep that deficit spending on track. Borrowing $.40 for each $1.00 we spend is a must if we are to keep supporting our precious entitlement system.

You are going to elect someone that has left investors holding the bag with bankruptcy multiple times to get the books balance. That is both sad and funny.

MikeKerriii
07-23-2015, 12:21 AM
Cut from the same NYC cloth huh?

You two can stop with this obvious routine any time now.

You posers wouldn't know scrappy if it bit you in the ass son.

Although a little too liberal for my liking Donald Trump is a patriot

Howard Stern is a 65 year old deviant ,cross dressing, Christ hating ,parasite wearing a gene Simmons wig & blabbering on about free speech while threatening to sue anyone who calls him out on it.

No wonder you're a fan.

Is there anyone who doesn't terrify you into senseless attacks?

Mjölnir
07-23-2015, 02:43 AM
Saxby Chambliss.. The RINO Chicken Hawk that got 2 student draft deferments, when his country called. yet, had the gall to smear a Silver star winner and Disabled Vet Max Cleland as somehow "lacking in courage" for voting against the Patriot act.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tKFYpd0q9nE

Just Another Typical NEOCON Bucket of Shit....

OK ... I kind of remember that. Chambliss was talking about Cleland's votes on a DHS bill, which miscategorized Cleland's reasons for voting against the bill -- politics.


Others have covered the attacks on Cleland.

You don't remember Joe Walsh and the "no true hero" attacks?

http://thinkprogress.org/election/2012/07/03/510443/joe-walsh-tammy-duckworth-service/
http://thinkprogress.org/election/2012/07/03/510791/vote-vets-joe-walsh/
http://www.msnbc.com/the-last-word/walsh-suggests-iraq-vet-not-true-her

The Republican response to these attacks was a huge upwelling of hypocritical silence

I hadn't heard of that ... I read the stories and Walsh sounds like a guy who was grabbing at straws. Ill advised tactic on his part for sure.

I am not shocked by the hypocritical silence, it happens on both sides (D & R). Look at the shooting of the female in San Francisco which has spawned many a talk about sanctuary cities in the US ... if she or the shooter fit a slightly different demographic the left would have likely jumped all over this; as it is the right is running with it. We talk about $15.00 minimum wage for baristas in Seattle but are happy to buy goods from countries with (practically) state-sponsored sweat shops. Apple uses their public pulpit to deride a state law on same sex marriage but does hundreds of millions of dollars in business in countries like Qatar and Saudi Arabia -- which publicly executes people for being homosexual.

BT BT

Now, Walsh does bring up a good (unrelated tangent) about if it is possible for a politician to over-emphasize their military records. I have worked with, deployed with, fought with many truly heroic individuals ... some I don't think I could vote for in an election because I don't think they would do a good job.

garhkal
07-23-2015, 06:07 AM
Who is a Trump supporter? I'm guessing that we have a few of them in here.

I wish he'd get the hell out of the race, but he might actually help thin the republican field, and then drop out.

I'm worried that he might end up running as an independent and siphon enough votes from the Republican nominee, and set up Hillary for a win.

I think that is about the only chance Hillary has to win, and I hope that doesn't happen.

I can't stand Hillary.

Waves hand high.

Compared to most of the rest of the GOP field, i find him a breath of fresh air with his tactlessness and unwillingness to give in to PC Pressure. I also find most of what he stands for agreeable.



Watching Republicans who complain about Trumps attacks on McCain handle questions abut why they were silent about attacks on Duckworth, Cleland and Kerry is funny as hell also,


Or why they are not raising any stink about McCain's comments about all those who went to Trump's AZ rally must be crazy.


To me, he seems like the type that will not be that hampered from personal scandal...he doesn't get up there and preach family values and all that stuff.

I think if you don't preach a moralistic code, it's a little easier to get over the "scandals."


That to me is also one big side bonus to having a SINGLE person run. They can say "well since i am single, yo won't have to worry about issues of adultery in the WH!


I actually think it is more to do with him being super rich. There comes a point when people become so rich that everyone around them is simply a "yes man" and everyone coddles them. They basically turn into a small child like you describe where the world revolves around them.

To me that is one of the bigger reasons the rest of the GOP seems to be ganging up on him. Cause he doesn't need to pander to the GOPs normal special interest groups for funds and as such doesn't have to tote THEIR party line.

MikeKerriii
07-23-2015, 06:28 AM
Waves hand high.

Compared to most of the rest of the GOP field, i find him a breath of fresh air with his tactlessness and unwillingness to give in to PC Pressure. I also find most of what he stands for agreeable. I have smelled fresher air out of porta-potty on a hot day.




Or why they are not raising any stink about McCain's comments about all those who went to Trump's AZ rally must be crazy. Why raise a stink about an accurate assessment?




That to me is also one big side bonus to having a SINGLE person run. They can say "well since i am single, yo won't have to worry about issues of adultery in the WH! The only single person running Is Lindsey Graham.




To me that is one of the bigger reasons the rest of the GOP seems to be ganging up on him. Cause he doesn't need to pander to the GOPs normal special interest groups for funds and as such doesn't have to tote THEIR party line. Or he is simply a narcissistic jackass who cares about nothing but hyping himself.

garhkal
07-23-2015, 08:55 AM
Why raise a stink about an accurate assessment?

So IYO someone who listened to Trump is Crazy?

Absinthe Anecdote
07-23-2015, 12:57 PM
In Trump's most recent Anderson Cooper interview he threatened a third party run.

It's beginning to look a lot like 1992.

I really don't want that to happen, it is essentially handing the presidency to Hillary.

FLAPS, USAF (ret)
07-23-2015, 01:27 PM
You are going to elect someone that has left investors holding the bag with bankruptcy multiple times to get the books balance. That is both sad and funny.

Unfortunately, the risk of I investing involves loosing your money to bankruptcy. It happens all the time, and smart investors know this. This is why it's so effing idiotic that DEMS want to convince (stupid) voters that the "rich" people only pay 15% taxes, when they know damn well they are referring to the capital gains taxes that are low for a reason, to incentivize people to invest. It's investing that fuels growth. However, there's a risk to investing...with ANY company. That's why the taxes are lower.

By the way, I never said I'd vote for Trump. I will not. However, it's safe to say that MILLIONS of uninformed people will race to the polls to elect Hillary. No doubt she'll cause way more damage to this country than Trump. At least he'd get businesses back on track....which by the way is what drives our economy.

Rainmaker
07-23-2015, 03:29 PM
So IYO someone who listened to Trump is Crazy?

Rainmaker's still Skeptical that this is bread and circuses.... However, If you still believe that voting matters.....Then, there is no good reason for The Elected Government to Refuse to Follow the Law

Trump is resonating because What American's (White one's anyway) want in a Candidate, is Somebody who speaks truth to power instead of all these other RINO Saps who are so beholden to Special Money interest that they can't or won't tell the truth about the FOREIGN INVASION we are Under.

He is promising to seal the border, repatriate the invaders back to Mexico and bring our manufacturing base back from China.

Weather he actually means it or is just a Stalking Horse to measure the mood of the electorate (so someone else can tap into it) we'll soon find out.

But, there's nothing left to lose for White Republican's with Trump because there'd be no meaningful difference between a President Hitlery and Any of the Other Republican candidates.

Any White Republican that votes for the Red Team status quo is voting for further government sanctioned discrimination against their own Children......

So, In 2016 the GOP either goes back to its base or it will cease to exist in its current form. Either case is a Win-Win for us Crackers.

Absinthe Anecdote
07-23-2015, 03:43 PM
Rainmaker's still Skeptical that this is bread and circuses.... However,There is no good reason for The Elected Government to Refuse to Follow the Law

Trump is resonating because What American's (White one's anyway) want in a Candidate, is Somebody who speaks truth to power instead of all these other RINO Saps who are so beholden to Special Money interest that they can't or won't tell the truth about the FOREIGN INVASION we are Under.

He is promising to seal the border, repatriate the invaders back to Mexico and bring our manufacturing base back from China.

Weather he actually means it or is just a Stalking Horse to measure the mood of the electorate (so someone else can tap into it) we'll soon find out.

But, there's nothing left to lose for White Republican's with Trump because there'd be no meaningful difference between a President Hitlery and Any of the Other Republican candidates.

Any White Republican that votes for the Red Team status quo is voting for further government sanctioned discrimination against their own Children......

So, In 2016 the GOP either goes back to its base or it will cease to exist in its current form. Either case is a Win-Win for us Crackers.


http://youtu.be/WLKbcrC0krQ

You sound like Bill the Butcher ranting against the Irish.

MikeKerriii
07-23-2015, 05:39 PM
So IYO someone who listened to Trump is Crazy?

Going to that rally on that subject and listening to that troll on that subject is a sign of some kind of mental defect, Either crazy or stupidity works though.

Just like the idiots that listen to Alex Jones on CHEM-TRAILS and Jade Helm.

Rainmaker
07-23-2015, 08:23 PM
Is there anyone who doesn't terrify you into senseless attacks?

Speaking of Presidential campaigns..... How's yours going Mike? Rainmaker's been checking the website daily......

http://spokanenaacp.com/leadership/

But, for some reason haven't been able to find any updates. Can you give us a current status? when is the actual vote going to be held?

MikeKerriii
07-23-2015, 08:40 PM
Speaking of Presidential campaigns..... How's yours going Mike? Rainmaker's been checking the website daily......

http://spokanenaacp.com/leadership/

But, for some reason haven't been able to find any updates. Can you give us a current status? when is the actual vote going to be held?

You poor frightened and cowardly little child! I pity you and those around you.

Rainmaker
07-23-2015, 09:02 PM
You poor frightened and cowardly little child! I pity you and those around you.

So, should we take this to mean you've conceded the election?

MitchellJD1969
07-23-2015, 09:03 PM
I remember as a small child wondering why we honored soldiers who were killed in war...when the object was to not get killed.

Of course, then I turned 7 and matured.

That's the thing about the Trump, sometimes it's like he's a grade-school kid...and if someone says something negative about him, he'll attack them back in the most childish way...that's what he was doing to McCain, retaliating like a 6 year old.

I dont care for trump but al franken said pretty much the same thing about mcain a while back and nobody thought it was offensive.

Trumps a convienient target to focus on...no way o'mally, webb, or sanders wiil get as much scrutiny as trump or the rest of the repub field. Although I think o'mally pissed of the left wingers at netroots by saying all lives matter....he sure did backpedal fast.

Mjölnir
07-23-2015, 11:29 PM
You poor frightened and cowardly little child! I pity you and those around you.

From the Community Guidelines:

Disruption
You're welcome to voice your opinion here, and it would be a boring place if you didn't. But if you disagree with a comment that's been made, keep it civil. Posts designed to instigate or disrupt discussions or that contain offensive material may be removed, along with other messages posted in response. Please don't use obscene or offensive language, hate speech or engage in personal attacks of other members. Bashing services on branch-specific forums or any forum is not acceptable within our communities. Posts made with the intent to belittle, harass or otherwise disrupt a community will be removed. Repeated instances of such harassment and disruption may result in a revocation of posting privileges.

http://media.giphy.com/media/fzZaLJjnNscKs/giphy.gif

MikeKerriii
07-23-2015, 11:55 PM
I dont care for trump but al franken said pretty much the same thing about mcain a while back and nobody thought it was offensive.

Trumps a convienient target to focus on...no way o'mally, webb, or sanders wiil get as much scrutiny as trump or the rest of the repub field. Although I think o'mally pissed of the left wingers at netroots by saying all lives matter....he sure did backpedal fast.

When Franenand Cris rock said that Idiotic BS they were both comedians acting like comedians and those folks sometimes say stupid things, this was well before Frankin ran for office

Trump said his idiocy while he was running for presidency and he has double down on the stupidity multiple times.

Rainmaker
07-24-2015, 03:40 AM
From the Community Guidelines:

Disruption
You're welcome to voice your opinion here, and it would be a boring place if you didn't. But if you disagree with a comment that's been made, keep it civil. Posts designed to instigate or disrupt discussions or that contain offensive material may be removed, along with other messages posted in response. Please don't use obscene or offensive language, hate speech or engage in personal attacks of other members. Bashing services on branch-specific forums or any forum is not acceptable within our communities. Posts made with the intent to belittle, harass or otherwise disrupt a community will be removed. Repeated instances of such harassment and disruption may result in a revocation of posting privileges.

http://media.giphy.com/media/fzZaLJjnNscKs/giphy.gif

You can sell your soul to the Devil. But, your ass belongs to Thor...

garhkal
07-24-2015, 04:45 AM
Going to that rally on that subject and listening to that troll on that subject is a sign of some kind of mental defect, Either crazy or stupidity works though.

Just like the idiots that listen to Alex Jones on CHEM-TRAILS and Jade Helm.

Then what about the thousands who show up for Hillary, even WITH all her scandals? Are they not crazier?



I dont care for trump but al franken said pretty much the same thing about mcain a while back and nobody thought it was offensive.
When Franenand Cris rock said that Idiotic BS they were both comedians acting like comedians and those folks sometimes say stupid things, this was well before Frankin ran for office

Trump said his idiocy while he was running for presidency and he has double down on the stupidity multiple times.

Sp what, Comedians are given a free pass on it?

Mjölnir
07-24-2015, 05:52 AM
You can sell your soul to the Devil. But, your ass belongs to Thor...

ha ha ....

FLAPS, USAF (ret)
07-24-2015, 01:58 PM
Then what about the thousands who show up for Hillary, even WITH all her scandals? Are they not crazier?

Except now there are far more crazy Hillary fans than fans of any conservative candidate. That's what happens when the government INTENTIONALLY makes you dependent on it to take care of you. It's called, buying votes.

The DEMS in power are not stupid people. They know exactly what they're doing, which is why I'd bet away my retirement pension on Hillary winning the next election. She will win, the liberals will cheer and party for weeks, then the black cloud will cover this nation, while liberals keep blaming Bush.

Rainmaker
07-27-2015, 05:29 PM
In Trump's most recent Anderson Cooper interview he threatened a third party run.

It's beginning to look a lot like 1992.

I really don't want that to happen, it is essentially handing the presidency to Hillary.

You seem to be saying that If We don't want The Hildabest to be POTUS. Then our only other Choices are voting for a Socialist posing as an Independent (Bernie Sanders) or yet another Bought and Paid for Neocon RINO (like Bush, Christie, McCain, et.al).....

I look at those options and say Why not Donald Trump?

Given what I know right now, I really don't think there would be any substantial difference between Hillary and Jeb.

SomeRandomGuy
07-27-2015, 05:43 PM
Except now there are far more crazy Hillary fans than fans of any conservative candidate. That's what happens when the government INTENTIONALLY makes you dependent on it to take care of you. It's called, buying votes.

The DEMS in power are not stupid people. They know exactly what they're doing, which is why I'd bet away my retirement pension on Hillary winning the next election. She will win, the liberals will cheer and party for weeks, then the black cloud will cover this nation, while liberals keep blaming Bush.

I know it is a fun little comeback, but when is the last time you have heard a liberal blame Bush? The only issue that I ever see Bush get blamed for is the problems in Iraq and Afghanistan. He does kind of own that problem though.

I haven't heard any liberal blame Bush for anything else in several years. Why do people keep parroting that rhetoric? It's almost like Conservatives are trying to keep the narrative alive so that they can blame Obama if they get their candidate in office and things go to shit.

MikeKerriii
07-27-2015, 06:11 PM
Then what about the thousands who show up for Hillary, even WITH all her scandals? Are they not crazier? I since most of the Scandals are like Watergate and Bengazi are manufactured, not paying attention to them is OK. But unlike Trump she is not openly lying and spooning ignorance hate and bile on stage.




Sp what, Comedians are given a free pass on it? Comedians do get a pass, It they did not there would be no comedians at all.

garhkal
07-27-2015, 07:32 PM
You seem to be saying that If We don't want The Hildabest to be POTUS. Then our only other Choices are voting for a Socialist posing as an Independent (like Bernie Sanders) or yet another Bought and Paid for Neocon RINO (like Bush, Christie, McCain, et.al).....

I look at those options and say Why not Donald Trump?

Given what I know right now, I really don't think there would be any substantial difference between Hillary and Jeb.

Neither do i. Which is why i hope for a Cruz/trump ticket.

Rainmaker
07-27-2015, 09:28 PM
Neither do i. Which is why i hope for a Cruz/trump ticket.

Most of the GOP candidates seem to be running on the "vote for us and we'll be the lesser of two evils" platform.

Somehow Trump saying that he wants bring back jobs and enforce immigration laws makes him a radical right winger to the media and the rest of the Rinos.

MikeKerriii
07-27-2015, 10:51 PM
Neither do i. Which is why i hope for a Cruz/trump ticket.

Democrats are hoping for Trump\Cruz Ticket also.
( From a Republican site)

http://dyn.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2016/president/us/general_election_trump_vs_sanders-5565.html
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2016/president/us/general_election_trump_vs_clinton-5491.html

Everyone enjoys a good political curb stomp

Rainmaker
07-27-2015, 11:01 PM
Democrats are hoping for Trump\Cruz Ticket also.
( From a Republican site)

http://dyn.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2016/president/us/general_election_trump_vs_sanders-5565.html
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2016/president/us/general_election_trump_vs_clinton-5491.html

Everyone enjoys a good political curb stomp

It's still early and at this point Trump has far more support and name recognition than Barry Soetoro did.

Once, Hillbillary's handlers can't hide her anymore, then her toxic personality will drag her down

MikeKerriii
07-27-2015, 11:20 PM
It's still early and at this point Trump has far more support and name recognition than Barry Sotero did.

Once, Hillbillary's handlers can't hide her anymore, then her toxic personality will drag her down

A poor man who cant even get the Candidates names right grasping at straws. So sad.

You Ignored the fact that the Sander also looks like he would crush Trump.

Rainmaker
07-27-2015, 11:26 PM
A poor man who cant even get the Candidates names right grasping at straws. So sad.

You Ignored the fact that the Sander also looks like he would crush Trump.

Are you sure? Then with you being a member of the communist party USA, you should be be pulling for Trump instead of constantly whining about him being raaayycisss...

MikeKerriii
07-28-2015, 12:17 AM
Are you sure? Then with you being a member of the communist party USA, you should be be pulling for Trump instead of constantly whining about him being raaayycisss...

I am pulling for the racist anti-military, draft dodger to win the Republican nomination. The ensuing Democratic landslide would be very good for the country, I don't think that being a Racist will harm him in the primary, appealing to the values of the base never hurts

Hopefully the republicans will tale a decade or two to recover from that stupidity, Perhaps they might break into two parties, the loons can for their own party making them irrelevant for decades. They can use traditional names: The "Whigs' and the "No-nothings."

garhkal
07-28-2015, 04:36 AM
I am pulling for the racist anti-military, draft dodger to win the Republican nomination. The ensuing Democratic landslide would be very good for the country,

How on earth do you think a democratic landslide would be good for the nation?

FLAPS, USAF (ret)
07-28-2015, 01:19 PM
How on earth do you think a democratic landslide would be good for the nation?

1. Unions will be mandatory for every company. Due to union popularity, membership and dues will be mandatory. We know you'd pay anyway. Just trying to make it 'easier' for the employee to contribute.

2. We'll balance the budget by making all 'rich' people making $200K pay 80% income taxes. Oh yeah, Capital Gains taxes will be 50%, because these people who so-called invest are greedy anyway.

3. Minimum wage will be $15 for ALL employees, regardless of your business. If you don't want to pay it, it's because you're greedy and probably a bigot.

4. Affirmative Action will be mandatory for all businesses, due of course to "White Privilege." Successful white people got that way because they won the "genetic lottery," rather than so-called hard work or innovation.

5. Equal pay equal work. The best way to handle this is to mandate a government pay scale throughout the country. Minimum wage will of course be the lowest pay grade (P-1), with the highest being P-15, not to exceed $200K (CEO pay).

6. Greedy Wall Street will be no more. If you want to invest, you can buy savings bonds.

7. We believe in Diversity. All local,state and federal election candidates must include a percentage of minorities (except Asians, who don't count) equal to the national average.

8. Hatred will not be tolerated, so religious bakeries must make LGBTQ-themed cakes or face prison time. No LGBTQ owned business will be forced to go against their beliefs to make religious-themed cakes at any time.

9. Private schools are for the 'privileged,' and therefore open to all income levels.

10. Section 8 housing will be made available in all 'privileged' high income communities, which is defined by total family AGI of $150K or more.

11. Electric cars will be mandated after a 3.5 year grace period, beginning on the first day Hillary takes office. This will allow her to leave office (if not re-elected) with her legacy.

12. All public and private Christmas displays must not exceed the number of atheist displays. This applies to each household. We feel this will level the playing field and reduce bigotry in the community.

13. Private donations to charity are no longer encouraged, as the government will do a more efficient job with income withholdings from the super rich (at least $200K).

MikeKerriii
07-28-2015, 02:04 PM
How on earth do you think a democratic landslide would be good for the nation?

Two reasons: I am a Democrat and think that the republicans in office are a bunch of whiny brats who can't legislate or even think beyond what they are paid to think.

2. Folks Like Steve King and Gohmert, would sink into irrelevancy and that would be great for our nation.

You do realize that there are more Democrats than Republicans don't you?

ADDed: Eisenhower being the only good republican President in my lifetime has something to do with it also.

Rainmaker
07-28-2015, 03:15 PM
How on earth do you think a democratic landslide would be good for the nation?

MikeKerriii is right, there are more democrats than republicans now. But, The question to ask is why?

It's Because, (just like most of the sheeple) Mike has been self radicalized by the girls on the view into believing that the founder's intended us to be a Democracy (i.e Majority Dicatatorship).

Starting With Bush, the Constitution has been indefinitely suspended by executive order rather than by laws passed thru Congress.

The Congress is complicit in this. They could've stopped it. But, they'd rather act as controlled opposition for Whichever party's in power.

Illiegal Immigration was the tool used to dilute and disenfranchise the majority of Americans (Caucasians).

Mike hates Caucasians, so he supports this.

Homosexual Agenda was the tool used to eradicate the Majority American religion (Protestant Christianity) that had the capability to possibly prevent this totalitarian transition.

Mike hates Christians, so he supports this.

Off-shoring the Nation's manufactuirng base is the tool to make otherwise self-sufficient Americans dependent on Government and thereby unable to resist unwanted Government intrusion into their lives.

Mike hates self-sufficient Americans, so he supports this.

This is why Rainmaker agrees with Mike that it would be better for the GOP to collapse, Rather than to try and elect another RINO status quo candidate.

The irony is that Trump is being painted as a radical right wing because, he supports enforcing immigration laws and bringing back the country's manufacturing base. That idea goes totally against what both parties have been conspiring to accomplish since the end of the cold war.

Rainmaker
07-28-2015, 03:26 PM
ADDed: Eisenhower being the only good republican President in my lifetime has something to do with it also.

Just curious why would you think Eisenhower was a good President?

Ike rounded up and deported 1.3 Million Illegal Aliens..... Shouldn't that make him a "racist, vile scumbag" in your book?

http://www.encyclopedia.com/article-1G2-2831200293/operation-wetback.html

"At the urging of Brownell and President Dwight D. Eisenhower, Congress increased funding for the Border Patrol. The congressional response was also influenced by national media coverage of illegal immigration’s growing threat to national security and the American economy."

MikeKerriii
07-28-2015, 03:49 PM
Just curious why would you think Eisenhower was a good President?

Ike rounded up and deported 1.3 Million Illegal Aliens..... Shouldn't that make him a "racist, vile scumbag" in your book?

http://www.encyclopedia.com/article-1G2-2831200293/operation-wetback.html

"At the urging of Brownell and President Dwight D. Eisenhower, Congress increased funding for the Border Patrol. The congressional response was also influenced by national media coverage of illegal immigration’s growing threat to national security and the American economy."

He built the Interstate highways system and sent the US troops into Alabama to slap down a criminal Governor

Rainmaker
07-28-2015, 04:06 PM
He built the Interstate highways system and sent the US troops into Alabama to slap down a criminal movement.

You do realize that Ike stole both of those ideas from Hitler?

MikeKerriii
07-28-2015, 04:16 PM
You do realize that Ike stole both of those ideas from Hitler?

The highways, yes why not steal a good idea from a bad man?

The slapping down the criminal Governor was a constitutional requirement, he was enforcing a valid federal court order and that is part of the job

TJMAC77SP
07-28-2015, 05:14 PM
He built the Interstate highways system and sent the US troops into Alabama to slap down a criminal Governor

The history education you got at your mediocre high school is showing again. Ike sent troops to Little Rock, AR, It was Kennedy who sent troops to Alabama (and Miss). Not that it really matters to most of us but this kind of thing appeals to you............the Governor of Arkansas at the time (who was an opponent to integration) was a Democrat.

Mjölnir
07-28-2015, 05:36 PM
You do realize that there are more Democrats than Republicans don't you?

True, just under 30% of the country identifies as Democrat, 25% as Republican and 46% as Independent; hardly resounding for either side in what is for all intent and purposes a two-party system. Tracking the 'leanings' of the independents shows that on social issues, a majority of independents would vote with democrats, on economics a majority would vote with republicans ... so it comes down to what is the 'hot topic du jour.'

TJMAC77SP
07-28-2015, 05:42 PM
True, just under 30% of the country identifies as Democrat, 25% as Republican and 46% as Independent; hardly resounding for either side in what is for all intent and purposes a two-party system. Tracking the 'leanings' of the independents shows that on social issues, a majority of independents would vote with democrats, on economics a majority would vote with republicans ... so it comes down to what is the 'hot topic du jour.'

Dude.....to hell with your measured, cogent and adult responses !!

SomeRandomGuy
07-28-2015, 05:44 PM
True, just under 30% of the country identifies as Democrat, 25% as Republican and 46% as Independent; hardly resounding for either side in what is for all intent and purposes a two-party system. Tracking the 'leanings' of the independents shows that on social issues, a majority of independents would vote with democrats, on economics a majority would vote with republicans ... so it comes down to what is the 'hot topic du jour.'

You also have to consider urban, suburban, and rural voters. While there may be more democrats in America they are mostly congregated in urban and suburban areas. The founding fathers wanted to be careful to make sure that certain areas do not exert undue influence over the rest. As Rainmaker has somewhat correctly stated, that was one of the big issues that started the Civil War. People in Southern states began losing influence in Congress. That's happening again now. How many trips did either Presidential Candidate make to Wyoming, Montana, North Dakota, and South Dakota during the last election? It wasn't very many.

That's actually a blessing though. I'm from Dayton, Ohio. As one of the few states actually in play we Ohioans got pounded with political ads. Even worse we had to pick up the bill for all these trips and speeches. The Federal Government pays for Secret Service, and the Campaigns pay fees to the venue but the State of Ohio had to pay for Ohio State Highway Patrol overtime. We paid an incredible amount so Obama and Romney could seemingly visit us every damn week to tell us absolutely nothing..

Mjölnir
07-28-2015, 05:48 PM
Dude.....to hell with your measured, cogent and adult responses !!

http://i214.photobucket.com/albums/cc275/Dani-Death/Cartoons/Tantrum.gif

Mjölnir
07-28-2015, 06:03 PM
You also have to consider urban, suburban, and rural voters. While there may be more democrats in America they are mostly congregated in urban and suburban areas. The founding fathers wanted to be careful to make sure that certain areas do not exert undue influence over the rest. As Rainmaker has somewhat correctly stated, that was one of the big issues that started the Civil War. People in Southern states began losing influence in Congress. That's happening again now. How many trips did either Presidential Candidate make to Wyoming, Montana, North Dakota, and South Dakota during the last election? It wasn't very many.

Yes, the Civil War was the culmination of many issues that caused it; a big error I am seeing in this discussion is looking at the issues without the proper perspective on the time / history -- looking at a 19th century problem with a 21st century lens -- it doesn't work. President Lincoln was a great man, who thought slavery was evil, but he also wanted to deport the freed slaves back to Africa because "they would never assimilate into a civilized western culture." Moving forward we could look at the civil rights movement, LBJ championed the civil rights bill, but was an overt racist. Many political analysts (both sides) have agreed that the flip of the perception on race / civil rights by the parties is attached to their positions on welfare, social programs and government spending.

As far as presidential visits to small states, it is because those states don't carry weight in the electoral college. If you have six minutes, watch the below video ... it discusses the electoral college and at the end walks through how it is possible to win the Presidency with 22% of the popular vote based on the way the electoral college proportions votes.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7wC42HgLA4k

MikeKerriii
07-28-2015, 06:04 PM
You also have to consider urban, suburban, and rural voters. While there may be more democrats in America they are mostly congregated in urban and suburban areas. The founding fathers wanted to be careful to make sure that certain areas do not exert undue influence over the rest. As Rainmaker has somewhat correctly stated, that was one of the big issues that started the Civil War. People in Southern states began losing influence in Congress. That's happening again now. How many trips did either Presidential Candidate make to Wyoming, Montana, North Dakota, and South Dakota during the last election? It wasn't very many.

That's actually a blessing though. I'm from Dayton, Ohio. As one of the few states actually in play we Ohioans got pounded with political ads. Even worse we had to pick up the bill for all these trips and speeches. The Federal Government pays for Secret Service, and the Campaigns pay fees to the venue but the State of Ohio had to pay for Ohio State Highway Patrol overtime. We paid an incredible amount so Obama and Romney could seemingly visit us every damn week to tell us absolutely nothing..

In Delaware we are blessed with a near total absence of visiting politicians during elections, we get politicians only at ceremonies at DOVER AFB and those guys fly in and out.

garhkal
07-28-2015, 06:35 PM
Two reasons: I am a Democrat and think that the republicans in office are a bunch of whiny brats who can't legislate or even think beyond what they are paid to think.

2. Folks Like Steve King and Gohmert, would sink into irrelevancy and that would be great for our nation.

You do realize that there are more Democrats than Republicans don't you?

ADDed: Eisenhower being the only good republican President in my lifetime has something to do with it also.

And look at which cities are the most in ruins/highest crime rates. Detroit, Chicago, LA.. All dem ran and held for 20+ years!


True, just under 30% of the country identifies as Democrat, 25% as Republican and 46% as Independent; hardly resounding for either side in what is for all intent and purposes a two-party system. Tracking the 'leanings' of the independents shows that on social issues, a majority of independents would vote with democrats, on economics a majority would vote with republicans ... so it comes down to what is the 'hot topic du jour.'

Combine that with since most illegals and welfare leeches vote dem, their rolls have increased the longer we have kept our borders open and porous. Add to that the # of democratic controlled states/cities which are sanctuary cities and the ones most likely to want to give drivers licenses to illegals, i see the Dems trying to FLOOD the voter rolls with voters that will keep them in power.

Mjölnir
07-28-2015, 07:13 PM
And look at which cities are the most in ruins/highest crime rates. Detroit, Chicago, LA.. All dem ran and held for 20+ years!



Combine that with since most illegals and welfare leeches vote dem, their rolls have increased the longer we have kept our borders open and porous. Add to that the # of democratic controlled states/cities which are sanctuary cities and the ones most likely to want to give drivers licenses to illegals, i see the Dems trying to FLOOD the voter rolls with voters that will keep them in power.

We lived just outside Detroit until I was ent to live with my grandparents. Detroit (like many of the cities you name and others are or were great places to live, lots to do, plenty of infrastructure etc. as long as the tax base remains to support it. It is hard not to make a connection that over-reliance on high taxes and social programs that do not promote getting out of the program were the downfall of many of the great US cities. Detroit in particular is interesting to study because the decline was so rapid.

TJMAC77SP
07-28-2015, 09:11 PM
Yes, the Civil War was the culmination of many issues that caused it; a big error I am seeing in this discussion is looking at the issues without the proper perspective on the time / history -- looking at a 19th century problem with a 21st century lens -- it doesn't work. President Lincoln was a great man, who thought slavery was evil, but he also wanted to deport the freed slaves back to Africa because "they would never assimilate into a civilized western culture." Moving forward we could look at the civil rights movement, LBJ championed the civil rights bill, but was an overt racist. Many political analysts (both sides) have agreed that the flip of the perception on race / civil rights by the parties is attached to their positions on welfare, social programs and government spending.

As far as presidential visits to small states, it is because those states don't carry weight in the electoral college. If you have six minutes, watch the below video ... it discusses the electoral college and at the end walks through how it is possible to win the Presidency with 22% of the popular vote based on the way the electoral college proportions votes.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7wC42HgLA4k

Your going to continue no matter I say aren't you?

Mjölnir
07-28-2015, 09:14 PM
Your going to continue no matter I say aren't you?

http://s3.amazonaws.com/rapgenius/popeye_i_am_what_i_am_t_copy.gif

Rainmaker
07-28-2015, 10:07 PM
Detroit in particular is interesting to study because the decline was so rapid.

The decline of Detroit is blueprint for the Decline of America that the New World Order Satanists have planned.

Just this weekend In celebration of their victory over the now dependent people of Detroit, they unveiled a graven image of their Transgendered Pedophile God Baphomet.
http://news.yahoo.com/satanic-temple-holds-public-sculpture-unveiling-detroit-173259288.html#

Detroit is victory for these perverts because, as "The great arsenal of democracy". It was once the symbol of American might and resistance against Evil.

Hundreds of Thousands of innocent little Children go missing each year, some never to be heard from again.

Many of them are suspected to be sacrificed in ritualistic killings by these monsters.

You can thank the Legal arm of the Communist Party (The ACLU) for the existence of these deviants in our once great land.

MikeKerriii
07-28-2015, 11:37 PM
Combine that with since most illegals and welfare leeches vote dem, their rolls have increased the longer we have kept our borders open and porous. Add to that the # of democratic controlled states/cities which are sanctuary cities and the ones most likely to want to give drivers licenses to illegals, i see the Dems trying to FLOOD the voter rolls with voters that will keep them in power.

Illegals voting, in more than miniscule numbers, is just a particularly ignorant straw-man. There is nothing to support that idiotic assertion.t does provide a excuse to k make it harder for the poor and the old to vote

MikeKerriii
07-28-2015, 11:39 PM
The decline of Detroit is blueprint for the Decline of America that the New World Order Satanists have planned.

Just this weekend In celebration of their victory over the now dependent people of Detroit, they unveiled a graven image of their Transgendered Pedophile God Baphomet.
http://news.yahoo.com/satanic-temple-holds-public-sculpture-unveiling-detroit-173259288.html# (http://news.yahoo.com/satanic-temple-holds-public-sculpture-unveiling-detroit-173259288.html#)

Detroit is victory for these perverts because, as "The great arsenal of democracy". It was once the symbol of American might and resistance against Evil.

Hundreds of Thousands of innocent little Children go missing each year, some never to be heard from again.

Many of them are suspected to be sacrificed in ritualistic killings by these monsters.

You can thank the Legal arm of the Communist Party (The ACLU) for the existence of these deviants in our once great land.
Was that an attempt a humor or just an indication of mental health problems?

TJMAC77SP
07-29-2015, 12:33 AM
Illegals voting, in more than miniscule numbers, is just a particularly ignorant straw-man. There is nothing to support that idiotic assertion.t does provide a excuse to k make it harder for the poor and the old to vote

So what is an acceptable level of voter fraud? Where is the line on the number of illegal aliens who vote? Or fraudulent voting at all?

Why is it that most are perfectly happy accepting statistics regarding unreported sexual assaults (some sources cite up to 68% go unreported) but completely dismiss any report of voter fraud being a problem because numbers to support a claim of widespread fraud has gone unreported?

That argument on it face is a logic failure. Unless you do a 100% audit face to face with every voter, post-election day there is no frapping way to state with any real certainty any statistic regarding potential voter fraud. If someone is going to use instances of 'known' voter fraud they should qualify their arguments as such. Of course that doesn't fit the narrative does it?

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/monkey-cage/wp/2014/10/24/could-non-citizens-decide-the-november-election/

http://www.nationalreview.com/campaign-spot/391134/jaw-dropping-study-claims-large-numbers-non-citizens-vote-us-jim-geraghty


And for some it is a dream.............

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/general_politics/may_2015/most_democrats_think_illegal_immigrants_should_vot e

FLAPS, USAF (ret)
07-29-2015, 12:43 AM
Illegals voting, in more than miniscule numbers, is just a particularly ignorant straw-man. There is nothing to support that idiotic assertion.t does provide a excuse to k make it harder for the poor and the old to vote

How exactly is anyone making it harder for the poor or old to vote?

MikeKerriii
07-29-2015, 02:05 AM
So what is an acceptable level of voter fraud? Where is the line on the number of illegal aliens who vote? Or fraudulent voting at all?

Why is it that most are perfectly happy accepting statistics regarding unreported sexual assaults (some sources cite up to 68% go unreported) but completely dismiss any report of voter fraud being a problem because numbers to support a claim of widespread fraud has gone unreported?

That argument on it face is a logic failure. Unless you do a 100% audit face to face with every voter, post-election day there is no frapping way to state with any real certainty any statistic regarding potential voter fraud. If someone is going to use instances of 'known' voter fraud they should qualify their arguments as such. Of course that doesn't fit the narrative does it?

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/monkey-cage/wp/2014/10/24/could-non-citizens-decide-the-november-election/

http://www.nationalreview.com/campaign-spot/391134/jaw-dropping-study-claims-large-numbers-non-citizens-vote-us-jim-geraghty


And for some it is a dream.............

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/general_politics/may_2015/most_democrats_think_illegal_immigrants_should_vot e
there is no evidence or even indication that voter problem is more that a very rare thing, It is usefully to provide excuses and give racist chums something to fuss about but that is about it, How many confirmed cases of election fraud have been found in the last decade?

An I don't click on the nation review, a magazine founded by a open an very proud racist that has gone downhill since his death

If you doubt that Buckley was a racist check this out, as James Baldwin guts him in a debatehttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oFeoS41xe7w

garhkal
07-29-2015, 04:52 AM
Illegals voting, in more than miniscule numbers, is just a particularly ignorant straw-man. There is nothing to support that idiotic assertion.t does provide a excuse to k make it harder for the poor and the old to vote

And how exactly is voter ID making it harder for poor/elderly to vote?
Do they not already require ID for
Having a bank account
Cashing checks
Driving
Getting drugs from a pharmacy
Going into government buildings (which the SS office, welfare offices etc ARE)???

MikeKerriii
07-29-2015, 05:00 AM
And how exactly is voter ID making it harder for poor/elderly to vote?
Do they not already require ID for
Having a bank account
Cashing checks
Driving
Getting drugs from a pharmacy
Going into government buildings (which the SS office, welfare offices etc ARE)???

Some of those things require ID some do not, the problem is when they make the form of ID required narrow enough, My mother i did not have ID that fit the requirements of some states for over a decade before her birth, She simply had no need for it. And the States that allow a CCW to be used and refuse to allow an ID from a State run college are just making the point obvious,

I could get along pretty well, bar driving, with just my retired military ID but that would not satisfy the clowns that wrote these laws, since it is not STATE issued. A college ID would work for all those purposes also

It is not just being able to ID yourself it is making the IDs hard to obtain, essentially creating a poll tax.

All to fix a non-existent problem

FLAPS, USAF (ret)
07-29-2015, 12:53 PM
Some of those things require ID some do not, the problem is when they make the form of ID required narrow enough, My mother i did not have ID that fit the requirements of some states for over a decade before her birth, She simply had no need for it. And the States that allow a CCW to be used and refuse to allow an ID from a State run college are just making the point obvious,

I could get along pretty well, bar driving, with just my retired military ID but that would not satisfy the clowns that wrote these laws, since it is not STATE issued. A college ID would work for all those purposes also

It is not just being able to ID yourself it is making the IDs hard to obtain, essentially creating a poll tax.

All to fix a non-existent problem

Saying it's a non-existent problem is like saying miilitary/civilian identity theft wasn't a problem one day prior to finding out 20 million gov employees had their data stolen. So, why not address the issue before finding out 10 million illegals voted in an election, or that 30 million legal citizens voted multiple times in the same election? Why not? Besides, if voters can somehow find a ride to a polling site, surely don't you think they can find a ride to the DMV to get an ID before the next election?

TJMAC77SP
07-29-2015, 01:45 PM
there is no evidence or even indication that voter problem is more that a very rare thing, It is usefully to provide excuses and give racist chums something to fuss about but that is about it, How many confirmed cases of election fraud have been found in the last decade?

An I don't click on the nation review, a magazine founded by a open an very proud racist that has gone downhill since his death

If you doubt that Buckley was a racist check this out, as James Baldwin guts him in a debatehttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oFeoS41xe7w

I notice you didn't challenge the information but merely attacked one of the sources. Both of my first citations used the same source for their articles. BTW: I found a similar article on the Huff Post. Would that have made you happy? BTW, a simple search would have found arguments against the study but that is typical isn't it? Bottom line is that 'facts' aren't as universal as they are in your reality.

Your assertion (which is the same of all Dem supporters) assumes that all voter fraud is committed by minorities and no GOP figure I know of has every said that. No voter ID law mentions any race or group. The assertion sounds racist itself. I applaud any effort against voter fraud, regardless of recorded instances.

I will ask the same question I did almost two years ago when we had a thread on voter ID laws and one which was asked by Flaps yesterday (and ignored)....How exactly is anyone making it harder for the poor or old to vote?

TJMAC77SP
07-29-2015, 02:01 PM
Some of those things require ID some do not, the problem is when they make the form of ID required narrow enough, My mother i did not have ID that fit the requirements of some states for over a decade before her birth, She simply had no need for it. And the States that allow a CCW to be used and refuse to allow an ID from a State run college are just making the point obvious,

I could get along pretty well, bar driving, with just my retired military ID but that would not satisfy the clowns that wrote these laws, since it is not STATE issued. A college ID would work for all those purposes also

It is not just being able to ID yourself it is making the IDs hard to obtain, essentially creating a poll tax.

All to fix a non-existent problem

Which states will not allow the use of military ID's? What states make it hard to obtain.

Things you most certainly need an ID for.

....................Opening a bank account
....................Driving
....................Cashing a check (unless it is your bank in which case you have to give them your account number...see first example)
....................Getting an Obama Phone.

Getting drugs from a pharmacy requires you to cite your name and birthday so we can take that one off the list. As for government buildings cited, I doubt that is a requirement but can't say for certain

As for college ID's, there are several reasons they would not suffice. It certainly makes no point obvious except to those who have an agenda to promote. Silly argument. A state can control the standards for obtaining a photo ID, they can't control the standards for how a college or colleges issue such IDs.

Equally silly is the labeling this as a 'poll tax' It is another lame and obvious attempt to label these laws as racist by resurrecting images of Jim Crow laws. All while ignoring the question...............why do these laws negatively affect only minorities and the poor.

MikeKerriii
07-29-2015, 02:09 PM
Which states will not allow the use of military ID's? What states make it hard to obtain.

Things you most certainly need an ID for.

....................Opening a bank account
....................Driving
....................Cashing a check (unless it is your bank in which case you have to give them your account number...see first example)
....................Getting an Obama Phone.

Getting drugs from a pharmacy requires you to cite your name and birthday so we can take that one off the list. As for government buildings cited, I doubt that is a requirement but can't say for certain

As for college ID's, there are several reasons they would not suffice. It certainly makes no point obvious except to those who have an agenda to promote. Silly argument.

Equally silly is the labeling this as a 'poll tax' It is another lame and obvious attempt to label these laws as racist by resurrecting images of Jim Crow laws. All while ignoring the question...............why do these laws negatively affect only minorities and the poor.

If you can't get a ID for free it is a poll tax, Money you must spend before you can vote

SomeRandomGuy
07-29-2015, 02:40 PM
there is no evidence or even indication that voter problem is more that a very rare thing, It is usefully to provide excuses and give racist chums something to fuss about but that is about it, How many confirmed cases of election fraud have been found in the last decade?

An I don't click on the nation review, a magazine founded by a open an very proud racist that has gone downhill since his death

If you doubt that Buckley was a racist check this out, as James Baldwin guts him in a debatehttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oFeoS41xe7w

Here are several cases for you from this past decade. You are naïve if you think this sort of thing doesn't happen all the time.

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2013/07/17/cincinnati-illegal-voting/2530119/

Rainmaker
07-29-2015, 02:47 PM
Was that an attempt a humor or just an indication of mental health problems?

Go figure. You and The ACLU support NAMBLA pedophiles erecting monuments to Their Transgendered God 'Baphomet' in the Motown town square, so that they can satisfy their 'love' of very young children....

Yet, You also think that the Confederate Flag should be "banned". Because you're so Tolerant Yo'.....

And you have the gall to accuse Rainmaker as being the one that's mentally ill??!!

Now, Get your ass back in the matrix you Commie radical!!!

FLAPS, USAF (ret)
07-29-2015, 03:20 PM
If you can't get a ID for free it is a poll tax, Money you must spend before you can vote

Well, if you think about it, NOTHING is "free." Somebody is paying for that ID, so what I think you should have said was, "If you can't get an ID that someone else is paying for, then it is a poll tax."

I suppose the transportation to the polling place should be "free" as well, meaning paid for with someone else's money? I'll assume that's what you really meant, because that's what most liberals feel entitled to, STUFF paid for with someone else's money.

The lack of personal responsibility and sense of entitlement in this country is flat out sickening. Get your Effing ID so we can cut down on ID fraud. If you're interested in voting in the next election (for Hillary, of course), then you have almost 1.5 years to save up your pennies to pay for your precious ID. Geezus, this country is Effed!

Rainmaker
07-29-2015, 03:21 PM
True story...... In the 2008 " Estadounidense Día de Elecciones", Rainmaker was standing in line at the Polling Place in Tampa FL. to cast his ballot for Mick E. Mouse for POTUS.

As I stood there in uniform (waiting and patiently Reading Plato's Republic), 2 Busloads full of Haitians (some wearing Hope and Change buttons) were unloaded and formed up in a gaggle near the line.

A Poll worker came out and informed them that " In Florida, you must register to vote through the Florida Division of Elections in order to be able to vote on Election Day " AND "In the United States only citizens are allowed to vote in national and statewide elections".

Now, Rainmaker's not sure who they were planning on voting for, or whether or not any of them actually understood what she said (because, they were all speaking in Haitian Creole). But, they immediately turned around and got back on the bus.

Surely, these Disenfranchised Taxpayer's meant no harm and were just confused Patriots and seeking to do their Civic duty they thought was expected of them....

TJMAC77SP
07-29-2015, 03:33 PM
If you can't get a ID for free it is a poll tax, Money you must spend before you can vote

Right. That's what it is.

Silly hyperbole.

BTW: you didn't answer my questions........again..............."Which states will not allow the use of military ID's? What states make it hard to obtain?"

For what's it worth I do support giving free ID's to anyone on the following:

SANP (Food Stamps), Medicaid, SSI, National School Lunch Program’s Free School Lunch, Low-Income Home Energy Assistance Program (LIHEAP), Temporary Assistance to Needy Families (TANF), or some Tribal programs. In addition, you can qualify if your income is 135% below the Federal Poverty Guidelines in your state (some states go to 150%).

The above are the requirements for an Obama Phone. This could be funded by an extra dollar on DL renewals. I wouldn't balk at that. Then, like the Obama Phone program we could have people with not only one ID but multiple IDs

Bos Mutus
07-29-2015, 03:51 PM
How exactly is anyone making it harder for the poor or old to vote?

I'm not poor, but am getting old....either way, I can't comprehend how people don't have IDs in 2015...strange world.

TJMAC77SP
07-29-2015, 03:56 PM
I'm not poor, but am getting old....either way, I can't comprehend how people don't have IDs in 2015...strange world.

Exactly. A lot of disinformation

Rainmaker
07-29-2015, 03:57 PM
Here are several cases for you from this past decade. You are naïve if you think this sort of thing doesn't happen all the time.

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2013/07/17/cincinnati-illegal-voting/2530119/

Disagree. Mikekerriii is not Naïve...... He is an indoctrinated Marxist.

To put it in terms you Godless Heathens can understand.... Marxism IS his religion, therefore he cannot be un-indoctrinated through mere debate or evidence alone.

Nature abhors a vacuum. So, whenever man takes God out of the equation..... He always sets himself up as the"God" and the State inevitably becomes the "religion"

When the person is too brainwashed to even begin to understand the problem with this....then, waking them the fuck up becomes an impossible task.

Mjölnir
07-29-2015, 04:56 PM
there is no evidence or even indication that voter problem is more that a very rare thing, It is usefully to provide excuses and give racist chums something to fuss about but that is about it, How many confirmed cases of election fraud have been found in the last decade?

While voter fraud may not take place in large or even majority numbers, it can have substantial secondary and tertiary effects (I actually did my Master's Thesis at Georgetown on voter fraud):

In the 2008 elections, Al Franken (D) challenged incumbent Senator Norm Coleman (R) from Minnesota; the election was one of the closest ever. At first Coleman was ahead by a bit over 700 votes and after months of recounts and legal challenges, Franken was declared the winner by just over 300 in July 2009 and sworn in as the junior Senator from Minnesota.

A secondary effect of Sen. Franken's win was he was the 60th Senator to caucus with the Democrats in the 111th Congress -- giving the Democrats a filibuster-proof majority (which would last through the death of Sen. Kennedy and his appointed substitute Sen. Paul Kirk until the election and swearing in of Sen. Scott Brown.

A tertiary effect of Sen. Franken's win was the party line vote (60 - 40) for cloture on H.R. 3590 (originally a modification of the Internal Revenue Code and replaced with the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act.)

In 2010, it was initially alleged that over 1300 voters in the 2008 election were convicted felons and ineligible to vote, as of late 2013 (when I included this topic in my Master's Thesis) the number had fallen to 1099 and over 300 convictions had been made by state prosecutors. Of the 1099 ineligible voters, almost 90% voted a straight democratic ballot. Now, I am not stating that a vast left-wing conspiracy colluded to elect Sen. Franken, any of the Senator's from the Democratic party in the 11th Congress could be considered the 60th vote; his was just the closest election that cycle. But, you can easily see that voter fraud, even just a few hundred in sleepy Minnesota can have huge repercussions.



If you can't get a ID for free it is a poll tax, Money you must spend before you can vote

One of the issues cited in the Supreme Court ruling this year in the case of Wisconsin's voter ID law (which SCOTUS allowed to stand) was that Wisconsin made ID's free and available to any resident of the state. Which seems to be the standard across the board is that states offer a free ID for voting (distinct from a driver's licence etc.) Now, if you have to pay to get a copy of a birth certificate to get the ID, that may be an unintended cost but how far back / how many steps does one go on that? Voter ID laws are often said to target the poor & roughly 10% of eligible voters do not have any form of voter ID (most of those are low-income), however about 3/4 of them are able to obtain government assistance, which does require some type of ID (maybe not acceptable for voting ... but it is what it is.) In those states that offer free ID's, yes ... you have to get yourself to an ID office which could be a problem in rural areas, but according to Pew (from 2013) over 90% of those low income people without ID's live in urban areas and roughly 1-3 miles of some type of government ID office ... so not at all unattainable.

TJMAC77SP sorry ... couldn't help it.

Rainmaker
07-29-2015, 05:49 PM
But, you can easily see that voter fraud, even just a few hundred in sleepy Minnesota can have huge repercussions.



Somali voters huh?

Don't talk around it, Commander Mjolnir....

You have to keep in mind, that some of us here are alumni of The University of Phoenix "Fighting Phoenix's" and not Georgetown, and so we're not able to read between the lines.... Yet....

MikeKerriii
07-29-2015, 06:42 PM
While voter fraud may not take place in large or even majority numbers, it can have substantial secondary and tertiary effects (I actually did my Master's Thesis at Georgetown on voter fraud):

In the 2008 elections, Al Franken (D) challenged incumbent Senator Norm Coleman (R) from Minnesota; the election was one of the closest ever. At first Coleman was ahead by a bit over 700 votes and after months of recounts and legal challenges, Franken was declared the winner by just over 300 in July 2009 and sworn in as the junior Senator from Minnesota.

A secondary effect of Sen. Franken's win was he was the 60th Senator to caucus with the Democrats in the 111th Congress -- giving the Democrats a filibuster-proof majority (which would last through the death of Sen. Kennedy and his appointed substitute Sen. Paul Kirk until the election and swearing in of Sen. Scott Brown.

A tertiary effect of Sen. Franken's win was the party line vote (60 - 40) for cloture on H.R. 3590 (originally a modification of the Internal Revenue Code and replaced with the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act.)

In 2010, it was initially alleged that over 1300 voters in the 2008 election were convicted felons and ineligible to vote, as of late 2013 (when I included this topic in my Master's Thesis) the number had fallen to 1099 and over 300 convictions had been made by state prosecutors. Of the 1099 ineligible voters, almost 90% voted a straight democratic ballot. Now, I am not stating that a vast left-wing conspiracy colluded to elect Sen. Franken, any of the Senator's from the Democratic party in the 11th Congress could be considered the 60th vote; his was just the closest election that cycle. But, you can easily see that voter fraud, even just a few hundred in sleepy Minnesota can have huge repercussions.




One of the issues cited in the Supreme Court ruling this year in the case of Wisconsin's voter ID law (which SCOTUS allowed to stand) was that Wisconsin made ID's free and available to any resident of the state. Which seems to be the standard across the board is that states offer a free ID for voting (distinct from a driver's licence etc.) Now, if you have to pay to get a copy of a birth certificate to get the ID, that may be an unintended cost but how far back / how many steps does one go on that? Voter ID laws are often said to target the poor & roughly 10% of eligible voters do not have any form of voter ID (most of those are low-income), however about 3/4 of them are able to obtain government assistance, which does require some type of ID (maybe not acceptable for voting ... but it is what it is.) In those states that offer free ID's, yes ... you have to get yourself to an ID office which could be a problem in rural areas, but according to Pew (from 2013) over 90% of those low income people without ID's live in urban areas and roughly 1-3 miles of some type of government ID office ... so not at all unattainable.

@TJMAC77SP (http://forums.militarytimes.com/member.php?u=7898) sorry ... couldn't help it.

Would a picture I have stopped any of that fraud?

Mjölnir
07-29-2015, 07:28 PM
Would a picture I have stopped any of that fraud?

If a voter ID law were in place in MN in 2008, most likely. Most states that have voter ID laws do not 'turn people away' at the polls. Voters without valid ID cast a provisional ballot. Now, most provisional ballots are not counted (same as absentee ballots) unless the margin of victory is narrow enough to warrant it. If a provisional ballot is filed and the voter found to not be eligible, the vote is not counted.

But the issue I am pointing out is that:

1. I agree with you, voter fraud is rare however,
2. Voter fraud need not be rampant to have implications in local, state nor federal politics.

Now, my personal opinion is I see hypocracy in a couple of areas by many IRT Voter ID issues:

1. Progressives are steadfastly against voter ID laws, and as you mentioned ... a photo ... ID because the right to vote shall not be impeded however, the same crowd is steadfast that people should have ID and be registered to carry a firearm ... also a Constitutional right that shall not be impeded.

2. A couple of Supreme Court rulings have gotten us to the point that precedent exists that voter ID laws are actually Constitutional (North Carolina 2013, Wisconsin 2015 to name two) provided that the state that requires the ID make the ID available to anyone for free. Rather than educate the low income, minority, elderly etc people that it is help people get in compliance with the laws, we waste time and effort fighting the law (which again, has been established as Constitutional in their present forms.)

3. Yes, I can see the point that paying $25 or $50 dollars is a big ding to someone with a low income or even a fixed income, that is why states are required to make them free, however I see a slight semantic disparity in the effort to register and get ID for low income and minority voters vice low income minority voters -- to me that is both hypocritical and racist.

4. In areas were there are efforts to get people in line with the voter ID laws, there is more of a push to get ID offices in areas that would traditionally support one side of the political spectrum vice a somewhat even distribution.

100, 50 or so years ago I don't know if this would have been as needed. Most people tended to be born, grow up and live their lives in the same general area, people knew who you were etc. Today, not so much. This is far short of walking down the street and being asked to present your papers, and unilaterally saying that it impacts low income, minority or elderly voters isn't really true as shown in places where said laws have been enacted.

While many people will say "one vote just doesn't count" ... it could. Maybe not in Chicago or New York nor directly in Small Town USA, but as evidenced in Minnesota in 2008, the implications of a couple of hundred out of 2.5 million votes drastically impacted national politics ... something that we shouldn't ignore.

Mjölnir
07-29-2015, 07:45 PM
Somali voters huh?

Don't talk around it, Commander Mjolnir....

You have to keep in mind, that some of us here are alumni of The University of Phoenix "Fighting Phoenix's" and not Georgetown, and so we're not able to read between the lines.... Yet....

Nothing wrong with University of Pheonix, my undergrad degree is from an online University. The degree is just a piece of paper and for the most part where it comes from is not important ... what you do with the tools you acquired in getting it however ... nomsayin?

I only point out the thesis to make the point that I am not 100% talking out of my butt on this & have put some time in on the subject.

So only 50% talking out my butt.

Bos Mutus
07-29-2015, 08:40 PM
Nothing wrong with University of Pheonix, my undergrad degree is from an online University. The degree is just a piece of paper and for the most part where it comes from is not important ... what you do with the tools you acquired in getting it however ... nomsayin?

I only point out the thesis to make the point that I am not 100% talking out of my butt on this & have put some time in on the subject.

So only 50% talking out my butt.

You might be denied entry into the elitist snob chapter of the Knights of Columbus

Rainmaker
07-29-2015, 09:56 PM
"50 or so years ago I don't know if this would have been as needed. Most people tended to be born, grow up and live their lives in the same general area, people knew who you were etc. Today, not so much."

This would be a "non-issue" if the political types in both parties hadn't intentionally allowed the country to be flooded with Illegal Aliens for the last 50 years.

By giving them direct access to open borders they've engaged in demographic warfare to undercut the value of The American worker's labor and displace America’s White European culture.

Third World immigration is the biggest danger American's face today.

So many problems could've been eliminated if they just did that one thing.......

These traitors in our Government are the lowest, most disgusting humans on the planet.

By encouraging people to break the law, Children are literally being sold into slavery by human traffickers smuggling them out of Mexico, while we look the other way.

They are so heavily compromised that they are no longer capable of governing the country.

Donald Trump is not even a conservative and yet he's running away with GOP field.

The rest of the Republicrat NEOCONs just react in Smear tactics (while looking straight at the numbers from their constituents and ignoring them). We see it over and over and over.

So, Rainmaker agrees with MikeKerriii. I'd rather vote for Hitlery, than vote for one of these RINO charlatans. Because, At least with CANKLES 2016 you know what you're going to get.

Now, Commander......You've brought us from Trump to Baphomet to Somali Pirates to Jack Handy and back to Trump (see why we moderators)

garhkal
07-30-2015, 12:18 AM
Some of those things require ID some do not, the problem is when they make the form of ID required narrow enough, My mother i did not have ID that fit the requirements of some states for over a decade before her birth, She simply had no need for it. And the States that allow a CCW to be used and refuse to allow an ID from a State run college are just making the point obvious,

I could get along pretty well, bar driving, with just my retired military ID but that would not satisfy the clowns that wrote these laws, since it is not STATE issued. A college ID would work for all those purposes also

It is not just being able to ID yourself it is making the IDs hard to obtain, essentially creating a poll tax.

All to fix a non-existent problem

All those examples i listed i have personally been asked for ID for. BUT i will give you the fact that many places it seems, don't like taking your mil ID (retired, dependent, heck even my active one while i was still in) preferring a state issued DL.



I will ask the same question I did almost two years ago when we had a thread on voter ID laws and one which was asked by Flaps yesterday (and ignored)....How exactly is anyone making it harder for the poor or old to vote?

I think i remember that thread.. Do you remember the link for it?


If you can't get a ID for free it is a poll tax, Money you must spend before you can vote

So getting a passport or Drivers license is a poll tax as you have to pay for both (quite a bit of dosh iirc for passports these days)?


Of the 1099 ineligible voters, almost 90% voted a straight democratic ballot. Now, I am not stating that a vast left-wing conspiracy colluded to elect Sen. Franken, any of the Senator's from the Democratic party in the 11th Congress could be considered the 60th vote; his was just the closest election that cycle. But, you can easily see that voter fraud, even just a few hundred in sleepy Minnesota can have huge repercussions.

I wonder.. If someone checked ALL the cases of voter fraud ever recorded, what the % would be democratic vice republican.


1. Progressives are steadfastly against voter ID laws, and as you mentioned ... a photo ... ID because the right to vote shall not be impeded however, the same crowd is steadfast that people should have ID and be registered to carry a firearm ... also a Constitutional right that shall not be impeded.

Its not just that part imo they see hypocrisy. iirc one of the democratic conventions where one of the main hot button issues they discussed, WAS the 'wrongness' of states which are pushing for voter ID laws), was held in a building you HAD TO show ID to get into..


While many people will say "one vote just doesn't count" ... it could. Maybe not in Chicago or New York nor directly in Small Town USA, but as evidenced in Minnesota in 2008, the implications of a couple of hundred out of 2.5 million votes drastically impacted national politics ... something that we shouldn't ignore.

Heck, while it was just a film (And imo a decent one at that) they even made a film based on "Just that one vote mattering".. Swing vote with Kevin Costner.

Bos Mutus
07-30-2015, 12:44 AM
So getting a passport or Drivers license is a poll tax as you have to pay for both (quite a bit of dosh iirc for passports these days)?

"poll tax"...is way of saying you must pay to vote. So, the cost for a passport is only a poll tax if states start requiring a passport to vote.

Get it?

That said...if "Poll Tax" is really the issue, the solution is pretty simple..."free" voter IDs. It could either be free for low income...or just keep it simply and make them free for everyone...there's gotta be a process for validating someone's identity even if they don't have a birth certificate...get a court order or something...it can not be that hard to identify people and give them and ID card.

Rainmaker
07-30-2015, 06:34 PM
Following the lefty line of thinking then Why should I have to pay for a NICS check and show ID (to prove I'm not a felon) just to exercise my 2nd amendment right to keep and bear arms? It's basically a tax you have to pay.

FLAPS, USAF (ret)
07-30-2015, 07:50 PM
Following the lefty line of thinking then Why should I have to pay for a NICS check and show ID (to prove I'm not a felon) just to exercise my 2nd amendment right to keep and bear arms? It's basically a tax you have to pay.

I always believed these fees targeted the poor, ensuring they can't enjoy the same 2nd Amendment rights as privileged rich white people.

Absinthe Anecdote
07-31-2015, 05:16 PM
You seem to be saying that If We don't want The Hildabest to be POTUS. Then our only other Choices are voting for a Socialist posing as an Independent (Bernie Sanders) or yet another Bought and Paid for Neocon RINO (like Bush, Christie, McCain, et.al).....

I look at those options and say Why not Donald Trump?

Given what I know right now, I really don't think there would be any substantial difference between Hillary and Jeb.

I'm saying that Trump will never win as a third party candidate. All he will do is split the Republican vote and guarantee a Hillary win.

As fond as you are of conspiracies, I can't believe that you don't see that as Trump's sole purpose for being in the race.

He is the spoiler for the Republican candidate, and a insurance policy for Hillary.

He isn't there to win, he is there to split the vote like Ross Perot did in 92.

MikeKerriii
07-31-2015, 05:39 PM
I'm saying that Trump will never win as a third party candidate. All he will do is split the Republican vote and guarantee a Hillary win.

As fond as you are of conspiracies, I can't believe that you don't see that as Trump's sole purpose for being in the race.

He is the spoiler for the Republican candidate, and a insurance policy for Hillary.

He isn't there to win, he is there to split the vote like Ross Perot did in 92.

Trump is there to feed Trumps ego. With every bit of press convalesce he wins a little more.

None of the clown car can beat Bernie at this point much less Hillary. The Democrats don;t have to throw a poison pill into the race the Republicans have already thrown in a double handful of clowns to ruin their chances themselves.

Absinthe Anecdote
07-31-2015, 06:41 PM
Trump is there to feed Trumps ego. With every bit of press convalesce he wins a little more.

None of the clown car can beat Bernie at this point much less Hillary. The Democrats don;t have to throw a poison pill into the race the Republicans have already thrown in a double handful of clowns to ruin their chances themselves.

The only way the Democrats can win the 2016 Presidency is if there is a third candidate to split the Republican vote.

Bos Mutus
07-31-2015, 06:55 PM
The only way the Democrats can win the 2016 Presidency is if there is a third candidate to split the Republican vote.

I don't see how you can leap to that conclusion. Heck, even Obama has a 48% approval rating right now...about the same as it was just prior to his re-election.

It's easy to think everyone hates the Democrats when your feed is full of whiners and their silly memes with funny pictures, predictions of doom...but, I don't thinks that really the case.

Absinthe Anecdote
07-31-2015, 07:10 PM
I don't see how you can leap to that conclusion. Heck, even Obama has a 48% approval rating right now...about the same as it was just prior to his re-election.

It's easy to think everyone hates the Democrats when your feed is full of whiners and their silly memes with funny pictures, predictions of doom...but, I don't thinks that really the case.

1) If we look at voting records since the end of WWII, it supports what I'm saying. It is very rare for the incumbent party to win three presidential elections in a row.

2) I'm basing my statement on that as much as I am Hillary's negative approval rating with many independents. The only way she can win is if a third candidate weakens the republican base.

3) Do you really think I'm sitting around reading Obama memes and the same kind of shit garkhal reads?

MikeKerriii
07-31-2015, 07:22 PM
The only way the Democrats can win the 2016 Presidency is if there is a third candidate to split the Republican vote.

Not according to any public poll they sow Hillary beating any Republican. Bernie scores within the margin of errors at the worst.

Bos Mutus
07-31-2015, 07:23 PM
1) If we look at voting records since the end of WWII, it supports what I'm saying. It is very rare for the incumbent party to win three presidential elections in a row.

Reagan/Bush...at this point in his term, I think Reagan's approval was lower than Obama's.


2) I'm basing my statement on that as much as I am Hillary's negative approval rating with many independents. The only way she can win is if a third candidate weakens the republican base.

I'm not convinced Hillary is going to win the nomination...I think she was the presumptive nominee in 2008 at this point, too. Sanders is certainly making more headlines...Hillary is running a "just don't mess up" campaign and it sucks so far...there might also be someone else yet to make some waves...Hillary has a LOT of baggage, and it still could cost her the primary, I think


3) Do you really think I'm sitting around reading Obama memes and the same kind of shit garkhal reads?

I don't know how you can avoid it.

The only good thing I can think of in Hillary winning is to watch heads explode.

That said, once again, the Republicans have a big Primary problem...what do they have now 16, 18 candidates? Who can keep track...and if their primaries in 2012 are any indication...the candidates race to the far right and then become unpalatable for most Americans.

Absinthe Anecdote
07-31-2015, 07:34 PM
Reagan/Bush...at this point in his term, I think Reagan's approval was lower than Obama's.



I'm not convinced Hillary is going to win the nomination...I think she was the presumptive nominee in 2008 at this point, too. Sanders is certainly making more headlines...Hillary is running a "just don't mess up" campaign and it sucks so far...there might also be someone else yet to make some waves...Hillary has a LOT of baggage, and it still could cost her the primary, I think



I don't know how you can avoid it.

The only good thing I can think of in Hillary winning is to watch heads explode.

I agree that Hillary has a lot of baggage, and I do think that Bill's new mistress will cause the Hillary campaign more headaches in the coming months.

However, if it isn't Hillary, it will be Biden. I think the same calculus applies to Biden if he turns out to be the Democratic nominee. He can only win by a third candidate splitting the republican vote.

I don't see Sanders as having a shot at the nomination, but even if he did get it, same applies to him.

Bos Mutus
07-31-2015, 07:49 PM
I agree that Hillary has a lot of baggage, and I do think that Bill's new mistress will cause the Hillary campaign more headaches in the coming months.

However, if it isn't Hillary, it will be Biden. I think the same calculus applies to Biden if he turns out to be the Democratic nominee. He can only win by a third candidate splitting the republican vote.

I don't see Sanders as having a shot at the nomination, but even if he did get it, same applies to him.

I hope we get a chance to hear what Jim Webb has to say...he might have the same primary problem the Republicans do...tough for a moderate to survive the primaries with all the polarization nowadays.

Absinthe Anecdote
07-31-2015, 08:06 PM
Not according to any public poll they sow Hillary beating any Republican. Bernie scores within the margin of errors at the worst.

Not exactly the same thing as we are talking about. Try to keep up with the conversation.

Absinthe Anecdote
07-31-2015, 08:26 PM
I hope we get a chance to hear what Jim Webb has to say...he might have the same primary problem the Republicans do...tough for a moderate to survive the primaries with all the polarization nowadays.

Indeed, it is hard for a moderate candidate to gain traction.

Somehow we have allowed the Rainmakers and Mike Kerrils of the nation to dominate political discussions.

MikeKerriii
07-31-2015, 11:08 PM
I hope we get a chance to hear what Jim Webb has to say...he might have the same primary problem the Republicans do...tough for a moderate to survive the primaries with all the polarization nowadays.

Web already threw himself on the sword of the Traitors Rag, He is now about as likely to win a democratic primary as Gohmert is. His position on Global warming would have the same result. Even his position on guns , that I agree with, would make it hard to win a nomination. Opposing your own party on key issues is usually not the way to get that party to vote for you.

MikeKerriii
07-31-2015, 11:10 PM
Not exactly the same thing as we are talking about. Try to keep up with the conversation.

You are talking abut being able to win elections are you not? For that the front-runners are Bernie and Hillary

Bos Mutus
08-01-2015, 12:06 AM
Web already threw himself on the sword of the Traitors Rag, He is now about as likely to win a democratic primary as Gohmert is. His position on Global warming would have the same result. Even his position on guns , that I agree with, would make it hard to win a nomination. Opposing your own party on key issues is usually not the way to get that party to vote for you.

I agree it's not likely as the crazy fringe from each party tend to control the Primaries...that's unfortunate.

MikeKerriii
08-01-2015, 01:27 AM
I agree it's not likely as the crazy fringe from each party tend to control the Primaries...that's unfortunate.

It is not only the fringes, we can't even decide where the center is, trumps followers are a calling folks Like Bush and Walker Liberals and Rhinos. I can't think of a single politician anywhere near the center.

Rainmaker
08-01-2015, 02:33 AM
I'm saying that Trump will never win as a third party candidate. All he will do is split the Republican vote and guarantee a Hillary win.

What makes you think he can't win the nomination outright?

People are pissed because, GOP came into office in 2014 with a clear mandate to stop Obama on immigration and the very first thing they did was to declare that they would do nothing to oppose the illegal actions.

The 2nd thing they did was invite the head of a foreign state to address the CONgress.

Rainmaker's known for a long time that The GOP stopped representing conservative values years ago, all they care about now is enriching themselves.

I think most traditional Republicans are finally figuring out that they are not really an opposition party to the Democrats.

Although there are still holdouts that think John Ellis Bush is somehow gonna be different from Hill-Billary.


As fond as you are of conspiracies, I can't believe that you don't see that as Trump's sole purpose for being in the race.

He is the spoiler for the Republican candidate, and a insurance policy for Hillary.

He isn't there to win, he is there to split the vote like Ross Perot did in 92.

Rainmaker mentioned in Post #29 that he could be a stalking horse.....Could be...Remains to be seen. It has to play out more.

I see the Koch's trying to shut him out and the media attacking him as a good sign. Let's wait and see if he does something to intentionally sabotage himself.

You will know them by their fruits. NomSayin?

garhkal
08-01-2015, 03:02 AM
"poll tax"...is way of saying you must pay to vote. So, the cost for a passport is only a poll tax if states start requiring a passport to vote.

Get it?

That said...if "Poll Tax" is really the issue, the solution is pretty simple..."free" voter IDs. It could either be free for low income...or just keep it simply and make them free for everyone...there's gotta be a process for validating someone's identity even if they don't have a birth certificate...get a court order or something...it can not be that hard to identify people and give them and ID card.

Since many of those states which DO have VID laws, do issue free ids, how can anyone then claim its "disenfranchizing' voters?

Also looking at this CNN site, it claims (according to the NAACP)
Nationwide, the NAACP says 25% of African-Americans and 16% of Latinos of voting age lack a current government-issued photo ID.

http://www.cnn.com/2014/10/18/politics/texas-voter-id-law/index.html


Following the lefty line of thinking then Why should I have to pay for a NICS check and show ID (to prove I'm not a felon) just to exercise my 2nd amendment right to keep and bear arms? It's basically a tax you have to pay.

Good point RM. How is it ok for there to be this 'effectively a poll tax' on the 2nd amendment, when its considered wrong for the right to vote, covered by 4 amendments which are all outside of the bill of rights.?



3) Do you really think I'm sitting around reading Obama memes and the same kind of shit garkhal reads?

So just cause i read stuff like the GOPUSA site (right wing) it must be baloney?


It is not only the fringes, we can't even decide where the center is, trumps followers are a calling folks Like Bush and Walker Liberals and Rhinos. I can't think of a single politician anywhere near the center.

Very true. When those on the left seem so far to the left even those who MAY BE more conservative are still to the 'left', while those on the right are either "still to left/liberal" or so far out to the right, where exactly IS the center?
Also what IS the center?

Absinthe Anecdote
08-01-2015, 04:07 AM
What makes you think he can't win the nomination outright?

People are pissed because, GOP came into office in 2014 with a clear mandate to stop Obama on immigration and the very first thing they did was to declare that they would do nothing to oppose the illegal actions.

The 2nd thing they did was invite the head of a foreign state to address the CONgress.

Rainmaker's known for a long time that The GOP stopped representing conservative values years ago, all they care about now is enriching themselves.

I think most traditional Republicans are finally figuring out that they are not really an opposition party to the Democrats.

Although there are still holdouts that think John Ellis Bush is somehow gonna be different from Hill-Billary.



Rainmaker mentioned in Post #29 that he could be a stalking horse.....Could be...Remains to be seen. It has to play out more.

I see the Koch's trying to shut him out and the media attacking him as a good sign. Let's wait and see if he does something to intentionally sabotage himself.

You will know them by their fruits. NomSayin?

I do not know why you keep saying that you don't listen to Rush Limbaugh.

I caught a few minutes of his show today and you say the exact same things he does, except you add a bunch of weird anti-Jew and racial stuff.

MikeKerriii
08-01-2015, 04:32 AM
Very true. When those on the left seem so far to the left even those who MAY BE more conservative are still to the 'left', while those on the right are either "still to left/liberal" or so far out to the right, where exactly IS the center?
Also what IS the center? When nut-bags are calling far right politicians like Walker and Bush RINOs. I can't think of a single republican left of center or to the Left of republicans like Bush I , Nixon, Ford or even Reagan. all of whose policies would get them called RINOs now. Who on the right is "still to left/liberal"?

It is funny Nixon's health care plan was far, far to the left of Obama's, and Trumps is to the left of that since he thinks the Canadian system is great,

garhkal
08-01-2015, 05:12 AM
When nut-bags are calling far right politicians like Walker and Bush RINOs. I can't think of a single republican left of center or to the Left of republicans like Bush I , Nixon, Ford or even Reagan. all of whose policies would get them called RINOs now. Who on the right is "still to left/liberal"?

It is funny Nixon's health care plan was far, far to the left of Obama's, and Trumps is to the left of that since he thinks the Canadian system is great,

BUsh i see as a RINO cause he seem to support the Democrats MORE than he supports his fellow republicans. Never heard anyone call Walker a Rino.

MikeKerriii
08-01-2015, 05:42 AM
BUsh i see as a RINO cause he seem to support the Democrats MORE than he supports his fellow republicans. Never heard anyone call Walker a Rino.

Which of Bushes position would have been outside the Republican Conservative mainstream 8 years ago? He has pretty much stayed where he was but the party has lurched very hard to the right

At sites like " The Hill" seeing people call Walker a liberal or a RINO is fairly common mostly from Trump, Cruz and Palin supporters though

Rainmaker
08-01-2015, 05:57 AM
I do not know why you keep saying that you don't listen to Rush Limbaugh.

I caught a few minutes of his show today and you say the exact same things he does, except you add a bunch of weird anti-Jew and racial stuff.

Because, Rainmaker don't listen to Rush Limbaugh. and is neither "Anti-Jew" nor "Pro-Jew".

So Now that you've gotten your usual smearing Rainmaker as a racist for disagreeing with you routine out of the way.....

Let's ask again...... What makes you think Donald Trump can't win the Republican nomination outright?

Rainmaker
08-01-2015, 01:26 PM
Rainmaker agrees with Mikekerriii.... The Republican party has moved right in rhetoric.....

But, not really in action. Rainmaker left the GOP mostly due to the following actions they've taken.

TARP/QE/ZIRP, allowing 15M Americans to lose their homes by not allowing them to renegotiate their mortgages while, spending Trillions of Dollars to bail out banks losses, so that they can make 6% interest on their money while, the average citizen gets .25% on theirs

Ignoring immigration laws and allowing open borders so that 30 Million illegals could flood across the border with no allegiance to anything other than themselves and where they came from

1/2 assed operations, dicking around all over the Middle East and getting tens of thousands of Good men and Women killed or maimed in the proces, all to Make the world safer for a small foreign country (with little strategic value), because of some 3,000 year old claim on a right of return based on the legend of The Allegorical King David.

Off-shoring all the private sector career employment opportunities to make slaves of foreigners and .gov dependent debt serfs out of ourselves.

So, you guys are telling me, The only alternative to the above, is to vote for the other party with fag marriage, defending people selling chopped up baby parts on the black market, Putting wack job Transgenders in the Military and Mocking Christianity at every chance?

Absinthe Anecdote
08-01-2015, 01:32 PM
Because, Rainmaker don't listen to Rush Limbaugh. and is neither "Anti-Jew" nor "Pro-Jew".

So Now that you've gotten your usual smearing Rainmaker as a racist for disagreeing with you routine out of the way.....

You are very much a "ditto-head" and you know it. More than once I've listened to an episode of Rush and then came onto this forum to see you repeating his talking points word for word.

Your anti Jew and racists rants are legendary in here, so stop denying it.




Let's ask again...... What makes you think Donald Trump can't win the Republican nomination outright?

Trump's lead in the polls will soon diminish. He is horrible at explaining his views on policy and if you've watched his two most recent sit-down interviews on CNN, he is easily caught in contradictions about immigration policy.

Some of the stuff he says about sending troops back to Iraq to surround the oil fields isn't going to get him the Republican nomination either.

All of your Rush Limbaugh talk about RINOs and the erosion of conservatism should lead you to the same conclusion that Trump doesn't have a chance of getting the nomination.

Absinthe Anecdote
08-01-2015, 01:36 PM
You leftists and Obama, fag marriage, celebrating freaking whack jobs like Bruce Jenner, leaVing the border wide open, and MOCKING us at every turn.

Wow!

Let me guess, you are down in your "prepper bunker" and you have one of those yellow flags with the rattlesnake on it and a cheap bottle of "survival bourbon" in your hand.

Rollyn01
08-01-2015, 01:37 PM
Let's ask again...... What makes you think Donald Trump can't win the Republican nomination outright?

He's ostracizing himself from the other Republicans with his candor. Lacking a filter and lacking any pacing makes him less likable. The party wants someone who would think the same as he does, but not be overt about it as it would keep the people that they want the votes from to vote for them. "A good general keeps the most critical parts of his plans to himself." Trump is definitely not doing this. He's putting it all out there. This is something that the party can't support because they know that if everything is thrown on the table, people would actually have to make informed decisions when it comes to voting. In short, by making people think, they would have their hands full with trying to actually deliver on their promises or risk losing any traction in future elections.

How's that?

Rainmaker
08-01-2015, 02:12 PM
Wow!
Let me guess, you are down in your "prepper bunker" and you have one of those yellow flags with the rattlesnake on it and a cheap bottle of "survival bourbon" in your hand.

Actually Rainmaker is posting this from a greasy spoon diner on the island.

There are no dangerous Gadsden flags here, so you'd be safe to come in and have a cup of coffee and a conversation.

The place is frequented by fisherman and locals and not the usual jackass tourists. So, i'm sure if you started up with your standard Anti-Christian fig tree routine you 'd get shown the door.

Now, just got done with my Saturday morning meeting with God out on the water. It was a little overcast and choppy today. And We talked about you briefly. Not really sure. But, I think he told me that PNAC's Jeb Bush is not winning next year.

Rainmaker
08-01-2015, 02:32 PM
You are very much a "ditto-head" and you know it. More than once I've listened to an episode of Rush and then came onto this forum to see you repeating his talking points word for word.

Your anti Jew and racists rants are legendary in here, so stop denying it.

Trump's lead in the polls will soon diminish. He is horrible at explaining his views on policy and if you've watched his two most recent sit-down interviews on CNN, he is easily caught in contradictions about immigration policy.

Some of the stuff he says about sending troops back to Iraq to surround the oil fields isn't going to get him the Republican nomination either.

All of your Rush Limbaugh talk about RINOs and the erosion of conservatism should lead you to the same conclusion that Trump doesn't have a chance of getting the nomination.

Rainmaker's said several times that Trump is not really a conservative.

Unless someone else comes forward, the only GOP candidates Rainmaker could consider voting for are Trump, Rand Paul, or Carly Fiornina.

Any other status quo RINO you might as well vote for Hillary IMO. Rainmaker will no longer give consent for candidates that have demonstrated they refuse to represent the interests of the governed.

Rush Limbaugh equates patriotism with unequivocal support for a foreign nation. Rainmaker does not.

Therefore, Rainmaker doesn't listen to him (No matter how much you wish it to be true).

The I AM hath sent me Absinte Anticdoete and WE CAN SEE YOU by your fruits (figs).

Rainmaker
08-01-2015, 02:52 PM
How's that?

Better. Could be stalking horse. Could be false flag to diffuse anger. Time will tell. Must Watch who's trying to shut him up and who's not. Nomsayin?

Rollyn01
08-01-2015, 03:28 PM
Better. Could be stalking horse. Could be false flag to diffuse anger. Time will tell. Must Watch who's trying to shut him up and who's not. Nomsayin?

You mean he's just there to split the votes and secure the win for the Republicans for not supporting such an "extremist"? I would buy that, except most of the GOP are leaving most of their chips on the table. They haven't really turn tail and outright said that they wouldn't support him. They are largely trying their best to pull out all the stops to keep the party from sinking. Trump is making it a lot harder for them to do that. They're pretty much in damage control mode when it comes to him. As for all other issues, they try their best not to even mention him. Everyone that has, is meet with enough skepticism to choke a magic bullet conspiracy theorist.

UncaRastus
08-01-2015, 03:39 PM
About Canadian Health Care?

When I had my cancerous prostate removed, I was checking out the health systems for Canada and Great Britain.

Canada had and has this thing where if a Canadian Doctor finds out that one has prostate cancer, or any other kind of cancer, the one with the cancer must wait one year for any removal of the cancer.

Great Britain has NHS, which is the primary insurance for GB, then that person which has cancer gets put into a lottery system, which figures out to 10% of those with said cancer.

Skin cancer may be different, because removing that can be rather easy. Can be. Not always, though. I am not sure about treatment for skin cancers in Canada or GB.

If I had waited for a year with my own prostate cancer, I would have died, in Canada. And I just am not lucky with lotteries.

Since my cancer had occurred during my age of 47, the rate of cancer cell multiplication was much faster than with someone in their 70s.

Living in either country would have been a death sentence.

So, anyway, there it is. Some things are great for treatment in either country. Cancer, not so much.

MikeKerriii
08-01-2015, 04:21 PM
About Canadian Health Care?

When I had my cancerous prostate removed, I was checking out the health systems for Canada and Great Britain.

Canada had and has this thing where if a Canadian Doctor finds out that one has prostate cancer, or any other kind of cancer, the one with the cancer must wait one year for any removal of the cancer.

Great Britain has NHS, which is the primary insurance for GB, then that person which has cancer gets put into a lottery system, which figures out to 10% of those with said cancer.

Skin cancer may be different, because removing that can be rather easy. Can be. Not always, though. I am not sure about treatment for skin cancers in Canada or GB.

If I had waited for a year with my own prostate cancer, I would have died, in Canada. And I just am not lucky with lotteries.

Since my cancer had occurred during my age of 47, the rate of cancer cell multiplication was much faster than with someone in their 70s.

Living in either country would have been a death sentence.

So, anyway, there it is. Some things are great for treatment in either country. Cancer, not so much.

Do yuo have a source for the information about cancer treatment in Canada and the UK, especially Canada, Canadians for the most part seem to love their system. If that was true the death rates for cancer in Canada would be much higher than in the US, stats show that the is very little difference.
http://www.worldlifeexpectancy.com/cause-of-death/all-cancers/by-country/


If

UncaRastus
08-01-2015, 09:50 PM
Got that from a friend that moved into the USA 5 years ago, from Canada.

She lost her father, due to cancer not being being treated for a year, by which time it had metastasized, due to the practice of not treating cancer for a year, as was done in Canada.

I am not sure if that timing has changed, recently, or not.

Absinthe Anecdote
08-01-2015, 10:14 PM
Rush Limbaugh equates patriotism with unequivocal support for a foreign nation. Rainmaker does not.

.

You mean the same foreign nation that contains all those violent "sand people" who invented your God?


Hey, you do know that Jesus's mom was violated by a ghost and impregnated by it?

I'm surprised she wasn't stoned to death for getting pregnant by a ghost.

I guess that is what they mean by the miracle of Christmas, huh?

retiredAFcivvy
08-01-2015, 10:35 PM
You mean the same foreign nation that contains all those violent "sand people" who invented your God?


Hey, you do know that Jesus's mom was violated by a ghost and impregnated by it?

I'm surprised she wasn't stoned to death for getting pregnant by a ghost.

I guess that is what they mean by the miracle of Christmas, huh?
II Peter 3:3 - Knowing this first, that there shall come in the last days scoffers,...

Absinthe Anecdote
08-02-2015, 01:51 AM
II Peter 3:3 - Knowing this first, that there shall come in the last days scoffers,...

Nice, another threat from the angry God of the "sand people".



II Peter 3:5-7 NKJV

5 For this they willfully forget: that by the word of God the heavens were of old, and the earth standing out of water and in the water, 6 by which the world that then existed perished, being flooded with water. 7 But the heavens and the earth which are now preserved by the same word, are reserved for fire until the day of judgment and perdition of ungodly men.

God sure likes to destroy things. Instead of drowning us, next time he is going to burn us with fire.

I guess that is what you get when you worship a God created by violent tribal people from the desert.

MikeKerriii
08-02-2015, 05:36 PM
Got that from a friend that moved into the USA 5 years ago, from Canada.

She lost her father, due to cancer not being being treated for a year, by which time it had metastasized, due to the practice of not treating cancer for a year, as was done in Canada.

I am not sure if that timing has changed, recently, or not.

The timing was never as you describe, there are and have Biden waiting periods for surgeries that are optional but there never have been for things like cancer treatments.

You seem to be basing a lot of your complaints on thing's that are urban legends of folklore that have no connection to reality, Here you are doing what you did about the start of the civil war and being arrested for hate speech. Facts do matter.

think about it if the Canadian government had had a system like that why would the Canadian voters have put up with it? It is even easier in Canada to fire a bad politician than it is in the US. what democracy would allow such a system to exist? The prime complaints abut the Canadian system is that it is not liberal enough in treatments it covers

Here are some articles of various ages
http://www.pnhp.org/news/2009/august/new_poll_shows_canad.php
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2012/07/01/everything-you-ever-wanted-to-know-about-canadian-health-care-in-one-post
http://www.queensu.ca/cora/_files/PublicPerceptions.pdf
http://www.ipsos-na.com/news-polls/pressrelease.aspx?id=5986
http://www.ipsos-na.com/news-polls/pressrelease.aspx?id=4467

Canadians are happier with their health care system that Americans were/are either before or after Obamacare.

Bos Mutus
08-02-2015, 11:26 PM
Since many of those states which DO have VID laws, do issue free ids, how can anyone then claim its "disenfranchizing' voters?

Also looking at this CNN site, it claims (according to the NAACP)
Nationwide, the NAACP says 25% of African-Americans and 16% of Latinos of voting age lack a current government-issued photo ID.

http://www.cnn.com/2014/10/18/politics/texas-voter-id-law/index.html.

ive seen similar reports before....that's the part I don't comprehend





So just cause i read stuff like the GOPUSA site (right wing) it must be baloney?

well, you do post a lot of baloney, though...

MikeKerriii
08-03-2015, 03:18 AM
ive seen similar reports before....that's the part I don't comprehend




If you live in a city, have no car and are poor why would you need a government issued ID?

TJMAC77SP
08-03-2015, 03:35 AM
If you live in a city, have no car and are poor why would you need a government issued ID?

To receive any benefits from the myriad of entitlement programs.

http://www.medicaid.state.al.us/documents/apply/2b-qualifying/2b-7_supportingdocsneeded.pdf

https://www.yourtexasbenefits.com/ssp/SSPHome/forms/en_US/blankapplication/M5017_H1010_09_10.pdf

http://www.ehealthmedicare.com/about-medicare/application/

Hell, even the simplest of tasks..........to buy a bottle of booze. Unless you say that those who live in the city, have no car, and are poor don't drink alcohol.

Bos Mutus
08-03-2015, 03:57 AM
If you live in a city, have no car and are poor why would you need a government issued ID?

Cash checks? Buy beer?

MikeKerriii
08-03-2015, 04:39 AM
Cash checks? Buy beer?

Not all that necessary in an urban neighborhood,

MikeKerriii
08-03-2015, 04:40 AM
To receive any benefits from the myriad of entitlement programs.

http://www.medicaid.state.al.us/documents/apply/2b-qualifying/2b-7_supportingdocsneeded.pdf

https://www.yourtexasbenefits.com/ssp/SSPHome/forms/en_US/blankapplication/M5017_H1010_09_10.pdf

http://www.ehealthmedicare.com/about-medicare/application/

Hell, even the simplest of tasks..........to buy a bottle of booze. Unless you say that those who live in the city, have no car, and are poor don't drink alcohol.

I never get carded for booze and have not been carded for abut 40 years

Bos Mutus
08-03-2015, 05:25 AM
Not all that necessary in an urban neighborhood,

People in urban neighborhoods don't cash checks or drink beer?


I never get carded for booze and have not been carded for abut 40 years

I think you should try locking up your IDs for a month...then come back and report how it went.

I suspect we take them for granted because we've always had one...and probably don't even realize how many things we use it for.

garhkal
08-03-2015, 06:01 AM
He's ostracizing himself from the other Republicans with his candor. Lacking a filter and lacking any pacing makes him less likable. The party wants someone who would think the same as he does, but not be overt about it as it would keep the people that they want the votes from to vote for them. "A good general keeps the most critical parts of his plans to himself." Trump is definitely not doing this. He's putting it all out there. This is something that the party can't support because they know that if everything is thrown on the table, people would actually have to make informed decisions when it comes to voting. In short, by making people think, they would have their hands full with trying to actually deliver on their promises or risk losing any traction in future elections.

How's that?

IMO that is WHY he is ahead in the polls. Cause he is NOT doing the same as the rest of the GOP has done..
We put them back in charge of the Senate back in November last year, so they could start ACTING against Obama and doing what WE wanted. BUT not one seems to have done a damn thing. ALL cause they are too busy (IMO) lining their pockets with Special interest money and saying "YEs dear" to all the liberal dems want.


If you live in a city, have no car and are poor why would you need a government issued ID?

Hows about
A) to get a bank account (gotta have one to get your welfare checks deposited into)
B) to use check cashing facilities (if they get the check in paper form and cash them)
C) to go INTO most welfare/SS offices and get served.
D) To register at a library.

That's just 4 reasons why they would need one.


Not all that necessary in an urban neighborhood,

What liquor stores YOU going to, or cash checking places??


I never get carded for booze and have not been carded for abut 40 years

Then that store is breaking the law.

TJMAC77SP
08-03-2015, 01:54 PM
I never get carded for booze and have not been carded for abut 40 years

So you should have said, those who live in the city, have no car, and are poor and are very obviously over 21. Of course that really wouldn't have made your point would it? Perhaps because your premise is so silly to begin with.

BTW: I noticed you responded to my off-hand example and none of the ones where there is actual citations. Any reason?

Don't worry that was a rhetorical question.

MikeKerriii
08-04-2015, 03:54 AM
People in urban neighborhoods don't cash checks or drink beer?



I think you should try locking up your IDs for a month...then come back and report how it went.

I suspect we take them for granted because we've always had one...and probably don't even realize how many things we use it for.

I,ve thought about it. I have used heath ins race cards library cards and my Costco Card but the only ID I have used in the last year or so is my military ID card for going to the commissary and as a secondary Heath insurance card. If I was not a vet I would have used no ID in that period. I haven't cashed a check in years I think most people don't deal with checks all that often and just deposit them when they do,. Unless you are young buying liquor doesn't require an ID either,

My mother did not have a state issued ID for the last ten years of her life, she could not see all that well so she didn't need a drivers license and had no need for an ID otherwise,

Bos Mutus
08-04-2015, 04:46 AM
race cards ,

Ok..that there is pretty funny, I don't care who you are...

as as for the rest of your post, I find it implausible. We live in different worlds.

garhkal
08-04-2015, 08:28 AM
My mother did not have a state issued ID for the last ten years of her life, she could not see all that well so she didn't need a drivers license and had no need for an ID otherwise,

So in that 10 years, she never entered a government building, flew, used a check cashing service/went into a bank, paid with a check (or credit card over 50 bucks), bought alcohol/tobacco?

Mjölnir
08-04-2015, 01:31 PM
Have been on leave for a week & in the last week, aside from using my ID to get on base:

-Had to show an ID when I used a credit card at Target (buying birthday party supplies for a 5-year old.)

-Was at navy Federal Credit Union depositing money did not have to show ID, out of curiosity I asked about it: no ID requirement to put money into an account, have to show ID to take it out (at the counter.) Also, if you want to cash/endorse a check they will ask for your ID.

-Took my daughter to finalize her Kindergarten enrollment, had to show ID at the school when filing the paperwork.

-Had to show my ID at the pharmacy to pick up prescriptions.

Now, this is just my experience. The personal 'need' for an ID is undoubtedly influenced by where you live and your stage in life. Living the retired American dream, with bank accounts / direct deposit on auto-pilot, not looking under 30 may mean not needing to show ID to buy tobacco or alcohol and if you have lived in the same area for years people may know who you are. In today's society people in general will need an ID to (just a couple of examples):

-Open bank accounts
-Cash a check (especially at a check casing service -- common in urban areas)
-Purchase alcohol
-Enter a federal building
-Pass through security at an airport

There are also weeks that go by (outside of my access to the facility I work) where I do not show an ID to anyone. It is an ebb and flow based on my personal activity. But, to think that what works for one individual in an urban or a rural environment is reflective of the entire population is presumptive.

Absinthe Anecdote
08-04-2015, 02:46 PM
Here is why I think the objection to showing ID at the voting booth is bullshit.

If a person is there to vote, then it is a reasonable assumption that they have registered to vote.

They had to expend some effort to participate, right?

It isn't anymore difficult to get a state ID.

Trying to claim that requiring voter ID is too burdensome is silly.

MikeKerriii
08-05-2015, 03:29 AM
So in that 10 years, she never entered a government building, flew, used a check cashing service/went into a bank, paid with a check (or credit card over 50 bucks), bought alcohol/tobacco?She bought both beer and cigarettes, but in Ohio at least when you are obviously over 30 there is no need to produce ID to do either of those things, especial when you have been going to the same store for 30 years of more. In Delaware I have never been asked for a ID to be booze.
She was in to a bank occasionally to make a deposit no ID is required for that
She was also a great believer in cash for making small payments since she grew up in the depression.
She only flew twice in here entire life to and from Europe to visit my brothers, and many people are simply too poor to even considered getting o an airplane and you don't need a ID for greyhound, My two surviving aunts have never been on an plane,
Her pharmacy did not ask for ID since she went to the same local pharmacy for nearly 50 years.

TJMAC77SP
08-05-2015, 03:48 AM
She bought both beer and cigarettes, but in Ohio at least when you are obviously over 30 there is no need to produce ID to do either of those things, especial when you have been going to the same store for 30 years of more. In Delaware I have never been asked for a ID to be booze.
She was in to a bank occasionally to make a deposit no ID is required for that
She was also a great believer in cash for making small payments since she grew up in the depression.
She only flew twice in here entire life to and from Europe to visit my brothers, and many people are simply too poor to even considered getting o an airplane and you don't need a ID for greyhound, My two surviving aunts have never been on an plane,
Her pharmacy did not ask for ID since she went to the same local pharmacy for nearly 50 years.


How does she get the cash to make those 'small purchases'? Does she deposit checks?

The pharmacy is required to prove they are dispensing the Rx to the correct person but they usually just use name and DOB. Funny you didn't mention that. Only that she is a long time customer. I would be interested in knowing a locally owned pharmacy that has been in business for 'nearly 50 years' and hasn't been gobbled up by a national chain.

Also, suggest you check Greyhound's policies now on photo ID's for intercity travel

Rainmaker
08-05-2015, 04:59 AM
Also, suggest you check Greyhound's policies now on photo ID's for intercity travel


They hate us for our freedom.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LQfdSBq7flw

Bos Mutus
08-05-2015, 06:26 AM
She bought both beer and cigarettes, but in Ohio at least when you are obviously over 30 there is no need to produce ID to do either of those things, especial when you have been going to the same store for 30 years of more. In Delaware I have never been asked for a ID to be booze.
She was in to a bank occasionally to make a deposit no ID is required for that
She was also a great believer in cash for making small payments since she grew up in the depression.
She only flew twice in here entire life to and from Europe to visit my brothers, and many people are simply too poor to even considered getting o an airplane and you don't need a ID for greyhound, My two surviving aunts have never been on an plane,
Her pharmacy did not ask for ID since she went to the same local pharmacy for nearly 50 years.

Okay, so your Mom was some kind of no-ID freak that every common occurrence where everyone else needs ID, she managed to find a way around it.

Once again...I find your stories implausible...you are simply trying to continue to weave a web of continuing BS to justify your initial position which was not well thought out...basically all the dozens of reasons normal people need ID, you're just gonna say "Oh, well my Mom doesn't do that...or the place where she does it knows her so well, they never asked for her ID."...bunch of BS

It's one thing to not often cash checks...it's quite another to go 10 years without ever receiving one. I don't often get checks...but I do once in awhile...refund from something I returned in the mail, credit card rebate, rebate from cancelling pre-paid TV service..something...I know, I know, your Mom didn't use credit cards, never returned anything and didn't watch TV...

How many "people in urban areas" do you think go to the same pharmacy for 50 years and be recognized by the staff for 50 years? Heck, I went today to the doc with my wife and she had to show ID to check in to the appt. I immediately thought of how crazy it is that your Mom never checked in to a doctor's office in the last 10 years of her life...but, of course, she went to the same doc for 50 years and they always recognized her.

In 50 years there were no new clerks or pharmacists that didn't recognize her? The same pharmacists entire career coincided with your Mom's entire need of medication?

If what you say of your Mom is true (which I don't believe)...she was some kind of no-ID freak, that no way does all this apply to 25% of any population.

Is there a good reason why your Mom would refuse to get an ID provided to her at no cost to facilitate her right to vote?

garhkal
08-05-2015, 09:11 AM
Have been on leave for a week & in the last week, aside from using my ID to get on base:

-Had to show an ID when I used a credit card at Target (buying birthday party supplies for a 5-year old.)

-Was at navy Federal Credit Union depositing money did not have to show ID, out of curiosity I asked about it: no ID requirement to put money into an account, have to show ID to take it out (at the counter.) Also, if you want to cash/endorse a check they will ask for your ID.

??
Every time i have deposited, withdrawn or just had coin rolls cashed in, i have been asked for id at my NFCU.



-Took my daughter to finalize her Kindergarten enrollment, had to show ID at the school when filing the paperwork.

? Why do you need id when its your kid going in?

Mjölnir
08-05-2015, 01:56 PM
??
Every time i have deposited, withdrawn or just had coin rolls cashed in, i have been asked for id at my NFCU.

Dunno, they never ask if I am just putting money in, taking money out or cashing a check they always ask. Granted, they have a machine that counts cash (change -- huge win so I don't have to roll it) that just asks for the account to deposit the money directly into ... doesn't ask for ID ... so if I put the acct # in wrong I would be putting money into someone else's acct.



? Why do you need id when its your kid going in?

It was to validate ID and custody.

Bos Mutus
08-05-2015, 02:49 PM
Dunno, they never ask if I am just putting money in, taking money out or cashing a check they always ask.

.

My credit union always asks...I think it's to verify that they are putting money in the correct account and didn't make an error entering the account number.

garhkal
08-06-2015, 08:06 AM
It was to validate ID and custody.

That i can understand..

MikeKerriii
08-07-2015, 03:37 PM
Okay, so your Mom was some kind of no-ID freak that every common occurrence where everyone else needs ID, she managed to find a way around it.

Once again...I find your stories implausible...you are simply trying to continue to weave a web of continuing BS to justify your initial position which was not well thought out...basically all the dozens of reasons normal people need ID, you're just gonna say "Oh, well my Mom doesn't do that...or the place where she does it knows her so well, they never asked for her ID."...bunch of BS

It's one thing to not often cash checks...it's quite another to go 10 years without ever receiving one. I don't often get checks...but I do once in awhile...refund from something I returned in the mail, credit card rebate, rebate from cancelling pre-paid TV service..something...I know, I know, your Mom didn't use credit cards, never returned anything and didn't watch TV...

How many "people in urban areas" do you think go to the same pharmacy for 50 years and be recognized by the staff for 50 years? Heck, I went today to the doc with my wife and she had to show ID to check in to the appt. I immediately thought of how crazy it is that your Mom never checked in to a doctor's office in the last 10 years of her life...but, of course, she went to the same doc for 50 years and they always recognized her.

In 50 years there were no new clerks or pharmacists that didn't recognize her? The same pharmacists entire career coincided with your Mom's entire need of medication?

If what you say of your Mom is true (which I don't believe)...she was some kind of no-ID freak, that no way does all this apply to 25% of any population.

Is there a good reason why your Mom would refuse to get an ID provided to her at no cost to facilitate her right to vote?

You need to change banks, I can deposit checks via night depository without showing ID to anyone. I have never been asked to sho An ID for a deposit, Neither at credit unions or a bank

My mom should not have had to get a family member to drive her to DMV them wait the two to three hours it took to get a State ID that she had not real use for.

By the way I am celebrating a bit Texas's voter IF D bill just got trashed by the court for racism

Bos Mutus
08-07-2015, 03:44 PM
You need to change banks,

Why? I always have an ID with me. I sometimes just cash checks instead of depositing them.


I can deposit checks via night depository without showing ID to anyone. I have never been asked to sho An ID for a deposit, Neither at credit unions or a bank

You didn't have to show ID to open that account?


My mom should not have had to get a family member to drive her to DMV them wait the two to three hours it took to get a State ID that she had not real use for.

Whatever...

TJMAC77SP
08-07-2015, 05:39 PM
You need to change banks, I can deposit checks via night depository without showing ID to anyone. I have never been asked to sho An ID for a deposit, Neither at credit unions or a bank

My mom should not have had to get a family member to drive her to DMV them wait the two to three hours it took to get a State ID that she had not real use for.

By the way I am celebrating a bit Texas's voter IF D bill just got trashed by the court for racism


Night depository? That is for businesses and requires a key to access. Did you mean ATM? Seems a pretty big error in terminology.

Absinthe Anecdote
08-07-2015, 05:46 PM
My mom should not have had to get a family member to drive her to DMV them wait the two to three hours it took to get a State ID that she had not real use for.


If she is too lazy to do that, then she is too lazy to stand in line on Election Day too.

Oh wait! You probably support early voting ballots that can be done by mail.

MikeKerriii
08-07-2015, 06:13 PM
If she is too lazy to do that, then she is too lazy to stand in line on Election Day too.

Oh wait! You probably support early voting ballots that can be done by mail.
In Ohio where she lived the system is designed t so that only poor people in urban neighborhoods have to wait in long lines to vote.

In Delaware I have never seen a line more than a couple of people long since our state is not run by incompetents


I have no trouble with Voting by mail or early voting at all. Voting should be easy

TJMAC77SP
08-08-2015, 04:25 AM
In Ohio where she lived the system is designed t so that only poor people in urban neighborhoods have to wait in long lines to vote.

In Delaware I have never seen a line more than a couple of people long since our state is not run by incompetents


I have no trouble with Voting by mail or early voting at all. Voting should be easy

Exactly how do they ensure that "only poor people in urban neighborhoods have to wait in long lines to vote."?

FLAPS, USAF (ret)
08-08-2015, 01:04 PM
Exactly how do they ensure that "only poor people in urban neighborhoods have to wait in long lines to vote."?

Because on the Rachel Maddow show last night, it was mentioned.

Sadly, all it will take to convince the majority of poor people to elect Hillary is the Rachel Maddow show and "My neighbor said his cousin heard such and such about Republican racism."

Mjölnir
08-08-2015, 01:17 PM
By the way I am celebrating a bit Texas's voter IF D bill just got trashed by the court for racism

I wouldn't say it was trashed:


Unfortunately, the appeals court (Fifth Circuit) ruling on Wednesday rejected Judge Ramos’s (Federal District Court) finding that the law was enacted with the intent to discriminate. It said the evidence she relied on — Texas’ “uncontroverted and shameful history” of racial discrimination in voting, as well as comments by lawmakers who were opposed to the law — was not enough. It ordered her to reconsider her finding of intentional discrimination using different evidence.

The Fifth Circuit determined that the appropriate remedy in this case is not a broad injunction striking down the entire law. Rather, if the evidence in this case does not show that Texas acted with a discriminatory intent when it enacted this law, an injunction “reinstat[ing] voter registration cards as documents that qualify as acceptable identification under the Texas Election Code” would be appropriate.

So currently: the law is still in place and has been ordered to be reviewed.

MikeKerriii
08-08-2015, 03:15 PM
Exactly how do they ensure that "only poor people in urban neighborhoods have to wait in long lines to vote."?

By giving small precincts with a few hundred voters the same number of voting a machines as precincts with thousands of thousands of voters. That put i In the last Presidential election that put some lines in the inner cites at over 8 hours long or worse.

MikeKerriii
08-08-2015, 03:16 PM
I wouldn't say it was trashed:



So currently: the law is still in place and has been ordered to be reviewed.

The law can't be enforced until the review is completed, so that is pretty well trashed.

Absinthe Anecdote
08-08-2015, 03:29 PM
In Ohio where she lived the system is designed t so that only poor people in urban neighborhoods have to wait in long lines to vote.

In Baltimore the polling stations check your ID in the Democratic primaries to prevent fraud, but not in the general election.

The fraud and corruption is most abundant at the local level. In my city, voter turnout rarely breaks 23% of registered voters, making cheating very easy to do.

The Democratic organizers know this, and they try to stop it in their primaries, but in the general election requiring ID is suddenly a discrimination issue.

Oh, and how do the majority of voters register in Maryland? At the DMV while getting their driver's license.


In Delaware I have never seen a line more than a couple of people long since our state is not run by incompetents


I have no trouble with Voting by mail or early voting at all. Voting should be easy

Delaware has a fraction of the population of Ohio, I'd think that has more to do with shorter lines at the polling stations on Election Day.

It is easy to vote. As a matter of fact, I'd say it is easier to vote than it is to go to the market, or the movies, or out to dinner.

Producing an ID isn't an undue burden, going to vote in person isn't an undue burden either.

TJMAC77SP
08-08-2015, 04:21 PM
In Ohio where she lived the system is designed t so that only poor people in urban neighborhoods have to wait in long lines to vote.

In Delaware I have never seen a line more than a couple of people long since our state is not run by incompetents


I have no trouble with Voting by mail or early voting at all. Voting should be easy

But how is that strictly a GOP tactic.

Note that the mechanics of elections is managed at the local level. Which party controls the election officials in those inner cities where the lines are so long?


"The reasons for the lack of voting machines and long wait times in minority communities isn't always clear. At the county level, it is hard to find evidence of Republican schemes to keep heavily Democratic areas from voting. Local officials are responsible for buying voting machines and staffing polling places. Many of the places with the fewest resources and longest lines are governed by African Americans and Latinos and tend to skew Democratic. Take Maryland's P.G. County. Alisha Alexander, the county's election administrator, told me that voter registrations for the 2012 election far surpassed projections made in the early 2000s, yet the county still had the same number of voting machines. Those machines, purchased in 2001, were nearing the end of their useful lives and could not be easily fixed or replaced since they were no longer being manufactured. "You can't mix and match voting equipment," Alexander explains. State law required the county to use the same type of machine everywhere. "We literally had all of our voting units out in the field between early voting and Election Day, but there was no mechanism to get additional units."The2012 election in Richland County, South Carolina, was a disaster that officials are still trying to untangle. Nearly 100 voting machines (http://www.wistv.com/story/20223227/richland-county-election-investigation-not-enough-voting-machines-used) sat in a warehouse, unused on election night while voters queued up for as long as seven hours (http://www.thestate.com/2012/11/11/2515647_vote-counting-expert-former-voting.html?rh=1) to vote at overburdened polling places. (Local conspiracy theorists (https://www.usenix.org/system/files/conference/evtwote13/jets-0101-buell.pdf)have suggested—incorrectly—that the election office stiffed precincts on voting machines in areas that opposed a controversial tax proposal that voters rejected in 2010.)"

http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2014/10/minority-voters-election-long-lines-id


Could it also be that the voter turnout in the last two national elections far exceeded past numbers?

https://www.census.gov/newsroom/releases/archives/voting/cb09-110.html

http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2013/05/08/six-take-aways-from-the-census-bureaus-voting-report/


Without a doubt issues occur. They do in every election but sometimes the boogeyman is simply ineptitude; as inconvenient to some narratives that truth may be.

Mjölnir
08-08-2015, 04:31 PM
The law can't be enforced until the review is completed, so that is pretty well trashed.

Incorrect. I have found news articles that hint both ways, but per the actual decision (http://www.ca5.uscourts.gov/) the law remains in effect pending review.

TJMAC77SP
08-08-2015, 04:32 PM
All this talk of racially motivated voter ID laws is just nonsense.

The truth is the huge fucking elephant in the room.

Voter turnout (with the notable exception of the last two national elections) is historically low in the minority communities. This is why there is a huge effort to transport people in these neighborhoods to polling places. Churches and community organizations mobilize a huge effort to do this. They don't come to my neighborhood although my polling place is further away then several in the poorer precincts my county. I get why and I don't have any issues with the transport efforts. Every US citizen should have every legal opportunity to vote. Just face facts and the truth.

Any possibility that voters will be lost to the lack of an ID scares the shit out of the Democratic party. I actually don't blame them but to attempt to label the voter ID laws as racist is bullshit of the highest order.

TJMAC77SP
08-08-2015, 04:34 PM
Incorrect. I have found news articles that hint both ways, but per the actual decision (http://www.ca5.uscourts.gov/) the law remains in effect pending review.

Oops............

Mjölnir
08-08-2015, 04:45 PM
Oops............

Yes, both sides are claiming victory (as they are apt to do) but in reading the actual decision, one portion of the law was found invalid, the remainder of the law is in effect.


The court finds that, if the District Court finds in its review of the case that the Law only violates Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act, it should find a solution that can still reduce the risk of in-person voter fraud and satisfy the legislative intent of the voter ID law. As such, barring the enforcement of the law in total is unmerited and only the section of the law in violation of Section 2 is void and a proposed and legal voter ID and photo ID law is attainable in concert with Section 2.


A good (non biased) summary is here: http://www.scotusblog.com/2015/08/texas-voter-id-law-ruled-invalid-in-part-2/


...the panel stressed, however, that the judge should not issue a remedy order that is broader than the need to remedy the specific violation. It suggested several ways that such an order might be written that would leave Texas free to continue to enforce some form of photo identification requirement.

You know me ... all concerned about facts and all ... :)

TJMAC77SP
08-08-2015, 05:56 PM
Yes, both sides are claiming victory (as they are apt to do) but in reading the actual decision, one portion of the law was found invalid, the remainder of the law is in effect.




A good (non biased) summary is here: http://www.scotusblog.com/2015/08/texas-voter-id-law-ruled-invalid-in-part-2/



You know me ... all concerned about facts and all ... :)

The are pesky little things aren't they?

Thanks for another reasoned post.

Absinthe Anecdote
08-08-2015, 06:17 PM
So, back to Trump.

I know we have more than a few people on the forum who despise political correctness. What is the view in here on Trump explaining his abrasive comments as "not having time to be PC."

I sometimes enjoy bluntness and being candid; however, in the case of Trump we are talking about him using the "no time" excuse to explain him calling people pigs and slobs.

I don't see how that is a time saver in any way imaginable. It actually wastes a tremendous amount of time by creating a stupid controversy that is easy to avoid.

Then he gets pissed off at Fox's Megan Kelly for asking him tough questions, and insinuates that she must have been on her period.

I don't begrudge him for playing hardball, but I frankly don't want my president to be asshole.

Regardless, it makes me question his judgement and temperament. If he can't avoid getting into such easily avoidable controveries, well, it makes me wonder what other kind of blunders he'd make.

TJMAC77SP
08-09-2015, 03:55 AM
So, back to Trump.

I know we have more than a few people on the forum who despise political correctness. What is the view in here on Trump explaining his abrasive comments as "not having time to be PC."

I sometimes enjoy bluntness and being candid; however, in the case of Trump we are talking about him using the "no time" excuse to explain him calling people pigs and slobs.

I don't see how that is a time saver in any way imaginable. It actually wastes a tremendous amount of time by creating a stupid controversy that is easy to avoid.

Then he gets pissed off at Fox's Megan Kelly for asking him tough questions, and insinuates that she must have been on her period.

I don't begrudge him for playing hardball, but I frankly don't want my president to be asshole.

Regardless, it makes me question his judgement and temperament. If he can't avoid getting into such easily avoidable controveries, well, it makes me wonder what other kind of blunders he'd make.

He is an embarrassment to the GOP. Hell he is an embarrassment to the human race. I am completely flabbergasted (OK, truthfully the cynic in me isn't surprised at all) by the sheeple who seem to think he ego driven diatribes are somehow 'telling it how it is'. They don't really listen to him.

Arggggghhhhhhhh !!!!!!!!!!!!!!

UncaRastus
08-09-2015, 02:04 PM
TJ,

So that means that you are not going to vote for Trump? ;)

Absinthe Anecdote
08-09-2015, 02:32 PM
He is an embarrassment to the GOP. Hell he is an embarrassment to the human race. I am completely flabbergasted (OK, truthfully the cynic in me isn't surprised at all) by the sheeple who seem to think he ego driven diatribes are somehow 'telling it how it is'. They don't really listen to him.

Arggggghhhhhhhh !!!!!!!!!!!!!!

My biggest issue with him is that I have yet to hear him talk about any of his polices in depth. I haven't heard him lay out any details for his plans to rectify immigration.

It is pretty obvious to me that Trump isn't in this race to win.

MikeKerriii
08-09-2015, 03:28 PM
But how is that strictly a GOP tactic.

Note that the mechanics of elections is managed at the local level. Which party controls the election officials in those inner cities where the lines are so long?


"The reasons for the lack of voting machines and long wait times in minority communities isn't always clear. At the county level, it is hard to find evidence of Republican schemes to keep heavily Democratic areas from voting. Local officials are responsible for buying voting machines and staffing polling places. Many of the places with the fewest resources and longest lines are governed by African Americans and Latinos and tend to skew Democratic. Take Maryland's P.G. County. Alisha Alexander, the county's election administrator, told me that voter registrations for the 2012 election far surpassed projections made in the early 2000s, yet the county still had the same number of voting machines. Those machines, purchased in 2001, were nearing the end of their useful lives and could not be easily fixed or replaced since they were no longer being manufactured. "You can't mix and match voting equipment," Alexander explains. State law required the county to use the same type of machine everywhere. "We literally had all of our voting units out in the field between early voting and Election Day, but there was no mechanism to get additional units."The2012 election in Richland County, South Carolina, was a disaster that officials are still trying to untangle. Nearly 100 voting machines (http://www.wistv.com/story/20223227/richland-county-election-investigation-not-enough-voting-machines-used) sat in a warehouse, unused on election night while voters queued up for as long as seven hours (http://www.thestate.com/2012/11/11/2515647_vote-counting-expert-former-voting.html?rh=1) to vote at overburdened polling places. (Local conspiracy theorists (https://www.usenix.org/system/files/conference/evtwote13/jets-0101-buell.pdf)have suggested—incorrectly—that the election office stiffed precincts on voting machines in areas that opposed a controversial tax proposal that voters rejected in 2010.)"

http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2014/10/minority-voters-election-long-lines-id


Could it also be that the voter turnout in the last two national elections far exceeded past numbers?

https://www.census.gov/newsroom/releases/archives/voting/cb09-110.html

http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2013/05/08/six-take-aways-from-the-census-bureaus-voting-report/


Without a doubt issues occur. They do in every election but sometimes the boogeyman is simply ineptitude; as inconvenient to some narratives that truth may be.
In OHIO where I mentioned the allocation of voting machines is a STATE managed issue not a local one. The same is true I personally know in DE and MA. The same can be said of many other states as well. In what states are the voting machines bought by the local governments?

MikeKerriii
08-09-2015, 03:35 PM
He is an embarrassment to the GOP. Hell he is an embarrassment to the human race. I am completely flabbergasted (OK, truthfully the cynic in me isn't surprised at all) by the sheeple who seem to think he ego driven diatribes are somehow 'telling it how it is'. They don't really listen to him.

Arggggghhhhhhhh !!!!!!!!!!!!!! People s who use the terms like "sheeple' are his prime constituency, and those that think manners and common decency (AKA: PC) are the problem. The Republican party sowed the winds of hate with BS like "birther-ism' an are now reaping the whirlwind of hate with Trump.

They are strangling with a kudzu that they themselves planted and it is funny as hell to watch.

TJMAC77SP
08-09-2015, 05:25 PM
TJ,

So that means that you are not going to vote for Trump? ;)

Yeah, that's a safe bet.

TJMAC77SP
08-09-2015, 05:42 PM
People s who use the terms like "sheeple' are his prime constituency, and those that think manners and common decency (AKA: PC) are the problem. The Republican party sowed the winds of hate with BS like "birther-ism' an are now reaping the whirlwind of hate with Trump.

They are strangling with a kudzu that they themselves planted and it is funny as hell to watch.


Once again I ask............do you actually ever have an original thought?

The irony of you commenting on the use of 'sheeple' is actually hilarious so thanks for that.

TJMAC77SP
08-09-2015, 05:53 PM
In OHIO where I mentioned the allocation of voting machines is a STATE managed issue not a local one. The same is true I personally know in DE and MA. The same can be said of many other states as well. In what states are the voting machines bought by the local governments?

Did you read any of the post past the first line?

If Ohio (the state) buys all the voting machines for the state why does this article talk about Lake County possibly being forced to buy new machines?

http://www.news-herald.com/general-news/20130605/ohio-law-may-require-lake-county-to-spend-200000-on-54-more-voting-machines-video

MA (the state) does not buy voting machines (except limited number of ADA accessible machines to supplement locally purchased machines)

https://www.bostonglobe.com/metro/regionals/west/2014/05/17/voting-hudson-vaults-into-century/NwJ8F9UUvJ4S9z1xr8d6wN/story.html

http://www.thesunchronicle.com/news/local_news/mansfield-voters-get-new-voting-machines-for-today-s-election/article_29f156d0-d068-54f4-a83d-97e79a8bcc2a.html

http://www.masslive.com/metrowest/republican/index.ssf?/base/news-31/1302160848323740.xml&

I will take your word for who buys the machines for the three counties that make up Delaware.


As to the misallocation of voting machines in Ohio; could you cite a credible source for this claim? I found a lot of information on claims and lawsuits but nothing that mentioned a GOP effort to limit the number of available machines in minority precincts.

Absinthe Anecdote
08-09-2015, 06:52 PM
Once again I ask............do you actually ever have an original thought?

The irony of you commenting on the use of 'sheeple' is actually hilarious so thanks for that.

And he stole the kudzu stiff from my vine talk in another thread!

garhkal
08-09-2015, 07:40 PM
He is an embarrassment to the GOP. Hell he is an embarrassment to the human race. I am completely flabbergasted (OK, truthfully the cynic in me isn't surprised at all) by the sheeple who seem to think he ego driven diatribes are somehow 'telling it how it is'. They don't really listen to him.

Arggggghhhhhhhh !!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Do you prefer Hillary?

MikeKerriii
08-09-2015, 08:11 PM
Do you prefer Hillary?
Trump is the Republican least likely to beat Hilary


But I prefer Bernie, or even Hilary to any of the Republicans running with Kasich coming in a distant third.

TJMAC77SP
08-09-2015, 09:52 PM
Do you prefer Hillary?

Garhkal,

There are 37 other GOP declared candidates, 15 of them viable to some degree. Why in God's name do you reduce it to a choice between Trump and Clinton?

Absinthe Anecdote
08-09-2015, 10:24 PM
Garhkal,

There are 37 other GOP declared candidates, 15 of them viable to some degree. Why in God's name do you reduce it to a choice between Trump and Clinton?

That is hilarious!

I was just thinking that a possible benefit of Trump being involved in the race would be that it would cause people to get to know some of the other candidates.

It might make some investigate or at least pay attention to people like Kasich or Fiorinna.

At least, that is what I'm hoping for.

FLAPS, USAF (ret)
08-09-2015, 10:39 PM
Trump is the Republican least likely to beat Hilary


But I prefer Bernie, or even Hilary to any of the Republicans running with Kasich coming in a distant third.

Both Bernie and Hillary would raise taxes on the achievers in addition to borrowing trillions to add more people to the welfare rolls. That's so very noble and compassionate of them! Such visionary leaders too.

MikeKerriii
08-09-2015, 11:45 PM
Both Bernie and Hillary would raise taxes on the achievers in addition to borrowing trillions to add more people to the welfare rolls. That's so very noble and compassionate of them! Such visionary leaders too.

Since that is likely only in your imagination and in propaganda. I am not too worried abut it. Borrowing huge sums of money is more a Republican thing than a Democratic one, Look a St. Ronnie and Bush II for great examples of how you can trash an economy that way. At least the won't cut taxes while increasing spending. Bush was stupid enough to cut taxes while trying to fight two wars.

TJMAC77SP
08-10-2015, 01:36 AM
Since that is likely only in your imagination and in propaganda. I am not too worried abut it. Borrowing huge sums of money is more a Republican thing than a Democratic one, Look a St. Ronnie and Bush II for great examples of how you can trash an economy that way. At least the won't cut taxes while increasing spending. Bush was stupid enough to cut taxes while trying to fight two wars.


So you don't think either will increase taxes on the so-called one percent?

http://www.cnn.com/2015/07/05/politics/bernie-sanders-raise-taxes/

http://www.cnbc.com/2015/07/24/hillary-clinton-proposes-sharp-increase-in-short-term-capital-gains-taxes.html

http://www.motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2015/07/hillary-clinton-takes-aim-capital-gains-taxes-rich

Maybe not so much in his imagination................

So which is it, bad to raise taxes or bad to cut taxes?

Mjölnir
08-10-2015, 01:46 AM
Since that is likely only in your imagination and in propaganda.

Actually both Sen. Sanders and Sec. Clinton have both been pretty upfront that their economic plans include raising taxes.

Sanders is proposing a tax rate of up to 90% for the top tax bracket and the "wealthiest of Americans", a 65% estate tax rate, and incremental raises in middle class tax rates. The 90% tax rate is not unprecedented, it was that high in the 1950's for the highest earners in the US. What is muddy is how he and his policy people define the "wealthiest of Americans" which in some speeches that Sanders has given would be people making more than $200,000 a year: high if you live in a small rural area, not so high if you live in LA, NYC, DC etc.

Clinton is proposing a change in capital gains (primarily on short term -- less than 1 year -- capital gains.) Clinton’s proposals would incrementally lower the capital gains tax rate on the highest taxpayers for each year that those investors hold securities. The tax rate on capital gains would drop to 36 percent by year 2, then step down to 32 percent, 28 percent, 24 percent and finally to 20 percent by year 6.

Basically, if you make a lot of money each year, the Clinton proposal would encourage you, via tax incentives, to hold on to securities for a long time horizon, of at least six years or more.

Mjölnir
08-10-2015, 01:48 AM
FYI

As we go further from discussing Donald Trump, this thread will likely get split to a general "Election 2016" thread just to make topics easier to search.

Rainmaker
08-10-2015, 01:55 AM
So, back to Trump.

.

Then he gets pissed off at Fox's Megan Kelly for asking him tough questions, and insinuates that she must have been on her period.

I don't begrudge him for playing hardball, but I frankly don't want my president to be asshole.

Regardless, it makes me question his judgement and temperament. If he can't avoid getting into such easily avoidable controveries, well, it makes me wonder what other kind of blunders he'd make.


I think Trump had no other choice but to hit back. Because, If he's gonna have any chance at all, then He can't allow the MSM to Marginalize him.

It's not a matter of being PC, it's a matter of the question not being relevant. Who cares what he said on a reality TV show about Rosie O'Donnell?

Anyhow, Nice to see Poor Little Megyn finaly got called out by someone not dazzled by her Big fake titties.

Stick to lying to Howard Stern Honey. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fCyI2_i-Xx8

Yeah, what a real pro that one is....

But, it's not her fault. She's following Rupurt Murdoch's Fox "News" script to the T.

with the big "F" (for the Facebook Globalist married to an illegal Alien) on the wall behind them the whole time, who do you think they're gonna attack? what a sham.


Where's the tough questions for the Fat ass Chris Christy on Bridge gate? or How bout asking JEB about the PNAC foreign policy disaster, he endorsed (turning the entire greater Middle East into a giant failed state)?

Or how bout a question about Obama and what you'd do different? None of that..

Notice who got singled out for a divisive question...... Trump, Scott Walker (with the abortion BS) and Rand Paul (Israel). Basically, anyone that Doesn't have Netanyahoo's Dick in their mouth.

Mjölnir
08-10-2015, 02:51 AM
I think Trump had no other choice but to hit back. Because, If he's gonna have any chance at all, then He can't allow the MSM to Marginalize him.

It's not a matter of being PC, it's a matter of the question not being relevant. Who cares what he said on a reality TV show about Rosie O'Donnell?

Anyhow, Nice to see Poor Little Megyn finaly got called out by someone not dazzled by her Big fake titties.

Stick to Howard Stern Honey. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fCyI2_i-Xx8

Yeah, what a real pro that one is....

But, it's not her fault. She's following Rupurt Murdoch's Fox "News" script to the T.

with the big F for the Facebook Globalist married to an illegal Alien on the wall behind them the whole time.
who do you think they're gonna attack? what a sham.


Where's the tough questions for the Fat ass Chris Christy on Bridge gate? or How bout asking JEB about the PNAC foreign policy disaster, he endorsed (turning the entire greater Middle East into a giant failed state)?

Or how bout a question about Obama and what you'd do different? None of that..

Notice who got singled out for a divisive question...... Trump, Scott Walker (with the abortion BS) and Rand Paul (Israel). Basically, anyone that Doesn't have Netanyahoo's Dick in their mouth.

Yes and no, hitting back is one thing -- not acting like a Presidential candidate is another. Trump should have expected hard(er) questions ... he is the front-runner.

IMO, Trump could have made his points, not been PC, been himself but not act like an ass to people. While his dis-invitation to the RedState gathering this weekend may be an effort to marginalize him, in large part he marginalizing himself ... I think it is also legitimate if the organizer wants the event to be taken seriously to have candidates attend that act seriously. Indicative of the circus that the Trump candidacy is becoming is the statements from Trump on the event before and after the dis-invite.

MikeKerriii
08-10-2015, 04:05 AM
So you don't think either will increase taxes on the so-called one percent?

http://www.cnn.com/2015/07/05/politics/bernie-sanders-raise-taxes/

http://www.cnbc.com/2015/07/24/hillary-clinton-proposes-sharp-increase-in-short-term-capital-gains-taxes.html

http://www.motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2015/07/hillary-clinton-takes-aim-capital-gains-taxes-rich

Maybe not so much in his imagination................

So which is it, bad to raise taxes or bad to cut taxes?

"in addition to borrowing trillions to add more people to the welfare rolls." Is the BS propaganda I have problems with.

MikeKerriii
08-10-2015, 04:06 AM
Actually both Sen. Sanders and Sec. Clinton have both been pretty upfront that their economic plans include raising taxes.

Sanders is proposing a tax rate of up to 90% for the top tax bracket and the "wealthiest of Americans", a 65% estate tax rate, and incremental raises in middle class tax rates. The 90% tax rate is not unprecedented, it was that high in the 1950's for the highest earners in the US. What is muddy is how he and his policy people define the "wealthiest of Americans" which in some speeches that Sanders has given would be people making more than $200,000 a year: high if you live in a small rural area, not so high if you live in LA, NYC, DC etc.

Clinton is proposing a change in capital gains (primarily on short term -- less than 1 year -- capital gains.) Clinton’s proposals would incrementally lower the capital gains tax rate on the highest taxpayers for each year that those investors hold securities. The tax rate on capital gains would drop to 36 percent by year 2, then step down to 32 percent, 28 percent, 24 percent and finally to 20 percent by year 6.

Basically, if you make a lot of money each year, the Clinton proposal would encourage you, via tax incentives, to hold on to securities for a long time horizon, of at least six years or more. If He wouldd have have limited his post to taxes I would agreed with him, They both plan on raising taxes a bit

But I don't see all that much wrong with raising a bit, the bit about borrowing trillions to pay for welfare is what I find insane.

TJMAC77SP
08-10-2015, 01:25 PM
"in addition to borrowing trillions to add more people to the welfare rolls." Is the BS propaganda I have problems with.

Should have been a little more judicious with your cherry picking of his post.

MikeKerriii
08-10-2015, 02:52 PM
Should have been a little more judicious with your cherry picking of his post.

I think the lie was the main point of his post.

Rainmaker
08-10-2015, 03:02 PM
Yes and no, hitting back is one thing -- not acting like a Presidential candidate is another. Trump should have expected hard(er) questions ... he is the front-runner.

IMO, Trump could have made his points, not been PC, been himself but not act like an ass to people. While his dis-invitation to the RedState gathering this weekend may be an effort to marginalize him, in large part he marginalizing himself ... I think it is also legitimate if the organizer wants the event to be taken seriously to have candidates attend that act seriously. Indicative of the circus that the Trump candidacy is becoming is the statements from Trump on the event before and after the dis-invite.

Mikekerriii may indeed be right (that the GOP is headed the way of the Whig party).

But, it's not for the reasons he thinks. It's because, they continue to ignore the will of the core segment of their constituency

The Tea party gave the GOP control of the house in 2010 largely because of anger about TARP.

Then, in 2014 they gave them the Senate. Largely because of anger about illegal immigration.

They were given a mandate to Oppose Obongo and the Leftist agenda And the GOP has done Fuck all to oppose it (other than parading Netanyahoo up there). This begs the question. Why?

Now, Rainmaker lives in the heart of Faux "News" country.. These are mostly people that are net tax payers and not net tax takers, and they're pissed.

Vern Buchanan is our Congressional representative and You couldn't find a bigger mealy mouthed sellout RINO prick than this guy.

The GOP needs a complete makeover. But, Their answer to everything is to put up another open border, big spender, compassionate conservative Globalist like (Bush, Rubio, Christie et. al) .

That is a losing prospect and is basically no different than what Hillary brings. People don't want that anymore. This country doesn't need another democratic party light.

Depending on which poll you look at Trump is polling at 15-25%. , They need to embrace Trump and bring him into the tent and actually vet him with some real questions and not these hatchet job attacks. Cause, If they freeze him out they are going to get run over by the train.

MikeKerriii
08-10-2015, 04:36 PM
Mikekerriii may indeed be right (that the GOP is headed the way of the Whig party).

But, it's not for the reasons he thinks. It's because, they continue to ignore the will of the core segment of their constituency

The Tea party gave the GOP control of the house in 2010 largely because of anger about TARP.

Then, in 2014 they gave them the Senate. Largely because of anger about illegal immigration.

They were given a mandate to Oppose Obongo and the Leftist agenda And the GOP has done Fuck all to oppose it (other than parading Netanyahoo up there). This begs the question. Why?

Now, Rainmaker lives in the heart of Faux "News" country.. These are mostly people that are net tax payers and not net tax takers, and they're pissed.

Vern Buchanan is our Congressional representative and You couldn't find a bigger mealy mouthed sellout RINO prick than this guy.

The GOP needs a complete makeover. But, Their answer to everything is to put up another open border, big spender, compassionate conservative Globalist like (Bush, Rubio, Christie et. al) .

That is a losing prospect and is basically no different than what Hillary brings. People don't want that anymore. This country doesn't need another democratic party light.

Depending on which poll you look at Trump is polling at 15-25%. , They need to embrace Trump and bring him into the tent and actually vet him with some real questions and not these hatchet job attacks. Cause, If they freeze him out they are going to get run over by the train.

I hope the republicans take your advice and run with it, seeing them get under 40% in the general election would be heartwarming, The Congressional seat that would come with a landslide that that would just be is icing on the cake.

Rainmaker
08-10-2015, 04:59 PM
I hope the republicans take your advice and run with it, seeing them get under 40% in the general election would be heartwarming, The Congressional seat that would come with a landslide that that would just be is icing on the cake.

Da Comrade Kerr!!! I'll bet you're a GOD on Jezebel.com

Absinthe Anecdote
08-10-2015, 05:14 PM
The GOP needs a complete makeover. But, Their answer to everything is to put up another open border, big spender, compassionate conservative Globalist like (Bush, Rubio, Christie et. al) .

That is a losing prospect and is basically no different than what Hillary brings. People don't want that anymore. This country doesn't need another democratic party light.

Depending on which poll you look at Trump is polling at 15-25%. , They need to embrace Trump and bring him into the tent and actually vet him with some real questions and not these hatchet job attacks. Cause, If they freeze him out they are going to get run over by the train.

No, the moderate wing of the GOP needs to split and form a new party. Call it the Moderate Party and I'm ok with the mascot being a big rhinoceros.

The Moderate Party would be fiscally conservative and socially liberal. Its political base would include a large swath of the middle of both the Democrat and Republican parties.

If the RHINOs would formulate their platform to grab the middle of the political spectrum, they would steamroll elections across the nation.

The GOP is suffering from a branding problem due to the TEA party and a successful smear campaign by the Democrats to associate the GOP name with people like, dear old Rainmaker.

You and your ilk can have the GOP as far as I'm concerned.

I'll take candidates like Rubio, Christie, and Kasich. Give them a new party banner to run under and we'd swipe the base of both current parties.

You and Cruz can take the GOP name and run full crazy with it for all I care. The GOP name has been virtually ruined, and I don't see a way of saving it. You TEA party nuts are the same kind of idiots that voted for Perot in 92, and you are the same ones embracing Trump now.

I really wish the RHINOs as you call them would abandon the GOP name. This country is ripe for the rise of a third party, but it would need to come from the middle of the political spectrum to be successful.

Rainmaker
08-10-2015, 05:14 PM
Trump should have expected hard(er) questions ... he is the front-runner.




Q: Your Twitter account has several disparaging comments about women’s looks. You once told a contestant on Celebrity Apprentice it would be a pretty picture to see her on her knees. Does that sound to you like the temperament of a man we should elect as president, and how will you answer the charge from Hillary Clinton, who was likely to be the Democratic nominee, that you are part of the war on women?

Trump was right to blow this question off. Because, This is not a serious question.

It's a smear job, following right on the heels of the whole stand up and raise your hand if you won't swear unconditional allegiance to JEB Bullshit.

It's clear that Roger Ailes and the crew poured over 8 years of apprentice episodes and then took something said completely out of context in an effort just to make Trump look bad

If you have ever watched The Apprentice you'll know it was a TV SHOW. And just who is Megyn Kelly to put words in Hillary Clinton's mouth. Just when exactly did Hillary say this anyway?

And now this Silly little girl, Megyn Kelly (who only got were she is in the first place by using her tits and ass to get ahead) suddenly wants to play the gender game?

Here's another example of some of Megyn's finest work....

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=clTgWdrhIeg

yep, she's a regular Walter Cronkite.

I'm just glad Trump is exposing Fox to the diehard Hannity fans for the shit show it really is.

Bos Mutus
08-10-2015, 05:25 PM
No, the moderate wing of the GOP needs to split and form a new party. Call it the Moderate Party and I'm ok with the mascot being a big rhinoceros.

The Moderate Party would be fiscally conservative and socially liberal. Its political base would include a large swath of the middle of both the Democrat and Republican parties.

If the RHINOs would formulate their platform to grab the middle of the political spectrum, they would steamroll elections across the nation.

The GOP is suffering from a branding problem due to the TEA party and a successful smear campaign by the Democrats to associate the GOP name with people like, dear old Rainmaker.

You and your ilk can have the GOP as far as I'm concerned.

I'll take candidates like Rubio, Christie, and Kasich. Give them a new party banner to run under and we'd swipe the base of both current parties.

You and Cruz can take the GOP name and run full crazy with it for all I care. The GOP name has been virtually ruined, and I don't see a way of saving it. You TEA party nuts are the same kind of idiots that voted for Perot in 92, and you are the same ones embracing Trump now.

I really wish the RHINOs as you call them would abandon the GOP name. This country is ripe for the rise of a third party, but it would need to come from the middle of the political spectrum to be successful.

Yes! This is my new party...I call it, The 68 Percenters...which is those within one standard deviation of normal.

Rainmaker
08-10-2015, 05:27 PM
I'll take candidates like Rubio, Christie, and Kasich. Give them a new party banner to run under and we'd swipe the base of both current parties.



Rubio, Christie, and Kasich....Then, you might as well just vote for Hillary. because, there's really no meaningful difference between any of them. Hillary is a Neocon. I can't see why you wouldn't like her.

Absinthe Anecdote
08-10-2015, 05:28 PM
Yes! This is my new party...I call it, The 68 Percenters...which is those within one standard deviation of normal.

How much spare time do you have?

Would you like to start a political movement with me?

Rainmaker
08-10-2015, 05:29 PM
How much spare time do you have?

Would you like to start a political movement with me?

They already have one just like that. It's called AIPAC.

Absinthe Anecdote
08-10-2015, 05:31 PM
Rubio, Christie, and Kasich....Then, you might as well just vote for Hillary. because, there's really no difference meaningful difference between any of them. Hillary is a Neocon. I can't see why you wouldn't like her.

Blaa, Blaa, Blaa... Why don't you go cook some bacon on a machine gun barrel with Ted Cruz? Maybe he will give you a modern hand-me-down handgun to carry instead of a relic of the 1950s.

Bos Mutus
08-10-2015, 05:39 PM
How much spare time do you have?

Would you like to start a political movement with me?

I have some time...

Absinthe Anecdote
08-10-2015, 05:44 PM
They already have one just like that. It's called AIPAC.

More fear mongering about Israel. Bla bla bla... You are out of sync with the rest of the evangelicals.

Most of your TEA party buddies love Israel, they want them in Jerusalem to keep the lights on for Jesus.

Just where do you get your anti-AIPAC marching orders from? A white prison gang like the Peckerwoods?

Seriously, where are you getting all this stuff from?

When push comes to shove in a political discussion, you always start screaming about AIPAC, but you never explain why this pro Israel lobbying group is such an issue with you.

What gives?

Absinthe Anecdote
08-10-2015, 05:50 PM
I have some time...

I have the capstone course for my Mass Communications degree coming up this semester, so I'm going to be busy when school starts.

Unless, I can figure out a way to integrate this idea into my course work, which might be possible.

Rainmaker
08-10-2015, 06:24 PM
Bla bla bla... You are out of sync with the rest of the evangelicals.

I'm not an evangelical.


When push comes to shove in a political discussion, you always start screaming about AIPAC, but you never explain why this pro Israel lobbying group is such an issue with you.

What gives?

Nothing against them personally. But, it's Because #1, I don't like bullies. And #2, I swore my oath to support and defend the Constitution of the United States (Not to some small foreign apartheid state). And #3, I can think for myself.

Collusion is supposed to be illegal.

The Widely Disproportionate influence of less than .04% of the Population in a Nation's government and Banking Industries, Not to mention the news and entertainment media (Comcast, News Corp, Disney, Viacom, Time Warner, CBS), is not healthy. In-fact. It's dangerous.

When a Government gets so heavily compromised at its highest levels by the number of foreign interests holding positions in those levels, then it becomes no longer capable of effectively governing the country.

America has enjoyed a lot of prosperity largely based on an ideology of unity that has preserved it. The loss of that unity is what is destroying it.

That's all.

Absinthe Anecdote
08-10-2015, 06:40 PM
I'm not an evangelical.



It's nothing against them personally. But, it's Because #1, I don't like bullies. And #2, I swore my oath to support and defend the Constitution of the United States (Not to some small foreign apartheid state). And #3, I can think for myself.

Collusion is supposed to be illegal.

The Widely Disproportionate influence of less than .04% of the Population in the Nation's government and Banking Industries, Not to mention the news and entertainment media (Comcast, News Corp, Disney, Viacom, Time Warner, CBS), is not healthy. In-fact. I'd say It's dangerous.

When a Government gets so heavily compromised at its highest levels by the number of foreign interests holding positions in those levels, then it becomes no longer capable of effectively governing the country.

America has enjoyed a lot of prosperity largely based on an ideology of unity that has preserved it. The loss of that unity is what's destroying it. That's all.

So, are saying that AIPAC, this lobbyist group controls the U.S. News media and congress?

http://www.aipac.org/about/mission

What evidence do you have that government officials and media corporations are controlled by AIPAC?

Give me some more details.

Rainmaker
08-10-2015, 06:43 PM
So, are saying that AIPAC, this lobbyist group controls the U.S. News media and congress?

http://www.aipac.org/about/mission

What evidence do you have that government officials and media corporations are controlled by AIPAC?

Give me some more details.

What am I, Google? Go drink your cheep vodka

Absinthe Anecdote
08-10-2015, 06:53 PM
From the AIPAC website:




http://www.aipac.org/about/how-we-work

AIPAC empowers pro-Israel activists across all ages, religions and races to be politically engaged and build relationships with members of Congress from both sides of the aisle to promote the U.S.-Israel relationship. The vital work of AIPAC is made possible by its dedicated membership participating in AIPAC’s Clubs, investing with the AIPAC Tomorrow Campaign, and being politically engaged with members of Congress.

More than 100,000 citizens from across the country work with their elected officials and AIPAC staff to strengthen the bonds between the United States and the Jewish state.

AIPAC is not a Political Action Committee and we do not rate or endorse candidates. AIPAC members in all 50 states are encouraged to be politically active and develop relationships with their members of Congress to help educate them about the importance of U.S.-Israel ties.

While building support in Washington is essential, AIPAC is found wherever the future of the U.S.-Israel relationship could be affected. AIPAC has a network of 10 regional offices and seven satellite offices that help pro-Israel activists from Missoula to Miami learn how they can affect Israel's future and security by promoting strong ties with the United States.

Pro-Israel advocacy and strengthening the U.S.-Israel relationship is a cause that concerns a broad spectrum of Americans. AIPAC professionals work with Synagogues and Churches to promote pro-Israel advocacy throughout their congregations. African American and Hispanic leaders work with AIPAC staff and their members of Congress to ensure that America supports our ally in the Middle East.

AIPAC also works on hundreds of college and high school campuses, empowering and educating student activists to answer Israel's detractors and how to use political involvement to build support for Israel.

During the Cold War era, Israel was a dependent nation in that it probably wouldn't have existed if not for support from the U.S. and I'm not too sure how long it would survive in the modern era if they lost all support from the U.S.

I would expect a country in Israel's situation to have a strong lobbying group here.

As far as couple of big media corporations owning almost all of news outlets, how is that linked to AIPAC?

Media consolidation is a concern, but I don't see the linkage to Israel.

Help me out, show me your case, but be specific and provide some compelling evidence.

Absinthe Anecdote
08-10-2015, 07:14 PM
What am I, Google? Go drink your cheep vodka

Ok, I take that to mean that you can't. Perhaps the AIPAC conspiracy was a little tidbit you heard on Alex Jones or at a storm trooper rally.

Why are you repeating such a claim if you can't substantiate it?

Speaking of storm troopers, here is the third an final installment of the Hitler vs Vader Epic Rap Battles.

Hitler loses.
http://youtu.be/BpqNvskS_kM

garhkal
08-10-2015, 07:19 PM
If He wouldd have have limited his post to taxes I would agreed with him, They both plan on raising taxes a bit

But I don't see all that much wrong with raising a bit, the bit about borrowing trillions to pay for welfare is what I find insane.

What do you consider 'raising taxes a bit'? 10% more for those say making 50k or more? pushing it to 75% tax for those making 200k a year?


No, the moderate wing of the GOP needs to split and form a new party. Call it the Moderate Party and I'm ok with the mascot being a big rhinoceros.

The Moderate Party would be fiscally conservative and socially liberal. Its political base would include a large swath of the middle of both the Democrat and Republican parties.

IMO its impossible to both be fiscally conservative while socially liberal. The latter is often about "spreading" the wealth by taking it from the rich to give to everyone else.

Rainmaker
08-10-2015, 07:29 PM
Ok, I take that to mean that you can't. Perhaps the AIPAC conspiracy was a little tidbit you heard on Alex Jones or at a storm trooper rally.

Why are repeating such a claim if you can't substantiate it?




You're the one that asked what my deal with AIPAC is, and Now, I told you, so you can take it or leave it as it is.

You want me to post websites, so you can play the usual gotcha game and debate the credibility of the sources, ad nauseum ? No thanks.

But, someone quoting from the AIPAC website to tell us that they're just like any other lobby. Is like the grand wizard quoting stromfront website to tell us that the Klan is really open minded.

Besides the fact that we have 6 Catholics and 3 Jews on the SCOTUS( when the majority of the National population is Protestant). and The Chairman of the Fed for the last 30 years (and most of the 12 banks as well), and all but 2 of them in the last 100 years have been Jewish,

And our whole foreign policy seems to consist of destabalizing every neighboring regime hostile to Israel in the Middle East.

And there's a giant fucking Minora set up across the street from the White House. Every Dec. since, 2001

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_House_Hanukkah_Party.

and you can't change the channel without hearing something about Judeo whatever, when they're only .04% of the population of the country is not enough for you. Etc. etc. etc

Now, There are 84 citations at the bottom of this page. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Israel_Public_Affairs_Committee

So, If you really want, then do some research. See where it takes you.

Or just open your eyes and look around... or don't. I don't really care. Because, I'm not the one afraid of acknowledging the truth. You are.

Absinthe Anecdote
08-10-2015, 07:42 PM
IMO its impossible to both be fiscally conservative while socially liberal. The latter is often about "spreading" the wealth by taking it from the rich to give to everyone else.

It doesn't have to be that way.

I'm talking about the party not getting painted into a corner over social issues like abortion, gay rights, women's issues, and welfare reform.

As far as spreading money around, it is possible to be compassionate to the poor without being a socialist.

The fact is that capitalism lifts far more people out of poverty than socialism.

The GOP has suffered in its branding because of the far right segment of the party that screams and calls candidates RHINOs if they support any initiative or program that is socially liberal.

The Democrats have been very successful in painting an image of the GOP as being representative of racist and uncompassionate hardliners.

How did they do this?

By exploiting the section of the GOP that hates reasonable men like John McCain, Kasich, Christie and the rest of the RHINOs.

I say screw it, the RHINOs should be the ones to leave the GOP and create a moderate party. Hell, we could probably swipe some good people from the Democrats in the process.

The RHINOs should jettison the crazies on the far right and take the middle. It is a winning formula.

Absinthe Anecdote
08-10-2015, 07:46 PM
You're the one that asked what my deal with AIPAC is, and Now, I told you, so you can take it or leave it as it is.

You want me to post websites, so you can play the usual gotcha game and debate the credibility of the sources, ad nauseum ? No thanks.

But, someone quoting from the AIPAC website to tell us that they're just like any other lobby. Is like the grand wizard quoting stromfront website to tell us that the Klan is really open minded.

Besides the fact that we have 6 Catholics and 3 Jews on the SCOTUS( when the majority of the National population is Protestant). and The Chairman of the Fed for the last 30 years (and most of the 12 banks as well), and all but 2 of them in the last 100 years have been Jewish,

And our whole foreign policy seems to consist of destabalizing every neighboring regime hostile to Israel in the Middle East.

And there's a giant fucking Minora set up across the street from the White House. Every Dec. since, 2001

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_House_Hanukkah_Party.

and you can't change the channel without hearing something about Judeo whatever, when they're only .04% of the population of the country is not enough for you. Etc. etc. etc

Now, There are 84 citations at the bottom of this page. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Israel_Public_Affairs_Committee

So, If you really want, then do some research. See where it takes you. Or just open your eyes and look around... or don't. I don't really care. Because, I'm not the one afraid of acknowledging the truth. You are.

Have a beer hall putsch, and get 'em fired up!

Mjölnir
08-10-2015, 07:48 PM
Q: Your Twitter account has several disparaging comments about women’s looks. You once told a contestant on Celebrity Apprentice it would be a pretty picture to see her on her knees. Does that sound to you like the temperament of a man we should elect as president, and how will you answer the charge from Hillary Clinton, who was likely to be the Democratic nominee, that you are part of the war on women?

Trump was right to blow this question off. Because, This is not a serious question.

I disagree. Like you I am a husband & a dad to a little girl. To me (my opinion), if a candidate for President is sexist or has negative attitudes towards women I think it is relevant -- considering he would be in charge of the Executive Branch and would be able to de-emphasize DoJ protections for women. It may not be my #1 priority, but it is a factor in his being a suitable candidate.

EDIT: Donald Trump may in fact no be a sexist etc. but he has a very carefully crafted public persona that in some ways portrays him as such. Just because he says "I'm not a sexist" doesn't counter the kinds of statements he has made on his TV shows etc. He may be a man of impeccable character etc. with the highest regard for women, the character he has very publicly made himself is different ... it does become part of the equation.

Rainmaker
08-10-2015, 07:57 PM
I disagree. Like you I am a husband & a dad to a little girl. To me (my opinion), if a candidate for President is sexist or has negative attitudes towards women I think it is relevant -- considering he would be in charge of the Executive Branch and would be able to de-emphasize DoJ protections for women. It may not be my #1 priority, but it is a factor in his being a suitable candidate.

You think women need DOJ protections? From what? Racist White men like Donald Trump?

30,000 white women are raped by blacks every year in America. Where's the DOJ protecting them?

.

Mjölnir
08-10-2015, 08:04 PM
You think women need DOJ protections?

I think the current laws for equal protection under the law need to be enforced.


From what? Racist White men like Donald Trump?

I don't think he is a racist, don't know where you made that connection. But I think women deserve a President who doesn't think they are objects ... yeah.


30,000 white women are raped by blacks every year in America. Where's the DOJ protecting them?

This isn't about race, please don't make it such & not sure why you are pulling race into this; I wouldn't rule out the minority women that are also victims of rape. But yeah, that is a terrible number; wish it was zero but I know that isn't realistic. As a guy with a brother who is a cop, pseudo-son who is a cop, they are doing the best they can. The DoJ for the most part get's involved with the prosecutorial aspects, not the prevention aspect.

Rainmaker
08-10-2015, 08:15 PM
I think the current laws for equal protection under the law need to be enforced.

So, When did Trump ever say he wouldn't enforce current law? You want to talk about enforcing current law?

How bout Kate Steinle? Killed in cold blood in front of her Father by an Illegal Alien Felon that had been in ICE custody over 5 times.

Where's Megyn Kelly's outrage over that? I guess we're all more worried about what was said to that Fat Lesbian Rosie O'Donnell on the view.


not sure why you are pulling race into this

gee. I dunno? I guess maybe the Hitler videos and comments comparing me to a Nazi above got me all confused.



The DoJ for the most part get's involved with the prosecutorial aspects, not the prevention aspect.

This DOJ is a threat to National Security. Eric Holder should've been impeached over fast and furious. But, the GOP is complicit in the 50 year attack on the sovereign borders of the United States.

TJMAC77SP
08-10-2015, 08:18 PM
I think the lie was the main point of his post.

You mean the 'lie' about "borrowing trillions to add more people to the welfare rolls"? That is the only part you should have quoted and labeled as part of his imagination. BTW....not sure 'lie' is the right label to something that hasn't happened yet but there is a chance it could (regardless of how slim the chance).

Mjölnir
08-10-2015, 08:28 PM
So, When did Trump ever say he wouldn't enforce current law? You want to talk about enforcing current law?

He didn't; but based on his statements about women in the past, I have to wonder if he would. When did President Obama ever say that he views a racially based hate crime as only being white-on-black? Never. But based on some statements he made &/or condoned in the past, I could kind of see that coming. Based on the overwhelmingly poor record on directing the DoJ to investigate obvious cases of black-on-white hate crimes I have to think that is what he is doing as well.


How bout Kate Steinle? Killed in cold blood in front of her Father by an Illegal Alien Felon that had been in ICE custody over 5 times.

It is tragic, and based on Trumps statements about it I think he does as well. I don't think her murder is as much an issue about her gender as much it is an illustration of the problems with 'sanctuary cities in America -- two different issues.


Where's Megyn Kelly's outrage over that? I guess we're all more worried about what was said to that Fat ass Rosie O'Donnell on the view.

I could care less who he made a seemingly sexist statement to, he made it. He also told one contestant on his TV show that she would look good on her knees. I am not saying that the apparent sexist views he portrays 'trumps' (no pun intended) other issues, but it is relevant to him being a candidate for President.




gee. I dunno? I guess maybe the Hitler videos and comments comparing me to a Nazi above got me all confused.

???


This DOJ is a threat to National Security

Disagree.


Eric Holder should've been impeached over fast and furious.

Agree.


But, the GOP is complicit in the 50 year attack on the sovereign borders of the United States.

Disagree.

Absinthe Anecdote
08-10-2015, 08:35 PM
gee. I dunno? I guess maybe the Hitler videos and comments comparing me to a Nazi above got me all confused.

.

It was your anti Jewish rant that got you compared to a Nazi.

This RHINO struck back hard against your Tea Party ass!

I brain tossed you son, I won, Yahtzee!

Rainmaker
08-10-2015, 08:45 PM
I would expect a country in Israel's situation to have a strong lobbying group here.

As far as couple of big media corporations owning almost all of news outlets, how is that linked to AIPAC?

Media consolidation is a concern, but I don't see the linkage to Israel.



They have the same funding sources.




It was your anti Jewish rant that got you compared to a Nazi.

This RHINO struck back hard against your Tea Party ass!

I brain tossed you son, I won, Yahtzee!

You're about as intellectually stimulating as a fucking pancake.

The constant whining and shouting of "Anti Semite" by brainwashed types like you...is really about wanting to prevent any rational discussion of the disproportionate influence of Internationalist Jews in the internal affairs of the United States (in which they should have no business).

They acknowledge It. And so does everyone else in the world.... So, Why shouldn't we?

http://www.nytimes.com/movies/movie/161693/Hollywood-An-Empire-of-Their-Own/overview

Absinthe Anecdote
08-10-2015, 09:27 PM
You're about as intellectually stimulating as a fucking pancake.

The constant whining and shouting of "Anti Semite" by brainwashed types like you...is really about wanting to prevent any rational discussion of the disproportionate influence of Internationalist Jews in the internal affairs of the United States (in which they should have no business).

They acknowledge It. And so does everyone else in the world.... So, Why shouldn't we?

http://www.nytimes.com/movies/movie/161693/Hollywood-An-Empire-of-Their-Own/overview

That is your proof? A documentary about a book that chronicles a few Jewish guys who became movie moguls during the Golden Age of Hollywood.

LOL!

And you call me an intellectual pancake!

I'll be the pancake, but you are the intellectual lard.

Yes, lard.

An unhealthy additive that is obsolete and unneeded.

You are dangerous, and you need a new way of thinking.

Is lard kosher?

No, it is not!

God banned it in the bible, but I guess you forgot.

Perhaps that is why you are so confused, you follow the same Jewish "sand people" God and your homeboy Jesus fucked up all their rules.

Take from a RHINO atheist, the Jews aren't the problem.

You might think I blame blue collar workers Union workers and poor white crackers who didn't go to college. I don't.

I blame lard-brains like you, who want to vote for Trump.

TJMAC77SP
08-10-2015, 09:30 PM
I continue to be sincerely amazed at the people who think Trump is not only a viable candidate but a fit and qualified one.

I know that as time goes on his dirty laundry will come out and after awhile merely yelling attack responses won't satisfy people but I shudder at all the time and effort it will take to get there.

Rainmaker
08-10-2015, 09:40 PM
That is your proof? A documentary about a book that chronicles a few Jewish guys who became movie moguls during the Golden Age of Hollywood.

LOL!

And you call me an intellectual pancake!

I'll be pancake, but you are the intellectual lard.

Yes, lard.

An unhealthy additive that is obsolete and unneeded.

You are dangerous, and you need a new way of thinking.

Is lard kosher?

No, it is not!

God banned it in the bible, but I guess you forgot.

Perhaps that is why you are so confused, you you follow the same Jewish "sand people" God and your homeboy Jesus fucked up all their rules.

Take from a RHINO atheist, the Jews aren't the problem.

You might think I blame blue collar workers Union workers and poor white crackers who didn't go to college. I don't.

I blame lard-brains like you, who want to vote for Trump.


When I'm sitting at the table and the guy next to me is dumping his chips, I don't need to see it in black and white in order to know that the game is rigged.

That's why you're still sitting in college at age 45 trying to find yourself, while I'm out making a killing, because, your too friggin stupid to figure out when you're being scammed.

Like I said before, you're either hired or your retarded. Rainmaker's money's on the latter.

Now, go back to eating your Kosher hot dog and yelling out loud at Jesus Because your Evangelical Christian, practice girlfriend dumped you (after the rabbi took too much off during your mitzvah of circumcision)

Absinthe Anecdote
08-10-2015, 09:54 PM
When I'm sitting at the table and the guy next to me is dumping chips, I don't need to see it in black and white in order to know that the game is rigged.

That's why you're still sitting in college at age 45 trying to find yourself, while I'm out making a killing, because, your too friggin stupid to figure out when you're being scammed.

Like I said before, you're either hired or your retarded. Rainmaker's money's on the latter.

Now, go back to eating your Kosher hot dog and yelling out lout at Jesus because, your Evangelical Christian practice girlfriend dumped you (after the rabbi took too much off during your mitzvah of circumcision)

Sweet!

Brag about your money and your freebie .38 from the 1950s.

Rainmaker, that gun is probably rusty and has stress cracks. Why don't you buy another since you big fat stacks of cash?

You hate against the Jews and you routinely lampoon blacks.

Seriously, half your posts sound like the rantings of a white-boy who spent some time in prison. If you roll up your sleeve, will I see a skinhead tattoo?

Rainmaker
08-10-2015, 09:57 PM
I continue to be sincerely amazed at the people who think Trump is not only a viable candidate but a fit and qualified one.

I know that as time goes on his dirty laundry will come out and after awhile merely yelling attack responses won't satisfy people but I shudder at all the time and effort it will take to get there.

I'm not saying Trump is the answer, I'm saying he's polling 20% of the republican electorate and he needs to be vetted and not pussy foot around with BS questions like the other night.

Personally, if I was Trump I'd just skip the debate and buy my own airtime and see which gets higher ratings...

I continue to be amazed by people who'll vote over and over for the same status quo RINOs and think they are ever going to actually do any of what they say.

They've been talking about securing the southern border and cutting spending for 25 years and its never going to happen because, obviously they don't want to.

Absinthe Anecdote
08-10-2015, 10:10 PM
I'm not saying Trump is the answer, I'm saying he's polling 20% of the republican electorate and he needs to be vetted and not pussy foot around with BS questions like the other night. Personally, if I was Trump I'd skip the debate and buy my own airtime and see which gets hire ratings...

I continue to be amazed by people who'll vote for over and over for the same status quo RINOs and think they are ever going to actually do what they say.

They've been talking about securing the southern border and cutting spending for 25 years and its never going to happen because, they don't want to.

What about the Northern border? What about our coastlines?

Should we string 10,000 miles of net to catch those cocaine submarines?

How about fixing the problem with policy, a guest worker program, and E-verify like the RINOs suggest?

Nope! You Tea Party dudes won't stand for that. You want stoke racial fears and turn the border into a DMZ.

I have an idea, take your fat stack of cash and buy some night vision goggles and go patrol the border with your Barny Fife era .38.

Don't want to go alone?

Have a beer hall putsch and get the Tea Party fired up!

Absinthe Anecdote
08-10-2015, 11:17 PM
Hey Rainmaker!

Look who else is in lockstep with you about AIPAC, none other than David Duke.

http://davidduke.com/how-aipac-controls-congress-and-non-jewish-journalists/

Is this where you are getting your opinions from?

It sure has hell sounds like the same stuff you routinely post on this forum.




How AIPAC Controls Congress and Non-Jewish Journalists
By David Duke
AUGUST 27, 2012 AT 7:12 AM
The Zionist Supremacist American-Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) controls not only Members of Congress but also Gentile journalists, a new report in a Jewish newspaper has revealed.

LOL Rainmaker

Mjölnir
08-10-2015, 11:54 PM
Rainmaker & Absinthe Anecdote:

Please refrain from personal insults that disrupt / derail the conversation.

If it is a personal issue, take it to PM.

http://media.giphy.com/media/fzZaLJjnNscKs/giphy.gif

TJMAC77SP
08-11-2015, 12:56 AM
I'm not saying Trump is the answer, I'm saying he's polling 20% of the republican electorate and he needs to be vetted and not pussy foot around with BS questions like the other night.

Personally, if I was Trump I'd just skip the debate and buy my own airtime and see which gets higher ratings...

I continue to be amazed by people who'll vote over and over for the same status quo RINOs and think they are ever going to actually do any of what they say.

They've been talking about securing the southern border and cutting spending for 25 years and its never going to happen because, obviously they don't want to.

I get some of what you are saying but Trump isn't really offering any solution. Many people seem to think he is but it just isn't true. He only offers inflammatory speech designed to do just that, inflame. That is not the man we need to run for President, regardless what party or lack of party he does so under.

Let's give the serious candidates a chance to honestly and cogently address the issues.

BTW: The fact that he is polling so high is what scares the shyte out of me. The cynical side of me always fears the uninformed electorate but with him we have entered a whole new level of mass stupidity.

Mjölnir
08-11-2015, 01:24 AM
I get some of what you are saying but Trump isn't really offering any solution. Many people seem to think he is but it just isn't true. He only offers inflammatory speech designed to do just that, inflame. That is not the man we need to run for President, regardless what party or lack of party he does so under.

Let's give the serious candidates a chance to honestly and cogently address the issues.

BTW: The fact that he is polling so high is what scares the shyte out of me. The cynical side of me always fears the uninformed electorate but with him we have entered a whole new level of mass stupidity.

I could take him a lot more seriously if he would stop acting out 'The Donald' character and be a serious candidate. I get the impression that Donald Trump wants to run for President ... but doesn't really want to be President.

MikeKerriii
08-11-2015, 02:17 AM
What do you consider 'raising taxes a bit'? 10% more for those say making 50k or more? pushing it to 75% tax for those making 200k a year?



IMO its impossible to both be fiscally conservative while socially liberal. The latter is often about "spreading" the wealth by taking it from the rich to give to everyone else.

A return of taxes to the level they were when Clinton was in office would be a good start, we know that that level of taxes did not harm the economy.
You have as little clue about what the term social liberal means as you did about who started the Civil war and what the word covert means. Most social liberal policies are essential free or cost less than the current policies.

MikeKerriii
08-11-2015, 02:21 AM
You mean the 'lie' about "borrowing trillions to add more people to the welfare rolls"? That is the only part you should have quoted and labeled as part of his imagination. BTW....not sure 'lie' is the right label to something that hasn't happened yet but there is a chance it could (regardless of how slim the chance).

Lie works when it is a old falacy that has been repeated and repeated for decades, A completely baseless statement is often called a lie

Mjölnir
08-11-2015, 02:30 AM
A return of taxes to the level they were when Clinton was in office would be a good start, we know that that level of taxes did not harm the economy.{/quote[

Without reducing spending (somewhere) that would increase debt. Current spending levels would not support a reduction of tax rates without also reducing spending. Raising taxes, even to a 95% cap on the highest income earners in the US will not keep up with the projected debt increases and interest on the debt. A major problem with our current tax structure is that if spending remains where it is, and a significant portion of the population is not actually paying taxes, the spending will always outreach the revenue.


[quote]Most social liberal policies are essential free or cost less than the current policies.

Not sure where you are getting that that. Could you explain.

MikeKerriii
08-11-2015, 02:59 AM
Without reducing spending (somewhere) that would increase debt. Current spending levels would not support a reduction of tax rates without also reducing spending. Raising taxes, even to a 95% cap on the highest income earners in the US will not keep up with the projected debt increases and interest on the debt. A major problem with our current tax structure is that if spending remains where it is, and a significant portion of the population is not actually paying taxes, the spending will always outreach the revenue. It would not be a complete fix, but would slow the arterial spay level of bleeding we are suffering from now. I think that much of the tax code need to be fixed, including the EIC where you can end up getting more money back than you paid in. I have no objection raising the base tax rates or lowering exemptions. I also have no objections to ending many of the forms of corporate welfare also.

Added I think that forcing DOD to submit to a real audit would likely come up with tens of billions that are currently lost in the cracks.





Not sure where you are getting that that. Could you explain. Do you think that the DEA, War on drugs and the ridiculous sentences we have people serving for non-violent crimes are somehow not costing us billions?
How much does being pro-choice cost the taxpayer?
Is the separation of Church and state expensive?
What are the financial costs of gay rights?
How expensive is employment equality for women to the taxpayer?

TJMAC77SP
08-11-2015, 03:23 AM
Lie works when it is a old falacy that has been repeated and repeated for decades, A completely baseless statement is often called a lie

No, a patently false statement about an act that has already occurred (or stated to have occurred) is a lie. To speculate on what some person or persons may do in the future is not a lie. It may be rhetoric. It may be based on a false premise. It is not a lie.

His claim isn't 'completely' baseless. The number of people on welfare is at an all time high. His words may be rhetoric but hardly 'completely baseless'

Look, let's cut through the usual bullshit. You are again guilty of the same thing you allegedly were railing about. You deliberately chose which words to quote to again push an oh so obvious agenda.

Mjölnir
08-11-2015, 03:41 AM
It would not be a complete fix, but would slow the arterial spay level of bleeding we are suffering from now. I think that much of the tax code need to be fixed, including the EIC where you can end up getting more money back than you paid in. I have no objection raising the base tax rates or lowering exemptions. I also have no objections to ending many of the forms of corporate welfare also.

Added I think that forcing DOD to submit to a real audit would likely come up with tens of billions that are currently lost in the cracks.

Ok.


Do you think that the DEA, War on drugs and the ridiculous sentences we have people serving for non-violent crimes are somehow not costing us billions?

No they do cost us a lot of money.


How much does being pro-choice cost the taxpayer?

Being pro choice costs nothing. Providing free pro-choice related medical services is about $528 million dollars just to Planned Parenthood. Add in the cost of Affordable Care Act subsidized abortion and the total to taxpayers is about $2.3 billion. This is not all women's reproductive health care (cancer screenings, birth control etc.) available through Planned Parenthood ... just abortion.


Is the separation of Church and state expensive? What are the financial costs of gay rights? How expensive is employment equality for women to the taxpayer?

K ... I get what you were saying now. No, having the social viewpoint on a policy point is not expensive. What is expensive are the programs that are enacted as a result of some of those viewpoints. Welfare for example:

Does it cost anything for me to think that no one in America should be homeless? Or go hungry? No.

Does it cost anything to actually do something about it? Yes. In 2013 the budget bill (one of two budget bills I worked on in the Senate) was 37% social program spending -- over $3 trillion.

I value education, I think it is important. Thinking everyone should have access to education is cost neutral, providing education to everyone is not.

Rainmaker
08-11-2015, 04:31 AM
Breaking News!!!

Illegal Alien gangsters recently released back onto the public streets invade an elderly AF veteran's home, Rape her and then bash her brains out with a hammer.

"Police say Victor Aureliano Martinez Ramirez, 29, and another man broke into the home of 64-year-old Marilyn Pharis in Santa Maria on July 24 and attacked her with a hammer and sexually assaulted her. Pharis, a veteran of the U.S. Air Force who worked at Vandenberg Air Force Base, died Aug. 1 from her wounds".

http://www.latimes.com/local/california/la-me-undocumented-assault-20150810-story.html

Meanwhile, Self-hating RINOs everywhere patiently wait for someone that "Looks more Presidential" to enforce the law of the land....

.... And The Bimbo Fox News crack journalists are on the case to demand that Male chauvinist Donald Trump provide them with "further proof" that criminal gangs are illegally crossing the border.

"The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing."

God Bless Donald Trump for taking the heat and publicly standing up to call this Illegal invasion what it is. Amen

MikeKerriii
08-11-2015, 05:34 AM
Ok.



No they do cost us a lot of money.



Being pro choice costs nothing. Providing free pro-choice related medical services is about $528 million dollars just to Planned Parenthood. Add in the cost of Affordable Care Act subsidized abortion and the total to taxpayers is about $2.3 billion. This is not all women's reproductive health care (cancer screenings, birth control etc.) available through Planned Parenthood ... just abortion. None of the money spent at Planed parenthood is spent on anything Choice related, they get audited very regularly to enforce that, So you can't use the 528 Million spent on Health care as a pro-choice cost.




K ... I get what you were saying now. No, having the social viewpoint on a policy point is not expensive. What is expensive are the programs that are enacted as a result of some of those viewpoints. Welfare for example:

Does it cost anything for me to think that no one in America should be homeless? Or go hungry? No.

Does it cost anything to actually do something about it? Yes. In 2013 the budget bill (one of two budget bills I worked on in the Senate) was 37% social program spending -- over $3 trillion.

I value education, I think it is important. Thinking everyone should have access to education is cost neutral, providing education to everyone is not. Do those programs cost more or less than the cost of not having those programs?