Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
These are two VERYYYYYY different points. Did you even read the post I was replying to?
Yes. I don't see why you think my reply wasn't relevant.
Quote:
Originally Posted by HockeyMac18
Bias in the media is not what is being discussed...this is conspiracy level BS that's being pushed. As if all of the media is "in on it". I agree that their biases may have blinded them to many things that they missed - and their data models were WAAAAY off (embarrassingly off in many cases). But bad data and having inherent biases is not the same thing as what I was replying to.
Please don't confuse the two points.
Maybe I think the line between the two isn't as bright as you do. We have a few big mainstream media companies that dominate everything. Certain agendas are definitely pushed (and certain things never covered). There's plenty of evidence for that if you search for it. Some, like David Rockefeller have stated it quite openly.
I just went through this thread and am still having a pretty good laugh. I don't know what's funnier between it or these nonsensical protests (but do have at it and also understand that it's not going to change anything). I'm rather amazed the best the Democrats could put forward was a corrupt, serial liar and probably one of the only people that was hated as much, if not more, than Trump. But let's look at all the things they give a pass to and look the other way, and all the other illogical comments.
-You have the DNC (that isn't supposed to show favoritism toward their own candidates) that plot to demean Sanders with racists comments about his religion. So a Jewish person shouldn't be President, huh? Sounds pretty racist and hateful to me. They get a PASS
-You have a candidate that knows damn well she shouldn't be using a private server for classified information and tells one lie after another about it. Then she was told by the FBI that she was grossly negligent (which in and of itself should have disqualified her from running for office). She gets a PASS
-You have a candidate that wants to hone in on tax advantages for others but uses her foundation as a vehicle to shield herself from paying more taxes and does favors to those that contribute. Sound a bit dishonest and hypocritical to me. She gets a PASS
-You have people screaming about how she won the "popular vote" (laughable...you have no idea what the popular would have been as our system on Presidential elections is not designed that way). Perhaps some of you should have visited a battleground state to see the barrage of commercials and campaigning that was done there, compared to California where the only ones we saw were mostly national commercials. If you still don't understand this, you should probably take a Civics class. You are also living a pipe dream if you truly believe the nonsense that the electoral college will change the voting for the battleground states (so please get out of your world of denial). If you understood how it actually worked, it would also be easier for you to understand that rural America spoke more loudly, because they have been largely ignored for the last seven-and-a-half years. California and New York have 20% of the population of this country, but only represent 4% of the Republics that form the country. If we changed to a popular vote it would not preserve the sovereign rights and fair representation of the states. If the electoral college were to be to be abolished, so would the concept of states. The Founding Fathers were well aware of that, and a bit more time in Civics courses instead of safe spaces would teach people a fair amount of how this country was built.
The popular vote is irrelevant because campaign strategy is based on securing the most votes in battleground states in an attempt to get the most electoral votes. For those of you that don't understand this, we live in a Constitutional Republic, not a Democracy! Clearly the popular vote would be different if we made everyone feels like their vote was just as important as those that live in battleground states (many disillusioned voters don't vote in the current system). About the only thing you could do to maintain a fair representation of states would be to maintain the electoral standings for each state, look at the popular vote on a state-by-state basis, and then allocate accordingly. In other words, if Clinton gets 70% of the vote in CA, then she receives 38 electoral votes, and Trumps receives the other 17. That would truly be the only way that you would get a true vote representation of total votes. As stated, right now you have no way to gauge what the real "popular vote" would be.
What's amazing is this is the 2nd time Clinton has been burnt by this process (apparently her handlers can't seem to understand how the process works). Obama mopped the floor with her in 2008 using the same strategy.
-You have a dishonest media, dishonest polls, and generally people that live in a bubble in CA that are so closed minded and oblivious that they can't understand how anyone can think different than them (yeah, maybe some of you ought to get out of the friendly confines of the state and really see what people think of all these Democratic policies outside the state).
I've challenged many Liberals on some of the things Trump has stood for that I agree with and most will do everything they can to dodge and deflect from the conversation. The best one is when many told me that securing our border is "crazy talk" of Trump. So I ask...do you think America should have open borders? And all I get is hamina, hamina, hamina. Everyone knows that there's no way that would fly. So clearly it isn't crazy. Those same people claim he won't build the wall because he won't be able to come up with the money, LOL. Yeah, we give Obama $780 billion for a fiscal stimulus and we can't find $20 billion to secure our border. Hilarious. Did the Democrats suddenly become fiscally conservative now that their guy isn't going to be in office?
Most have no idea what Trump's tax plan was compared to Hilary and how it will greatly benefit those in the Bay Area (a place that never saw a tax increase they didn't like and yet continue to complain about the high cost of living....yes, do continue to cut your own throats).
Most don't understand that Hillary wanted to reduce taxable estate exclusions to $3.5 million and then tax everything at 65% after that with no adjustment for inflation. Really?! I got a middle finger for you on that one Clinton (especially when I anticipate what housing costs in the Bay Area will be 20 years from now). Not to mention we have plenty of farms in the Central Valley that could be severely damaged by that. HATEFUL (in fact, I'd say taking money from others for no other reason than to be punitive is pretty damn hateful).
I actually could go on but thought I'd just throw out some big ticket items from Liberals that have made me chuckle over the past week as they sit around and whine and sulk. Ultimately, you could never really defend your candidate, but instead, just hurled insults at the other guy as a defense mechanism (at some point, you do have to say why independent voters should vote for your candidate and I really never heard much on that). I still don't know why anyone should vote for her other than "she's not Trump" (an extremely weak reason).
Well, you've got 4 years of Trump and in all likelihood a Republican majority in the Senate and House for that length of time also (most of the mid-term are strong "red" states). This is without a doubt a complete referendum on Obama and the job he has done. What else can I say when you lose a Super Majority in such a short time?
And personally, aside from securing the border, I hope the next thing on the agenda is a complete dismantling of Obamacare that has been an abject failure and truly hurtful financially to an extremely large amount of people in the country.
I'm so glad to hear interviews like this one...
"With help from Republican lawmakers, Donald Trump as president will follow through on his campaign promise to get rid of Obamacare, Sen. John Barrasso, an orthopedic surgeon for 24 years, told CNBC on Tuesday.
Barrasso, the fourth-ranking member in the Senate GOP leadership, promised a "smooth transition" for the millions of Americans who receive health insurance through the 2010 Affordable Care Act. They won't be left out in the cold, without coverage, he added.
Trump suggested on CBS's "60 Minutes" on Sunday he might keep two pillars of President Barack Obama's signature health-care law — the prohibition on denials for pre-existing condition and the inclusion of coverage for children in their mid-20s under their parents' insurance.
"Don't get fixated on some of this phraseology. Obamacare is over. We promised to repeal and replace it. And that's what we're going to do," the Wyoming senator said in a "Squawk Box" interview"
I just went through this thread and am still having a pretty good laugh. I don't know what's funnier between it or these nonsensical protests (but do have at it and also understand that it's not going to change anything). I'm rather amazed the best the Democrats could put forward was a corrupt, serial liar and probably one of the only people that was hated as much, if not more, than Trump. But let's look at all the things they give a pass to and look the other way, and all the other illogical comments.
-You have the DNC (that isn't supposed to show favoritism toward their own candidates) that plot to demean Sanders with racists comments about his religion. So a Jewish person shouldn't be President, huh? Sounds pretty racist and hateful to me. They get a PASS
-You have a candidate that knows damn well she shouldn't be using a private server for classified information and tells one lie after another about it. Then she was told by the FBI that she was grossly negligent (which in and of itself should have disqualified her from running for office). She gets a PASS
-You have a candidate that wants to hone in on tax advantages for others but uses her foundation as a vehicle to shield herself from paying more taxes and does favors to those that contribute. Sound a bit dishonest and hypocritical to me. She gets a PASS
-You have people screaming about how she won the "popular vote" (laughable...you have no idea what the popular would have been as our system on Presidential elections is not designed that way). Perhaps some of you should have visited a battleground state to see the barrage of commercials and campaigning that was done there, compared to California where the only ones we saw were mostly national commercials. If you still don't understand this, you should probably take a Civics class. You are also living a pipe dream if you truly believe the nonsense that the electoral college will change the voting for the battleground states (so please get out of your world of denial). If you understood how it actually worked, it would also be easier for you to understand that rural America spoke more loudly, because they have been largely ignored for the last seven-and-a-half years. California and New York have 20% of the population of this country, but only represent 4% of the Republics that form the country. If we changed to a popular vote it would not preserve the sovereign rights and fair representation of the states. If the electoral college were to be to be abolished, so would the concept of states. The Founding Fathers were well aware of that, and a bit more time in Civics courses instead of safe spaces would teach people a fair amount of how this country was built.
The popular vote is irrelevant because campaign strategy is based on securing the most votes in battleground states in an attempt to get the most electoral votes. For those of you that don't understand this, we live in a Constitutional Republic, not a Democracy! Clearly the popular vote would be different if we made everyone feels like their vote was just as important as those that live in battleground states (many disillusioned voters don't vote in the current system). About the only thing you could do to maintain a fair representation of states would be to maintain the electoral standings for each state, look at the popular vote on a state-by-state basis, and then allocate accordingly. In other words, if Clinton gets 70% of the vote in CA, then she receives 38 electoral votes, and Trumps receives the other 17. That would truly be the only way that you would get a true vote representation of total votes. As stated, right now you have no way to gauge what the real "popular vote" would be.
What's amazing is this is the 2nd time Clinton has been burnt by this process (apparently her handlers can't seem to understand how the process works). Obama mopped the floor with her in 2008 using the same strategy.
-You have a dishonest media, dishonest polls, and generally people that live in a bubble in CA that are so closed minded and oblivious that they can't understand how anyone can think different than them (yeah, maybe some of you ought to get out of the friendly confines of the state and really see what people think of all these Democratic policies outside the state).
I've challenged many Liberals on some of the things Trump has stood for that I agree with and most will do everything they can to dodge and deflect from the conversation. The best one is when many told me that securing our border is "crazy talk" of Trump. So I ask...do you think America should have open borders? And all I get is hamina, hamina, hamina. Everyone knows that there's no way that would fly. So clearly it isn't crazy. Those same people claim he won't build the wall because he won't be able to come up with the money, LOL. Yeah, we give Obama $780 billion for a fiscal stimulus and we can't find $20 billion to secure our border. Hilarious. Did the Democrats suddenly become fiscally conservative now that their guy isn't going to be in office?
Most have no idea what Trump's tax plan was compared to Hilary and how it will greatly benefit those in the Bay Area (a place that never saw a tax increase they didn't like and yet continue to complain about the high cost of living....yes, do continue to cut your own throats).
Most don't understand that Hillary wanted to reduce taxable estate exclusions to $3.5 million and then tax everything at 65% after that with no adjustment for inflation. Really?! I got a middle finger for you on that one Clinton (especially when I anticipate what housing costs in the Bay Area will be 20 years from now). Not to mention we have plenty of farms in the Central Valley that could be severely damaged by that. HATEFUL (in fact, I'd say taking money from others for no other reason than to be punitive is pretty damn hateful).
I actually could go on but thought I'd just throw out some big ticket items from Liberals that have made me chuckle over the past week as they sit around and whine and sulk. Ultimately, you could never really defend your candidate, but instead, just hurled insults at the other guy as a defense mechanism (at some point, you do have to say why independent voters should vote for your candidate and I really never heard much on that). I still don't know why anyone should vote for her other than "she's not Trump" (an extremely weak reason).
Well, you've got 4 years of Trump and in all likelihood a Republican majority in the Senate and House for that length of time also (most of the mid-term are strong "red" states). This is without a doubt a complete referendum on Obama and the job he has done. What else can I say when you lose a Super Majority in such a short time?
And personally, aside from securing the border, I hope the next thing on the agenda is a complete dismantling of Obamacare that has been an abject failure and truly hurtful financially to an extremely large amount of people in the country.
I'm so glad to hear interviews like this one...
"With help from Republican lawmakers, Donald Trump as president will follow through on his campaign promise to get rid of Obamacare, Sen. John Barrasso, an orthopedic surgeon for 24 years, told CNBC on Tuesday.
Barrasso, the fourth-ranking member in the Senate GOP leadership, promised a "smooth transition" for the millions of Americans who receive health insurance through the 2010 Affordable Care Act. They won't be left out in the cold, without coverage, he added.
Trump suggested on CBS's "60 Minutes" on Sunday he might keep two pillars of President Barack Obama's signature health-care law — the prohibition on denials for pre-existing condition and the inclusion of coverage for children in their mid-20s under their parents' insurance.
"Don't get fixated on some of this phraseology. Obamacare is over. We promised to repeal and replace it. And that's what we're going to do," the Wyoming senator said in a "Squawk Box" interview"
Have a great Thanksgiving!! I know I will.
I'm thinking you have an interesting strategy for venting horsecrap and not being called out on it. War & Peace length posts that no one will be willing to actually read through.
My GF and I are Asian and voted for him. This is a wake up call for elites and the political establishment.
Trump is an elite, and he is hiring the political and lobbying establishment into his cabinet! No "draining the swamp" for Trump - he is inviting in the swamp rats.
Trump is an elite, and he is hiring the political and lobbying establishment into his cabinet! No "draining the swamp" for Trump - he is inviting in the swamp rats.
I think you need to pay closer attention to the news or verify your news source(s).
Here is a recent one from the Clinton News Network...
Trump is an elite, and he is hiring the political and lobbying establishment into his cabinet! No "draining the swamp" for Trump - he is inviting in the swamp rats.
It's true; the corporatists in his cabinet so far make the Clintons look like lightweights. Some people didn't vote for Hillary due to her corporate leanings, but they got far worse by not voting.
What's this I hear today, about Trump announcing he's either going to eliminate or privatize Medicare, Medicaid and one other gov't program--couldn't be Social Security, could it?
This reminds me of the austerity programs the World Bank imposes on 3rd World countries: jettisoning health care, aid to the poor of any sort, selling off any gov't enterprises, like banks, even in some cases privatizing public education. He wants to impose an austerity program on the US, making the 3rd-Worldization of America official!
But of course, no austerity for the military. No dialing back of any wars, new bomber designs, or anything like that. They'll still get to keep their gravy train.
Could get very interesting if he decides to eliminate treaty obligations toward the Native nations: Indian Health Service and education, to name a couple. That could get very interesting.
I just went through this thread and am still having a pretty good laugh. I don't know what's funnier between it or these nonsensical protests (but do have at it and also understand that it's not going to change anything). I'm rather amazed the best the Democrats could put forward was a corrupt, serial liar and probably one of the only people that was hated as much, if not more, than Trump. But let's look at all the things they give a pass to and look the other way, and all the other illogical comments.
You make some good points. It's now Republicans' turn (again) to set the agenda. Let's hope they don't make too many mistakes. Clinton wasn't perfect, would Bernie have won instead, I don't know. I have my fingers crossed that Trump will be a good president. As a gay person, I hope he doesn't take away too many of my civil rights.
I just went through this thread and am still having a pretty good laugh. I don't know what's funnier between it or these nonsensical protests (but do have at it and also understand that it's not going to change anything). I'm rather amazed the best the Democrats could put forward was a corrupt, serial liar and probably one of the only people that was hated as much, if not more, than Trump. But let's look at all the things they give a pass to and look the other way, and all the other illogical comments.
-You have the DNC (that isn't supposed to show favoritism toward their own candidates) that plot to demean Sanders with racists comments about his religion. So a Jewish person shouldn't be President, huh? Sounds pretty racist and hateful to me. They get a PASS
-You have a candidate that knows damn well she shouldn't be using a private server for classified information and tells one lie after another about it. Then she was told by the FBI that she was grossly negligent (which in and of itself should have disqualified her from running for office). She gets a PASS
-You have a candidate that wants to hone in on tax advantages for others but uses her foundation as a vehicle to shield herself from paying more taxes and does favors to those that contribute. Sound a bit dishonest and hypocritical to me. She gets a PASS
-You have people screaming about how she won the "popular vote" (laughable...you have no idea what the popular would have been as our system on Presidential elections is not designed that way). Perhaps some of you should have visited a battleground state to see the barrage of commercials and campaigning that was done there, compared to California where the only ones we saw were mostly national commercials. If you still don't understand this, you should probably take a Civics class. You are also living a pipe dream if you truly believe the nonsense that the electoral college will change the voting for the battleground states (so please get out of your world of denial). If you understood how it actually worked, it would also be easier for you to understand that rural America spoke more loudly, because they have been largely ignored for the last seven-and-a-half years. California and New York have 20% of the population of this country, but only represent 4% of the Republics that form the country. If we changed to a popular vote it would not preserve the sovereign rights and fair representation of the states. If the electoral college were to be to be abolished, so would the concept of states. The Founding Fathers were well aware of that, and a bit more time in Civics courses instead of safe spaces would teach people a fair amount of how this country was built.
The popular vote is irrelevant because campaign strategy is based on securing the most votes in battleground states in an attempt to get the most electoral votes. For those of you that don't understand this, we live in a Constitutional Republic, not a Democracy! Clearly the popular vote would be different if we made everyone feels like their vote was just as important as those that live in battleground states (many disillusioned voters don't vote in the current system). About the only thing you could do to maintain a fair representation of states would be to maintain the electoral standings for each state, look at the popular vote on a state-by-state basis, and then allocate accordingly. In other words, if Clinton gets 70% of the vote in CA, then she receives 38 electoral votes, and Trumps receives the other 17. That would truly be the only way that you would get a true vote representation of total votes. As stated, right now you have no way to gauge what the real "popular vote" would be.
What's amazing is this is the 2nd time Clinton has been burnt by this process (apparently her handlers can't seem to understand how the process works). Obama mopped the floor with her in 2008 using the same strategy.
-You have a dishonest media, dishonest polls, and generally people that live in a bubble in CA that are so closed minded and oblivious that they can't understand how anyone can think different than them (yeah, maybe some of you ought to get out of the friendly confines of the state and really see what people think of all these Democratic policies outside the state).
I've challenged many Liberals on some of the things Trump has stood for that I agree with and most will do everything they can to dodge and deflect from the conversation. The best one is when many told me that securing our border is "crazy talk" of Trump. So I ask...do you think America should have open borders? And all I get is hamina, hamina, hamina. Everyone knows that there's no way that would fly. So clearly it isn't crazy. Those same people claim he won't build the wall because he won't be able to come up with the money, LOL. Yeah, we give Obama $780 billion for a fiscal stimulus and we can't find $20 billion to secure our border. Hilarious. Did the Democrats suddenly become fiscally conservative now that their guy isn't going to be in office?
Most have no idea what Trump's tax plan was compared to Hilary and how it will greatly benefit those in the Bay Area (a place that never saw a tax increase they didn't like and yet continue to complain about the high cost of living....yes, do continue to cut your own throats).
Most don't understand that Hillary wanted to reduce taxable estate exclusions to $3.5 million and then tax everything at 65% after that with no adjustment for inflation. Really?! I got a middle finger for you on that one Clinton (especially when I anticipate what housing costs in the Bay Area will be 20 years from now). Not to mention we have plenty of farms in the Central Valley that could be severely damaged by that. HATEFUL (in fact, I'd say taking money from others for no other reason than to be punitive is pretty damn hateful).
I actually could go on but thought I'd just throw out some big ticket items from Liberals that have made me chuckle over the past week as they sit around and whine and sulk. Ultimately, you could never really defend your candidate, but instead, just hurled insults at the other guy as a defense mechanism (at some point, you do have to say why independent voters should vote for your candidate and I really never heard much on that). I still don't know why anyone should vote for her other than "she's not Trump" (an extremely weak reason).
Well, you've got 4 years of Trump and in all likelihood a Republican majority in the Senate and House for that length of time also (most of the mid-term are strong "red" states). This is without a doubt a complete referendum on Obama and the job he has done. What else can I say when you lose a Super Majority in such a short time?
And personally, aside from securing the border, I hope the next thing on the agenda is a complete dismantling of Obamacare that has been an abject failure and truly hurtful financially to an extremely large amount of people in the country.
I'm so glad to hear interviews like this one...
"With help from Republican lawmakers, Donald Trump as president will follow through on his campaign promise to get rid of Obamacare, Sen. John Barrasso, an orthopedic surgeon for 24 years, told CNBC on Tuesday.
Barrasso, the fourth-ranking member in the Senate GOP leadership, promised a "smooth transition" for the millions of Americans who receive health insurance through the 2010 Affordable Care Act. They won't be left out in the cold, without coverage, he added.
Trump suggested on CBS's "60 Minutes" on Sunday he might keep two pillars of President Barack Obama's signature health-care law — the prohibition on denials for pre-existing condition and the inclusion of coverage for children in their mid-20s under their parents' insurance.
"Don't get fixated on some of this phraseology. Obamacare is over. We promised to repeal and replace it. And that's what we're going to do," the Wyoming senator said in a "Squawk Box" interview"
Have a great Thanksgiving!! I know I will.
I read about 1/5 of your post and already you said things that are blatant lies. I'm sure if I had read further, I would find more. Your post is basically an exercise in fictional writing.
It always puzzle me why people are so willing to let out their ignorance. If someone likes Trump, fine. But if someone likes Trump because he/she believes these outrageous and obvious lies about the other side, then that person is nothing but an idiot.
.
I read about 1/5 of your post and already you said things that are blatant lies. I'm sure if I had read further, I would find more. Your post is basically an exercise in fictional writing.
It always puzzle me why people are so willing to let out their ignorance. If someone likes Trump, fine. But if someone likes Trump because he/she believes these outrageous and obvious lies about the other side, then that person is nothing but an idiot.
.
So which of the 20% you read was untrue? Curious.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
